Back to College

UW-Madison students are happy students, as we recently learned from the Huffington Post. This high ranking of our institution is a coup when it comes to attracting more applications, and since we rise in rankings by rejecting more applicants (and rightly care about happiness), this will likely be seen as a good thing.

Of course I'm delighted that our students are happy. Pleased as punch that they rate our sports culture and political activity highly (a 9 and an 8 out of 10 respectively), and the opportunities for things to do "endless."  It's wonderful-- they are spirited, free-thinking, and enthusiastic, and as all of my students well know, I love to teach them.

But with love (yes, really) I need to offer a little constructive critique. We have some things to work on and they directly pertain to the educational mission (and indirectly the affordability mission) of our school.   In that same set of rankings we scored just a 6 on "professors accessible" and a 7 on "intellectual life."  Maybe I'm hopelessly old-fashioned, but those are the things that students and families are purportedly paying tuition for-- courses and learning.

Or not.  I suppose, really not.  If you take a look at the latest video produced by the UW-Madison Administration, apparently my framing is not theirs, and a high-quality education offered by professors is not the message Madison seeks to attract and retain students with.

Here is WELCOME BACK to UW-MADISON.  It's definitely maximizing the sports culture rating. But I'll buy you a scoop of Babcock ice cream if you can glean any sense of an academic message about school from it.

You have read this article college / Education / Huffington Post / sports culture / UW-Madison with the title Huffington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2012/09/back-to-college.html. Thanks!

The Education of Obama

Over the past several weeks, three particularly interesting articles have been written about Barack Obama and education policy. The Huffington Post ran the first on March 14, the New Republic ran the second on March 26, and Slate ran the third on April 4.

In the Huffington Post, Michelle McNeil opined, "Would Obama approach education reform with a centrist frame-of-mind if he had the full power of the Presidency behind him, and wasn't fighting it out for the nomination?" I don't know about a 'centrist frame-of-mind', but I honestly believe he would approach it with a problem-solving mentality and not just kow-tow to the status quo much as I believe Senator Clinton would.

In the New Republic, Josh Patashnik writes: "There's at least one issue ... on which Obama's record puts him sharply at odds with the party's liberal establishment: education. Obama has long advocated a reformist agenda that looks favorably upon things like competition between schools, test-based accountability, and performance pay for teachers. But the Obama campaign has hesitated to trumpet its candidate's maverick credentials. As an increasingly influential chorus of donors and policy wonks pushes an agenda within the Democratic Party that frightens teachers' unions and their traditional liberal allies, Obama seems unsure how far he can go in reassuring the former group that he's one of them without alienating the latter. And this is a shame, because Obama may represent the best hope for real reform in decades."

Undoubtedly, I believe Obama is playing it safe by not emphasizing his education reform ideas within the context of a Democratic primary. That's smart politics, but it's made easier by many others issues--from the economy to Iraq--that are trumping education as priorities among the mass of Democratic primary voters and caucus goers.

In Slate, journalist and blogger Alexander Russo offers a more critical take on Obama and his "lackluster record" on education. Russo writes that as an Illinois state senator from Chicago, Obama failed to evidence leadership and choose sides in a debate between Chicago Public Schools (the school district) and local school councils over local control versus centralized accountability. The same dynamic is playing out around No Child Left Behind (NCLB), says Russo, but "it's hard to imagine [Obama] taking charge of the continuing debate over whether and how [NCLB] should be renewed."

Indeed, sometimes the past is prologue, but I'm not sure it would be true in an Obama administration. As US Senator, Obama has offered some very substantive proposals on teaching quality within the context of NCLB. He has supported policies such as educator induction and urban teacher residencies that would get to the root of building stronger capacity within troubled schools and districts. He has shown a personal commitment to these issues. I can see him staking out a "mend it, not end it" position on NCLB reauthorization and working with Senator Ted Kennedy and Congressman George Miller to work these proposals into a legislative package. Only time will tell.

What say you, Pennsylvania?

You have read this article Alexander Russo / Education / Huffington Post / NCLB / New Republic / No Child Left Behind / Obama / Performance Pay / Slate / teacher with the title Huffington Post. You can bookmark this page URL https://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/04/the-education-of-obama.html. Thanks!