Thursday, April 29, 2004

Senate panel votes against Yecke
 
That's the headline in Wednesday's Startribune, which reports:

Senate committee DFLers delivered another blow Tuesday to Gov. Tim Pawlenty's Republican administration, recommending that Education Commissioner Cheri Pierson Yecke be fired.

In a 6-4 vote that followed party lines and left Republicans fuming, the Senate Education Committee advised the full Senate not to confirm Yecke, who stepped into the job more than 14 months ago.


Earlier in the month, I was scheduled to testify, but the testimony was interrupted by a floor vote and went on far longer and was far more detailed and extensive than the Committee had planned. I had an early evening commitment in rural Northfield and had to leave, although I did submit my written testimony. I'm glad to have been able to participate to the extent that I did, and was heartened by Sen. Kelly's comments about education last Friday - more on that later.

As you may know, Rep. Ray Cox strongly supports the Commissioner, and on April 11, blogged:

While I think some of the dialog is appropriate, I think it is high time to move forward and approve the Commissioner.


On April 2, 2004, he had this to say, which causes me to question his understanding of the purpose of a confirmation hearing and the need for the basic checks and balances of legislative confirmation:

I tend to agree with the folks that say the whole hearing process for Commissioners Yecke and Molnau is turning into a bit of a circus. It is far too late to have a hearing on qualifications. The Senate is trying to turn this into some kind of performance review . . . clearly something that is out of the realm of their charge . . .

Commissioner Yecke is a strong leader that is working hard to bring organization and clarity to the Department of Education. She should have been approved months ago. It is time to end the political posturing in this campaign year and stop using Commissioner Yecke as campaign material.


Education policy is far more than "campaign material," in my opinion, the state under the Pawlenty administration, is heading us on the wrong course for which we will pay dearly, and change is necessary. Confirmation of Yecke would be a commitment to continue down this path, an ill-advised step. That's why I support the recommendation of the committee, and that's why I submitted testimony to that effect to the Senate Education Committee.

Carrie Lucking, of the Alliance to Block the Confirmation of the Commisisoner, provided the following information via MNPA, a south suburban group of political activists:

The Senate floor now takes up confirmation and can vote for or against Ms. Yecke despite the Senate Education Committee's recommendation. Your state Senator needs to hear from you immediately! One last time, take a moment and send the email that is below (or your own) to your state Senator or give them a quick phone call. Senator Kelley said that he is going to encourage a floor vote very soon, so please do not delay! Also, forward this email to friends and colleagues that oppose Ms. Yecke and urge them to do the same.

To contact your state senator, click here

and click either on their name or the link to their email address.

Most Senator email addresses are in the format of sen.firstname.lastname@senate.mn. However, Senators Anderson, Berglin, Cohen, Dean Johnson, Marko, Murphy, Pappas, Rest, Sams, Stumpf, and Vickerman only accept email through the form on their websites.

Not entirely sure of who your Senator is? click here and enter your address.


Here are a couple more news reports from outstate:
Senate panel votes against Yecke confirmation. (Willmar-Duluth)

Yecke's confirmation rejected by Senate education committee. (Princeton)

Here's today's story: Yecke's confirmation still undecided


Here's a great piece on NCLB from Marion Brady, a longtime Florida educator:


COMMENTARY: Key to accountability: What are we locking out?
By Marion Brady, Special to the Sentinel, April 22, 2004

Certain words get a free ride. When we read or hear them, they go directly to our emotions without passing through our brains.

"Natural" is such a word. In my local supermarket, it appears in big letters on boxes, bottles, jars, cans and wrappers, helping to sell bread, jelly, peanut butter, baby food, eye drops, hair spray, shampoo, hand lotion, Popsicles, ice cream, beans, cake mixes, cookies, cereal, digestive-system fiber, and much else. Fine print may point out that the word refers to only one ingredient, but fine print rarely gets read. If the word helps nudge a product off the shelf and into the grocery cart, it's done its work.

We have many such words and phrases: Lite. Freedom. NEW! Democracy. Competition. IMPROVED! We. Quality. Fat-free. Original. Organic. Liberators.

Add "accountability" to the list. Attached to "standards," as in the political mantra "standards and accountability," it's successful in the same way that the word "natural" is successful. It goes directly to voters' emotions without passing through their brains.

What does the word really mean? The dictionary isn't much help. It says that one should be accountable for one's acts; responsible; behavior should be defensible.

I don't know any teachers or school principals who reject the need for accountability. What's tearing a great many of them up, and sending some to early retirement, is deciding to whom they should be accountable. Official policy demands one thing; their desire to do what's best for kids demands something else.

Of course, most of those who're currently making education policy don't think that's a problem. They're sure that their demands are identical with what's best for kids, sure that everything important about educating can be measured and the result summed up in a single number or letter grade, sure, therefore, that No Child Left Behind's requirements for standardized testing, grade retention, school grading, public shaming and so on are real reforms.

And they've been very successful at convincing the general public that they're right, that their policies are the key to accountability. Those who oppose them -- those who point to mountains of contrary research and firsthand experience showing that the new policies are simplistic and will prove to be disastrously counterproductive -- get written off as unwilling to be held unaccountable.

There are, however, an increasing number of professionals angry enough to take a stand, and Nebraska's commissioner of education, Doug Christensen, is one of them. Nebraska's schools have a good reputation, and he aims to maintain and improve that reputation. What, then, should one think when he says, "I don't give a damn what No Child Left Behind (NCLB) says. I think education is far too complex to be reduced to a single score. . . If it's bad for kids, we're not going to do it."?

Is he refusing to be held accountable? Irresponsible? Self-serving? Or is he seeing "accountability" as something owed to students rather than to politicians whose views are too often skewed by political considerations?

Christensen doesn't think Nebraska's schools are exemplary. But neither does he buy Washington's contention, echoed in most state capitols (with an eye on federal money), that NCLB is the key to improvement. He thinks the real problem is that schools really haven't changed much in the past hundred years and need more flexibility to rethink what they're doing and why. He argues that the curriculum lacks clarity, focus and coherence. He says schools -- particularly those above the elementary level -- are far too big, aren't sufficiently integrated with the communities they serve, and don't make adequate provision for how kids differ from each other. He thinks student educational experience doesn't flow smoothly from one level to the next, and believes research is a better guide to reform than what often passes for common sense.

Think about Christensen's list of problems. Not a single item on it lies primarily in the realm of teacher or student control and responsibility. Everything he thinks is necessary to improve the quality of schooling requires a loosening rather than a tightening of centralized, bureaucratic control.

Which means that the education-improvement monkey should be taken off the backs of students and teachers and put where it belongs -- on the backs of legislators in Washington and in state capitols. They've hung the "standards and accountability" slogan in the wrong place, and milked it for political advantage long enough.

Call or write those legislators. Tell them that Doug Christensen has it right, that more and more of their constituents know it, and you're going to hold them accountable.

He can be reached at mbrady22@cfl.rr.com.

 



Monday, April 26, 2004

Economic Values
 
I have been doing a lot of reading and talking with folks about our economic future. Two things strike me as crucial to consider as we struggle with a slowed economy and hard times. 1) how important it is to have a clear vision of the future we want to make for ourselves. 2) we can learn from the lessons of the past even though there are circumstances that call for different solutions. The era that produced Hubert Humphrey and Richard Nixon was an era in which it was believed that by putting forth a vision of the future that benefited society as a whole and drew together management and labor, big and small business, private and public sectors to work together to achieve it.

The experiment with supply side economics of Ronald Reagan gave us policies that deregulated the free market sector and undermined worker rights leading to a situation where the wealthiest Americans are doing very well and the rest of us are struggling to make ends meet. President Bush has continued this trend by putting in place huge tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. The response has been to export manufacturing jobs and increase the number of low wage jobs while refusing to increase the minimum wage. We are told that if we only wait in another generation these economic policies will pay off and new jobs will be created. America already has a huge income gap. I can't imagine what it will be like for most of us to wait until we get to that 'promised day of prosperity.' These policies have more and more pitted those who work for a wage against those who own corporations and either have inherited wealth or successfully play the stock, real estate, or commodities markets. Most Americans sustain their position by carrying huge debt, hoping they will hold on to their job and that the future will eventually bring prosperity.

These deep societal divisions convince me that it is time to find a different path so that the great benefits of our economy can be spread to more people in our society. We have to find a way to have our robust economy have the capacity to provide at least adequately for all and assure the American taxpayers that their hard-earned tax money is not being spent on frivolous things. I believe we can have and promote a peacetime economy and find dignity for all American workers. Dignity that stems from recognizing the value of all workers and that all jobs are honorable.

Our current administration seems set on cutting back on public investment to solve our economic slow down and is using the unfair tax burden on the middle class to further enrich the wealthy. This is accomplished by ignoring the fact that the taxes contributions the wealthy and corporations have been cut back dramatically.
The economic goals I would set are that:
- We must assure that all Minnesotans have at least a living wage to support their households and that essential needs are affordable.
- We must assure that all Minnesotans have reasonable health coverage at affordable rates and put restrictions on allowable expenses of health care providers, such as CEO salaries and golf fees, which are passed on to insureds.
- We must have a progressive tax system where
- corporations pay their fair share of taxes through elimination of loopholes and benefits of corporate irresponsibility
- individual earned income tax remains low, but taxes on passive income such as investments, inheritance, rent/leases is increased

- We must protect our environment in a cost effective way by focusing on prevention and "polluter pays" rather than the current scheme of after-the-fact mitigation and cleanup on the backs of the taxpayers, which allows polluters to profit from destroying our environment.
- We must secure and regulate our energy system and essential services so they are not put at risk by profit motive and/or priced out of reach of individuals.

Families and individuals that can afford their own home contribute to the stability of communities and create a strong state and nation. Healthcare insurance cost increases drive up the cost of government, drive down all wage increases and deny health care to millions of Americans. It is a problem that must be solved and can't be trusted to the private sector to solve. Profiteers and energy speculators put vital resources and energy services at risk and only regulation and government intervention will stop it. I think we can afford these goals, but do we have the will to see it through? I am encouraged by a set of new ideas that are beginning to be talked about in organizations like Growth and Justice or The New American Foundation and books like Matthew Miller's, The 2% Solution, that takes a new look at what he calls the best ideas of conservatives and liberals. They stress importance of real dialogue to solve the serious problems that face us. David Cay Johnson's Perfectly Legal shows how policies in place benefit the wealthy and burden the middle class.

Hubert Humphrey said we should have the imagination to dream big dreams and then put our immense energy into making them a reality. We have had twenty years now of a distorted vision of America that rewards the rich for their wealth and stagnates the progress and opportunity for working people and robs them of their dignity because the value of their labor has been diminished. Abraham Lincoln said labor is more valuable than capital, because he believed in economy for people. It is my hope that once again we can join together rich and poor, blue collar and white collar to make an America that works for everyone.

 



Friday, April 23, 2004

Granny D walks across Northfield
 


Granny D (Doris Haddok), living her belief that "You're Never Too Old to Raise a Little Hell," walked through Northfield on Tuesday to raise awareness in her campaign for Fair and Clean Elections (FACE). Despite the rain, there was a good multigenerational turnout from the St. Olaf campus. I joined Granny, several St. Olaf student organizers and staff, mayor Covey and a few Northfielders.

We marched to Bridge Square where we were met by a number of activists from the Northfield area, and Carleton College students. From there we marched on to Sayles Hill to hear the Mayor, student organizers and Doris Haddock tell us about this important initiative.

This effort is sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Minnesota and Common Cause Minnesota, American Association of University Women, MPIRG, the Senior Federation, the Minnesota Alliance for Progressive Action and Democracy Matters, and organized locally by Breanna Peterson, a St. Olaf student. Over the weekend, she will be at the Free Democracy Summit in Duluth.



The populist-progressives are people who simply are politically awake. They can be liberal or conservative, they can be members of any party, but they believe in the Bill of Rights and they believe that we are a human community who have an obligation to work together to solve our common problems and advance our society, and they understand that local, state and federal governments are our tools, our meeting places, our tables of shared power where we meet and bring forth a better community, nation and world. Government is the enemy only when we let it be "the other" and not the us. It should be all of us working together for progress. That's progressive. The progressives have a sparkle in their eye that you can see across the room. They are more alive and less fearful than the politically dead, the hate mongers, the fear mongers who think that only their own church or their own gated community can be the seat of common action. The progressives are more interested in responsible behavior than those who are interested in promoting oppressive power at home and around the world, and the suppression of diversity instead of the celebration and nurturing of diversity. The progressives celebrate and advance the sharing of power among equal citizens. Progressives are the Davids who defend the human scale of politics, the economy and civilization itself against over-scaled Goliaths, whether they be unrepresentative governments or overlarge corporations, which are also unrepresentative governments.

--Doris "Granny D" Haddock




In July, 2002, very early in my campaign, I signed the FACE pledge and support Fair and Clean Elections. There are FACE bills in various stages in the Minnesota House (HF1382) (Rep. Jim Davnie, chief author) and Senate (SF998) (Sen. John Hottinger, chief author), we should all encourage our legislators to support this non-partisan effort to improve our democratic process.

More than 62 organizations have signed on to FACE, and by doing so, the organizations adopt the following platform:

Organizational Endorsement
We believe a critical step towards making our political system more accountable to the voters, and therefore, more truly democratic, is replacing our system of financing campaigns with a system that is based on the following principles:
- People should have access to elected officials because they vote, not because they pay.
- Candidates should raise issues, not money.
- The strength of parties, candidates, and interest groups should come from numbers of supporters, not numbers of dollars.
- Your voice should really make a difference.

We believe that the best mechanism for achieving such comprehensive and fundamental reform is the creation of a system which:
1. Provides candidates with the option of nearly full public financing if they agree to forego almost all private contributions;
2. Places limits on the size of contributions individuals and PACs can give to political parties and legislative caucuses;
3. Reduces unfair advantages caused by independent expenditures; and
4. Encourages grassroots participation in the political process.
We therefore join with other Minnesota organizations in endorsing the campaign for a Fair and Clean Elections system in Minnesota.

For more information contact Nick Palumbo at MAPA, phone (651) 641-4050 or e-mail npalumbo@mapa-mn.org

 



Wednesday, April 14, 2004

THE RACE IS ON!!
 
On Wednesday, March 30th , the Minnesota DFL Senate District 25 held its Endorsing Convention in LeSueur.

Bruce Bjork was nominated and endorsed for Minnesota House District 25A.

I was nominated and endorsed Minnesota House District 25B.

After rousing acceptance speeches, Delegates enthusiastically congratulated us and went on to elect Senate district officers: Dick Fox Senate District Chair, Paulette Wentslaff Associate Chair, Marion Fogarty, Secretary, and Rob Vanasek, Treasurer, and Joel Johnson, Affirmative Action Officer.

I look forward to the coming campaign and working with Bruce Bjork (25A) and Patti Fritz (26B) -- I'm feeling very encouraged by the huge turnouts and the grassroots support exhibited by these enthusiastic Democrats. This high level of enthusiasm is contagious. Let's take back Minnesota!

 



Tuesday, April 06, 2004

FARM ART and LAND USE WOES
 

© 2002 Richard Krogstad, Sole Survivor 3, 24 by 40 inches, oil on panel

In 1958, University of Minnesota Professor Willard Cochrane wrote in his book, Farm Prices: Myth and Reality:
Like all people who take pride in our country, I value certain of our institutions highly: our public school system, our Bill of Rights, sullied as it may be from time to time by overzealous patriots, our near-universal suffrage, and our national forest and park system. All of these, and many others that could be named, give the United States a distinctive flavor; make it, I believe, a good place to live in. But there is one institution I value particularly, one that is currently undergoing rapid change and may be in danger, like the whooping crane, of passing out of existence. It is the family farm -- the farm as it flourished in the Alleghenies to the High Plains and north of the Ohio River. It once provided a way of life as well as a way of business, and to me it provided a good way of life. Now it provides primarily a way of business, and in years to come it may not provide even that in an owner-operator sense. With capital requirements running as high $100,000 per farm it is difficult to see how these farms can remain family affairs. But what I want to say here is that I think our country will be losing something vital if it loses the institution of the owner-operated family farm. (quoted from Willard Cochrane and the Family Farm by Richard A. Levins)



I recently discovered Cochrane through conversation with my old neighbor

Richard Levins, who works with and has written a biography about him. I had run into Levins at an agricultural legislative forum last year in Sioux Falls, he spoke about agricultural economic issues, and I've followed up on several themes that were presented that day.

Last Thursday, after the Senate hearing, I met with Forest Township residents who were celebrating a pause in land-use changes and wanted to talk about land abuse issues in their respective communities. They were, to a one, concerned both about the County's Comprehensive Planing process and potential changes to the Plan, lack of input from affected local governmental units, and about the lack of enforcement of zoning and land-use laws already on the books.

They had legitimate concerns about the way planners and developers seemed able to manipulate the system in ways that had not only adverse environmental consequences but could, without careful planning, permanently alter their quality of life and the rural character of their township. They are particularly troubled by lack of enforcement of land-use regulatoins, because if the county is not doing its job, it falls on the citizens to challenge the violators. Citizens do not have the resources, either in cash or experts, to enforce the laws. Even where they do find the resources, it is often difficult to establish their authority -- yet when those with authority and responsibility for enforcement do not do it, what avenue is left? In this time of state agency cuts, a gutted agency is ineffective. It was an interesting discussion and encouraging to witness their willingness to get involved in the process and learn the intricacies of land use. They're putting themselves on the line and doing tremendous work.

It reminded me of another Cochrane quote from Levins' book:
Where competition has led to ruinously low prices and returns, poor service, or injury to certain persons or groups, government has historically intervened to regularize that competition, to equalize bargaining power among contending parties, and to redress inequities.

Although this issue is not about prices and returns, it does speak to the undue influence moneyed interests have over boards and commissions, influence that regular citizens do not have. Only government can change that, and government has the obligation to change that..

As the township discussion grew to a close, Stephanie Henrikson announced the opening of an art show that she and her husband, David Kamis, both artists, had organized.

I attended the reception for the artists on Friday and had a chance to speak with several of the artists. I was particularly taken with their simple and unassuming approach to their art and how they talked about their work. The show's opening brought together a good mix of artists, agricultural, political and environmental activists, even St. Olaf alum Sen. Chaudhary. If you want to see the show, gallery hours are Tuesday through Saturday, 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

From the press release

Minnesota farms and rural life: a tribute
Painting, drawing, sculpture, pottery, printmaking, and photography will come together in a show depicting Minnesota's fast-disappearing family farms and rural life at Banfill-Locke Center for the Arts. The exhibition, "Family Farms and Rural Communities: A Tribute," includes the work of 14 artists and will open April 2 and remain on view in the Center's galleries through May 8.


BANFILL-LOCKE CENTER FOR THE ARTS: "Family Farms and Rural Communities: A Tribute," photography, paintings and sculpture by 14 artists. Opening reception 7-9 p.m. today. Thru May 8. Gallery: 6666 E. River Rd., Fridley. Contact: Lia Rivamonte, Executive Director: 763-574-1850

For more information, please call BLCA during Center Hours: 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Tuesday through Saturday. BLCA is located at 6666 East River Road in Fridley, just minutes from downtown Minneapolis. Take East River Road off 694 and travel north approximately 2 miles, it's on the left.

Following is a review of the show:
"Family Farms and Rural Communities: A Tribute" will be shown at Banfill-Locke Center for the Arts, 6666 East River Road in Fridley, MN, April 2- May 8, 2004. Gallery hours are 10 am-4 pm Tuesday through Saturday. Opening reception with artists Friday, April 2, 7-9 pm.

Family farms are being driven out of business at an alarming rate. Causes are many--urban sprawl, weakening of Minnesota's Corporate Farm Law at the State Legislature, prices kept low by processors, a Farm Bill which puts subsidies in the hands of the mega-farms. Minnesota's dairy farms are particularly at risk.

With that in mind, a farm couple from Dundas, Stephanie Henriksen and David Kamis, walked through the 2002 Minnesota State Fair Fine Arts Exhibition, listing names of a dozen artists they felt made strong visual statements on a rural theme. Nine agreed to show their work as a group at other locations and five from the Northfield area joined them for a total of fourteen. Barbara Claussen of Lauderdale located galleries that might show the work. When Director Lia Rivamante explained that Banfill-Locke Center for the Arts in Fridley was originally the site of the largest dairy farm in Minnesota, Fridley Farm, all agreed this would be a perfect place for the show. Future plans include galleries in Northfield and Winona.

Painting, drawing, sculpture and pottery, printmaking and photography are included in the show. One of the painters, longtime art teacher Dorothy Divers of St. Olaf College in Northfield, died suddenly in November and the show is dedicated to her. Her gouache paintings depict farm machinery painted on location at a local implement dealership. Other paintings include the "Land Dispute" series by Barbara Claussen and "Moonlit Barn" by Richard Krogstad of St. Bonifacius. Intimate small town scenes by Patricia Canney of Minneapolis titled "Barbershop" and "Lunch Counter" contrast with free standing life-size oil portraits of "The Gardener" and "Lydie in Overalls" by Stephanie Henriksen of Dundas.

Pastel and charcoal works include "Pig" by Sharol Nau of Northfield, scenes from Stearns County by Mark Pederson of Elk River, "County Road l5" and "Heartland" by Debra Connolly of Danvers. " And anyone who craves detail will enjoy an intricate pencil work of cows by William Murray of St. Paul," said Kamis.

Sculpture pieces by Melanie VanHouten of Minneapolis combine found objects and cast elements. "Her 'Forget Me Knot' table literally drew me back in time to our kitchen on the farm," said Henriksen. "The artist said they are very personal having to do with loss of place," she added. David Kamis of Dundas will show pit-fired pots from his "Space Pod" series. Lids open to view seeds germinating within.

Viewers will enjoy the large prints by Fred Hagstrom of Carleton College Art Department. "One of them of my neighbor Steve Albers feeding his calves is on the postcard announcement," said Kamis. Photographs include "Home Place" by David Bjorkquist of Robbinsdale. "An older couple seem to float across the yard as if through time," said Henriksen. "It was a 'must have' piece for the show," she said.

Finally, Martin Berg of St. Paul will show a very large color photo called "House of Representatives in Session, 2002". Members, including those who served on the agriculture committees, can be seen from above in minute detail. A floor map is included so visitors can locate their representative. "That's where good and bad bills are passed that effect the future of farming," said Henriksen. "It is the centerpiece of the show for me," she said.


Sponsors of this exhibit include Minnesota COACT (Citizens Organized Acting Together), Minnesota Farmers Union, Clean Water Action Alliance, Land Stewardship Project.

Check out Willard Cochrane's latest book from University of Nebraska Press:

 



Friday, April 02, 2004

Senate Hearing on Education Commissioner
 
Appointment of Yecke as Commissioner of Education must be denied

Standardized Minds
By Niles Xi-An Lichtenstein, Youth Speaks

How can we walk straight
When our backs are bent into boxes
How can we stand
When standards overshadow the individuals
How can we create
locked down behind wooden desks
As future fates rest on the restricted breath of a number two pencil tip
So the clock ticks with the hands of Master America
Stitching together a society
Hemming in divisions and weaving in stratification
Searching for liberation
But stuck within the abbreviations like SATs GREs
GPAs and LSATs We, the nameless ones
Print our identification
With a consistent darkness
To shade the light of our being
Comprehension based
On two dimensional reflections
Of our circumstances
Knowledge is pressed into tight packages with breakable seals
That conceal unbreakable barrier
Deciphering between classes
This royalty has us backwards
As Prince-ton reviews our King's English
And mathematics only makes sense in the land of abstraction
This land of reality was based on fact
Not fractions
As factions are created between those deemed intelligent
And those who are not
Ivory gates of Ivy league creep open
As cells in Attica lock down
Equations only lead to x's
While life's questions only lead to why's
It's ironic the one's who can't figure the numbers on tests are the ones
Who end up as statistics
I sit dumbfounded trying to figure out the meaning of fulminate
And wonder if Shakespeare could analyze himself
For a 5 on the AP English exam
But I know he could poetry slam
And so they wonder why we're hesitant
To take tests where the subject matter seems irrelevant
We only use a level of standard
Because we're too scared to ask ourselves whether we're good educators
The national average is around 50%
Yet 50% will get you an F on my test
So when do the graders get graded
Who is held accountable for our failure
As students count the bull passed through schools every day
Cyclical reactions to the same problems
And so the bell curve tolls and we are left singing
Oh say can you see
Jose can you see
Nah, Jose is getting an F
Because no habla ingles
So after the test he is left with no options
Maybe back home he was a doctor
But now he is on the corner of 4th street looking for work
Hastening humans have no time to listen or flip past the first page
In their frenetic frenzy
Unless your life's story is on IMAX
Locked into percentiles
In need of melding together the tiles of a person's experience
And uncovering the mosaic they call life
Trapped in our personal bubbles
As we bubble in our answers
To none of our problems

Our hands must release from the mechanical flow and we must scribble outside the lines
We must paint our infinite responses to multiple choice questions
And scribe poetry in the blanks
Tell me this not everything
Tell me you believe there is more to me than this test
This test will never recount all the pain
This test will never tell you about my daily struggles
Or the passion breathing in these veins
You cannot confine the travelers of soul
There are too many 1600's who have never learned to survive
There are too many trying to survive who have no time to produce a 1600
Don't ever tell a child they're stupid
Don't ever cage the stars meant to shine
One can never measure the hidden magic locked behind the mind
There is only one test on planet earth
It ends with death and begins with birth

Three hours later
The pencil drops like the weight of a fallen angel
I'm questioning my worth as a human being
Sitting, waiting for you to implant the next string in my back.


-- Niles Xi-An Lichtenstein was the 2000 Bay Area Youth Poetry Champion, and a member of Youth Speaks, a poetry project in San Francisco. The organization brings young people together through spoken and written word.

Thursday afternoon, I attended the Senate Education Committee hearing on the confirmation of Education Commissioner Yecke and was on the schedule to testify and request that the Committee deny her appointment. I did submit my written testimony, but a previous commitment to meet with constituents in Forest Township kept me from making an appearance before the committee. It was frustrating, because I was next on the list, but those testifying against her confirmation were eloquent and covered many of my points. The following morning, I read Rep. Cox's comments on the hearing, which he described as 'a circus.' I'm not sure we were at the same hearing, at least I did not see him during the hours I was there. Now, I have to admit, it's been awhile since I've been to a circus, but aside from the shape of the hearing room, set up in a ring, I did not see any resemblance. I was impressed with chairman Kelly's evenhanded leadership and respect for all participants. He allowed speakers to finish statements even when they went far beyond the allotted time unless their testimony seemed to ramble. He allowed ample questions from all perspectives.

The only part of the proceeding I found at all circus like in behavior may have been the gallery, where Yecke supporters roamed back and forth sporting 'Yes, Yecke' stickers, one proudly wearing a blue 'Team Pawlenty' sweatshirt. A few opponents had 'no to Yecke' stickers on. There were a number of Republican Party operatives taking notes and watching everyone very carefully and making comments to each other. I was sitting behind two of them who highlighted my handout and whispered, not quietly enough, "Make sure the commissioner sees this." Shortly after that, Senator Tom Neuville approached me and asked what I was doing there. I said, "I am here to testify." To which he replied, "If you do, you are in big trouble" as he walked away. I do not know what he meant by this, but it does seem unusual to me that legislators, both a novice Representative and a seasoned Senator, would demean a democratic process in such a way. One calls a legitimate and legitimately contentious hearing a 'circus,' and another implies a participant should have reason to fear for offering testimony.
The issues for me on the Yecke appointment are as follows:

1. Her appointment was highly politicized by the White House involvement in Minnesota politics. I believe her appointment was engineered by the Bush administration. Which brings into question, "Who does she serve?"
2. She was touted as a reformer, but through the President's plan, promotes very traditional, perhaps outmoded methods of instruction, 'a one-size fits all' system of assessment that ignores the strengths of Minnesota schools and will arbitrarily punishe them.
3. She on numerous occasions gives misleading or dishonest information. As an example, I heard her on the radio the morning after say that most of her critics at the hearing complained about the social studies standards. This was not true. Very few of the critics at the hearing even mentioned the social studies standards, yet I remember her defenders mentioning them several times as if there was anticipation that this would be the primary objection (and this is not to say that the social studies standards are not something worthy of complaint, but there were more important issues to raise at this hearing, issues she'd perhaps rather not discuss on the radio.).
4. She discounts and dismisses those offering their education expertise and rejects differing points of view. We need open and thoughtful debate about education, not a stifling of viewpoints.


Rep. Cox, in his blog, went on to complain about having to listen to people complain about NCLB, the President's Elementary Secondary Education Act called 'No Child Left Behind'. He made several statements I did not quite follow. First, he claimed that No Child Left Behind started in the Johnson administration. This is the first I have heard of this, and I have done quite a bit of study on the matter.

Presidents since Eisenhower have all had an Elementary Secondary Education Act, but 'No Child Left Behind' started with Bush. Many of its elements can be traced back to the Clinton administration, which was influenced by Al Shanker, former President of the American Federation of Teachers, who called for testing and standards as ways of improving education outcomes. Much of the negative feelings about public education began with the 'Nation at Risk' study in the 80s, which in large part was discredited. The original idea to challenge schools to improve their efforts for all learners is laudable and it achieved bi-partisan support, especially for efforts to shrink the achievement gap. The problems and disagreements arise when you try to figure out how to do close the gap.

The Bush administration has chosen a highly punitive and regulated method that will withhold funds to states that do not institute curricular regimens that can gain the blessing of Federal Education Commissioner Rod Paige. The Federal Government must approve all plans for testing, teacher licensure, etc. Technically, Ray is correct, 'there is no Federal curriculm,' but with a commissioner who takes her marching orders from the Feds and uses standards hurriedly developed, it is hard to see how we will "get the academic standards to fit what Minnesotans want in our standards."

Ray claims that "President Bush has focused on the child." I don't see any evidence of this other than use of 'child' in the name. Before NCLB, there used to be talk about individualized instruction and the need for attention to learning style different modes of instruction -- much of this was incorporated into the 'Profile of Learning'. We are now focused on standardization and treating all students the same, which calls into question how this act can be about the needs of the individual child. In NCLB, all the attention is on making schools and teachers conform to a standardization plan.

The late Senator Wellstone was outspoken on the 'No Child Left Behind Act', and as a former educator, he was one of the few in Congress who understood this issue. He correctly advocated for substantial investment in early childhood programs to help those catch up who start out several steps behind. 'Head Start' was a program that was part of the Johnson administration that addressed this issue, but NCLB has no resemblance to it, so that can't be what Ray is referencing. In fact, the heavy emphasis on high stakes testing and exit exams at the end of the process will not help solve any of the problems facing us. Creating a system which financially rewards good test scores sets up a system that is at risk for promoting cheating and dishonesty, and that is the last thing we need if we truly want to improve education. A look at the problems with the testing and reporting in Houston shows this is a valid concern.

There is nothing wrong with testing per se, the problem is in how the tests are used and whether or not they become the only way of informing teachers and schools how they are doing. Tests can help teachers set goals and shape what we as a society believe is important for us to teach, and tests can tell us to a degree how well we are doing with that instruction. For example, I have been favorably impressed with how the Northfield school district has used testing information to improve instruction set goals and focus its resources. I believe the Minnesota Basic Skills tests have been positive overall, however we still need to work on methods to help those who fail to pass find alternatives. Overall the President's plan oversimplifies the problem by not encouraging multiple measures and a variety of paths to reach the goal of leaving no child behind.

Education should be about improving and creating opportunity for young people by helping them to develop the skills to be successful in life, which includes the tools and character to make good choices. What is wrong with NCLB is its approach. A recent study done by the Harvard Civil Rights Project, Inspiring Vision, Disappointing Results: Four Studies on Implementing the No Child Left Behind Act found that:

President Bush conceded that he had not read it before signing it and it is highly unlikely that anyone could have read and fully understood all the intricate provisions before Congress hurriedly ratified a bargain between the White House and Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress that produced a bill more than a thousand pages long. The new law tells all the states how often they have to test children and what subjects must be emphasized, forcing the great majority to change the assessment processes they had decided were best and to give absolute priority to gains in scores on reading and math tests from grades 3 to 8. The law specifies how much progress schools must make every year for every subgroup of students, and mandates goals that have never been achieved on any scale in high poverty school districts. It requires that students with limited English proficiency and special education children perform at these same high levels and that all schools employ 'highly qualified' teachers. . . It imposes huge new duties on the states without providing state resources to cover many costs. It requires the states to assume a role with the local schools and districts that goes beyond what any state has ever done on a large scale. While there is very broad support for the goals, there is bitter controversy over not only the substance of the requirements but also the feasibility and desirability of the dramatically altered role of federal and state administrators in forcing local change.


Gary Orfield, the Project Co-director, says, explaining that the Act's sanctions falls most harshly on low performing schools, "It's as if you were to take the temperature of everybody in a hospital waiting room, and then take away the medicine from those with the highest temperatures and threaten to hit them. That's supposed to be the cure: They will curve themselves if you punish them . . . We're dismantling desegregation, sending kids back to highly impoverished schools, and then we slap a big F on them. All of sudden, instead of the problems being blamed on discrimination and inequality, they're blamed on whoever happens to be in that school -- both the staff and kids."

Blame doesn't solve anything, and NCLB is not working toward solutions. It is a set up to exacerbate the problems that are already there and which need our attention.

Ray and other supporters of NCLB talk about the money it brings to the states and how it is not an unfunded mandate, however, according to the National Education Association, President Bush has requested $9.4 billion less in funding than the Act requires to cover just the costs of the mandates. In order to cover the costs, the states must make up the difference. That is an under-funded mandate. Who will make up that $9.4 billion difference?

We continue to be told by the Commissioner and advocates of NCLB, how wonderful it is and how much it will improve education, while they dismiss criticism and ignore its consequences. Those of us working in education are not blind to such blatant problems, and we must speak out to protect education.

Cheri Pierson Yecke is not the person to be setting Minnesota's education policy. Her appointment should be denied.