Where is Bipartisanship and the Need to Move Forward Together?

I am truly disappointed with the Republican minority in Congress regarding the stimulus package being proposed by the Obama Administration. 100% opposition in the House and being proud of it is not a good sign of things to come.

With Republican Party leadership not yet clearly established (Bush is gone and McCain doesn’t seem able to assume that role), we have a fractured Republican Party whose only agreement is to disagree with everything being offered by the new administration - so much for bipartisanship. With the news media’s attempt to present both sides to the stimulus story, it has given media savvy Conservative Republicans their opportunity to individually step out and offer their own version of criticism of the proposal so that they can “beat their chest” with their “base” back home. One has to remember that Republicans in recent years have shown that they have a natural ability for the role of the “loyal opposition.” Their problem comes to the forefront when they win elections and must move from criticizing to governing. They are once again back in their comfort zone – offering constant criticism with no alternative solutions to solve problems.

Part of the problem is their archaic, over-simplified, and naive view of our economic system. It is like they read Ayn Rand’s great novels – Atlas Shrugged, The Fountainhead, etc.- back in 50’s and 60’s and forgot they were fiction. It helps them that their sound bites always include fears of higher taxes, more government spending, and government involvement somehow limiting individual initiative. These are always popular themes with some people and if they can figure out how to incorporate the big, bad bug-a-boo of “socialism” in their few seconds of fame on TV, they have a sure-fire way to raise big dollars for their next election.

Many of them do have a problem, they voted for the previous administration’s bail-out program which gave billions of dollars to big banks, powerful real estate corporations, insurance companies, and auto industry. Hopefully, these congressmen got thank you notes from these people for the undeserved bonuses they received last year. But, when the present administration starts talking about creating jobs, money for schools, money to support state service programs, investment in alternative energy programs, providing funds to move towards some sort of universal health care, re-building infrastructure, etc., they are opposed. Government money distributed to the people is unpalatable, whereas money to “well-healed” corporate America is OK!

I would love to see the Republicans put together a leadership team that would be willing to work in a bipartisan fashion where possible; and, if they disagree, provide well thought-out, reasonable, constructive criticism. This team should be prepared to offer alternative recommendations of how we can deal with massive unemployment, 2 wars, global economic crisis, collapsing infrastructure, declining middle class, deteriorating schools, inequality in medical care, reduction in dependence on foreign energy, etc.

I am fully aware that what Obama is doing holds a great risk. It will need to be modified and adjusted as we move forward. I am convinced that the only suggestion I’ve heard from Republican’s, significant reduction in taxes for businesses and the wealthy, is not a viable alternative – even though it has voter appeal. Most economists reject it as a bad idea, just as it was in 2001. Tax reduction and smaller government is not a cure-all for what ails us.

I have my own concerns with the stimulus package. For example, I’m not thrilled with the idea that the federal government might increase control over education through funding of “no-child-left-behind.” Although Obama has asked for an “earmark free” stimulus package, I don’t want to see special interest groups and a few powerful Congressmen/women getting questionable projects for their districts and states by “back dooring” the legislative process. I’m less than thrilled with massive amounts of money being spent on new roads (rebuilding of existing deteriorating ones excepted), when it is becoming clear that the time has come for a new generation of light rail and railroads to move people and goods.

I want the stimulus package to be just that – a short term boost to the economy not a permanent establishment of broadened government bureaucracy with an exception or two. Obama has promised that. In fact, he has promised a “house cleaning” of unneeded, over funded, ineffective programs. Unfortunately, it is Congress that controls the purse strings and I have been less than thrilled with the Congressional Democratic leadership up to this point. Hopefully, they will rise to the occasion.

As a private citizen, I really have little clout, just a small voice amongst many others. That is why I would like to see the development of a responsible opposition party that will work together in a bipartisan fashion where possible and offer well thought-out, reasonable alternatives when they disagree. If the Republican Party can’t accomplish that, they do not deserve much respect or support and certainly not the opportunity to govern in the future. If all they can accomplish is negative demagoguery, they are no better than their loud, obnoxious talk radio star – Rush Limbaugh.

Less Frequent Posting in the Future

Not that it represents any significant loss to the world of political, economic, or educational writing, but I will be posting to this blog less frequently in the future. I have truly enjoyed it; but, I had hoped to stimulate more discussion on these issues than what has resulted. Thanks to those who have taken the time to read them and thanks to those who have commented orally that they have enjoyed reading them. I’m amazed that there haven’t been any who have taken issue with some of what was said. There undoubtedly are and maybe they are just being kind.

I’ve decided to take on another hopefully meaningful, creative, and certainly time consuming job of helping to home school our granddaughter. That is the advantage of retirement – doing what one wants to within reason. I taught school and coached at the secondary level for about 15 years some 30 years ago so I should have known what I was getting myself into – plus she is only a 2nd grader for crying out loud! However, it has been an eye opening experience already. Teaching is a tough job requiring all kinds of prep work, background educational reading, and serious thought. I have been truly amazed at the volume of information out there for education of young people. There are K-12 computer programs, supplemental computer programs, many studies on educational practices I’ve not been exposed to over the last 30 years, plus a wealth of curriculum information, exercises, games, etc. to peruse and/or include in one’s instruction.

You take a bright young girl and add in “a little” ADHD and you have a challenging experience that offers an interesting mix of joyful exhilaration in one lesson with a humbling one of failure in the next lesson. It is a roller coaster ride of emotion for both of us. I love it, so I intend to spend a disproportionate amount of time working one-on-one with this little girl I love so much and do my best to remain sane.

I’ve made it very clear to her that I will do my best to help her do well in math and, more importantly, she will learn to enjoy the problem solving challenges of the subject. And, I will do my best to study history with her so that she gains an appreciation and knowledge for a subject she already enjoys. I’ve signed on for as long as her parents want to pursue this educational option and want my involvement. Please wish both of us luck.

What's up with Our Country's Financial Leaders?

Something that has always bothered me about the investment world is that it is run by a group of well-educated, intelligent people who seem too often to make terrible investment decisions. As I understand it, a good share of the “market” is controlled by a fairly small group usually identified as institutional money managers, mutual fund managers, investment brokers, corporate leaders, insurance company money managers, big bankers, etc. These are people who handle huge sums of money day-in-and-day-out and seemingly not too well sometimes – as in 2008. In addition to the above, we have well-educated, intelligent government financial people at Treasury Dep’t and Federal Reserve who have been seemingly caught by surprise and who appear to be stumbling around trying to belatedly correct the most recent recession by throwing money to some big banks, insurance companies, and corporations.

It is more than a little scary for lay people, having only a rudimentary understanding of “markets”, to see their life savings (like 401K’s) depreciate 20 to 40% in a few months, see family and friends suddenly unemployed (at 6.7% maybe heading to 10%), see property values decreasing rapidly (resulting in record mortgage defaults and up-side-down mortgage positions), reduction in government services (that many in our society rely on), etc.

Then we get the explanation for the recession. They tell us it started with sub-prime mortgages and the bundling of this paper to be sold around the world. Why would well-educated, smart people trade in these things when it is so obvious that it is a “house of cards” ready to fall apart? Also, we learn that huge, historical icons of American Corporations, like “Big Three Auto Companies”, are poorly managed, surviving on “smoke and mirrors” and are only a few weeks from being broke. We see large, highly respected investment houses like Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers go under. We see big banks that have existed for generations going broke, being sold at auction, or being bailed out with infusion of massive amounts of government money.

Then, you add to this the rather cavalier attitude that many financial people have regarding these market swings. It is like, “Sure we are going to have these from time to time, it will correct itself, and we’ll be up and running in no time. Just hang on, don’t panic and cash in, maybe carefully move some money around to reposition yourself; but mostly, just relax.” I’m sitting here thinking, why is this normal, why is it so readily acceptable, and why does it happen at all with well-educated, intelligent people managing these financial affairs and these corporations?

Then the real kicker is that if one questions the functionality of our “free-market/capitalistic” system it is like you are committing blasphemy! Suggestions of regulations for the financial/corporate world is a really big, “NO-NO”. These people who have been responsible in large measure for this mess have never seen a regulation they like; and given the choice, they will applaud most deregulation. They insist that regulations will stifle the “free-market/capitalistic” system and its wonderfully self-regulating ability to create wealth for us all. The amazing thing is that they can say this with a straight face while “bellying up to the bar” with their open palm extended for government bail-outs. Then when it is suggested that they be held accountable for it, they are aghast, “What do you mean we have to tell you how we spend the money, how unreasonable. We know how to run our businesses and the worst thing that can be done is to get the government involved. And, by the way, if this isn’t enough money, we’ll be back to you when we need more.” Why do they hold to the archaic view of preserving a “pure capitalistic/free-market” economy? We haven’t had this system, other than in name, for about a century. We have a “mixed economy” with heavy government involvement that experience has shown us is needed to prevent illegal, unethical, ill-conceived, and abusive practices. Unfortunately, we evidently don’t have it quite right yet.

I’m sorry that I have no definitive answers to the questions I’ve asked throughout this column. I think they are worth some contemplation. But, in the mean time, our best choice might be to rely on carefully crafted government regulations that establish a delicate balance between freedom and controls that don’t unreasonably hinder the market system. That is the challenge moving forward with our “mixed economy”. We will have to constantly adjust the ‘rules-of-the-game”. Our aim should not be to eliminate risk, without risk you stifle innovation, creativity, and growth. But, maybe we can curtail the “lemminglike psychology” that overwhelms the entire market too frequently.

What History Teaches Us

History has always fascinated me. I think a deep understanding of history is a pre-requisite for success in many areas including business, local/state/national government, and foreign affairs, just to mention a few. I think what history does, is to teach us what mistakes not to repeat in making current and future decisions. However, it should not dictate what course of action to take with these decisions.

The War in Afghanistan might be a good example. We had good reason to militarily go after al-Qaeda – 9-11. But, history from the time of Alexander the Great, through British occupation, and the most recent Russian debacle in Afghanistan should have taught us not to make the mistake of moving into this country with what they would perceive as an occupying force. History clearly shows that they have the willingness to fight, even against what most would think are insurmountable odds, to resist that perception. They won’t accept defeat – they will choose death; they won’t welcome “nation building” – they will hold to their tribal system; they will not accept “puppet” governments set up by an occupier – they will bide their time and eradicate them as soon as possible; they will stay faithful to their religion and culture – in fact, the more pressure exerted to alter it will simply radicalize it even more. We should have known these things from history.

Understanding these things could have kept us from making the mistakes we made and are still making. A “surge” of more troops will result in having more control of Afghanistan. If you put more “feet on the ground” and more sophisticated military muscle in the country, you will kill more people and destroy more infrastructure; and for the time being, curtail insurgency and opposition because you will simply over-power them. We did it in Iraq. But, will it accomplish any long term goals like: establish a democracy, a peaceful and settled nation, promote human rights (for example, equality of women), create an appreciative ally for us in the region, etc.? I don’t think so!

That doesn’t mean we back away from confrontation with enemies dedicated in destroying us. My choice would have been to punish al-Qaeda with quick, overwhelming, devastating destruction and then get out – no occupation, no nation building, and no rebuilding. True “shock and awe” with no apologies; but, a promise that we will be back if need be. But, the time has passed for this. The Taliban has experienced a resurgence, al-Qaeda is linked closer than ever to them, and the conflict has broadened beyond the tribal areas in Pakistan to possible instability in all of Pakistan which is much more dangerous and complicated. I have confidence that the new administration has the necessary knowledge of history to avoid past mistakes; but, the solution is not to be found in history. It will take an innovative approach which may in the short run cost us more in lives lost and expenditure of money not readily available. In the end, our ego-defense may have to “take a hit” as it did in Korean War, Vietnam War, failed Iran Crisis Rescue Mission Attempt, and Mogadishu (of the tragic Black Hawk Down incident). The only consolation is that history has shown us that backing away from an ill-conceived and conducted military action doesn’t permanently damage our nation, just our ego. It does teach us that we do have limitations.

Another example is our recent economic crisis. Why are we caught by surprise and appalled by the newest “boom and bust?” They aren’t new, history has documented quite well one after another going back to our country’s beginning. We’ve had land speculation busts several times; technological inspired booms and busts like railroads, oil, and the 2001 “.com” one; numerous bank panics; investment speculation bubbles bursting like in 1929 and again in 2008, etc. How much evidence do we have to compile that a “free market” system, left to run amuck on its own, will create yet another “correction”, “down cycle”, recession”, and maybe a “depression”?

We should have learned enough from history to maturely accept the need for our government to balance responsible regulation with economic freedom to make our markets work. We certainly should have learned from history that we can’t expect anything but dire consequences if we retract regulations that were intended to protect us from obviously careless and/or unethical practices. Regulation needs to be carefully crafted and constantly adjusted to meet our needs, but seldom should we even consider deregulation. In addition to the above needed balance, there needs to be the acceptance of the necessity of maintaining a strong middle class which is required for prosperity and successful democracy.

However, history can’t teach us how to handle the most recent crisis. That has to be day-and-age specific problem solving. Hopefully, it will come as a result of much well thought-out public debate on a reasonably level playing field. This is where a democracy becomes so important - where large numbers of a wide variety of citizens take it upon themselves to offer their views. This is why it is so important that our government is not controlled by a few powerful special interest groups.

So, let’s learn and use our history to avoid mistakes of the past; but, let’s use our knowledge, intuition, and creativity to deal with current and future issues.

Merit Pay at the Secondary Level

Assessment based teaching/learning, which would be needed if we were to adopt merit pay for teachers, requires a different approach in the 9-12 vs. the K-8 curriculum. Secondary curriculum in most schools is a combination of required courses plus elective courses which allows some latitude for students to choose their own course of study. The most common tract in McPherson High School is a college prep program. If students are going to be equipped for college, this program should prepare them for assessment tests (required by “No-Child-Left-Behind”) and other standardized or college preparedness tests. Other students may choose other tracts, often along vocational lines, which may or may not cover the full range of skills, knowledge, and concepts required in assessment testing.

To accomplish this, some courses would need to be required to insure proficiency in assessment testing. Curriculum decisions would need to be made as to what these proficiencies are, what course work would be required to cover these, and how many course hours will be allotted to accomplish this. There should not be so many courses that student’s choices would be lessoned significantly. In all courses whose primary function is to prepare students for assessment proficiency, a pre-test may be needed at beginning of year followed by a post-test at the end of the year that can be used to determine student progress individually and collectively along with measuring teacher effectiveness – to determine merit pay.

One could use math as an example of this process. Determination would need to be made of what required courses would be needed to cover math proficiencies. Those in college prep program could elect to skip these courses if they followed continuum of algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus, etc. A similar process could be set up for science, reading, writing, and social studies.

In the elective courses, not designed specifically to teach assessment proficiency, teachers need to know what the proficiency requirements are. Then, teachers of these courses should attempt to include, where appropriate, those skills, knowledge, and concepts for assessment testing so that student’s proficiency would be re-enforced and enhanced. Beyond that, teachers will teach what has been established as the curriculum for this course of study. To establish a basis for merit pay, tests need to be developed or purchased from some reputable source where student proficiency and teacher effectiveness can be measured for that course.

If this sounds like all course work will be focused on “teaching to a test”, that is exactly what it is. If a school district accepts this philosophy of assessment based teaching/learning in order to fairly administer merit pay, one may have to face some possible negatives.

One of these is that student “learning” will be determined by the test used to measure what a student needs to know. Some would argue that present assessment tests given to students fail to measure that. For one thing, there is an emphasis in these tests on knowledge of random and isolated facts rather than problem solving skills that are a better measure of student’s preparedness to enter the real world. Plus, there is some criticism of the way these tests are structured and written.

Secondly, teaching students and students learning is not an exact science – there is not one way to do it. Teachers are not programmed robots and students are not sponges. Learning varies from student to student, class to class, and year to year. The best teachers recognize this, use creative approaches, encourage relevant problem solving approaches, take the time to re-group and approach learning in other ways if material is not learned, etc. Not encouraging and not allowing professional teachers to use their skills and experience curtails academic freedom and can discourage good teacher retention.

But, on the other hand, without agreed upon student proficiencies, one runs the risk of continuation of some ineffective teaching and students leaving school poorly educated.

I would suggest that the best way to approach this dilemma is to set up the curriculum process, administer the tests, and use the results to measure student proficiency, effectiveness of teachers and curriculum. Do all this without implementing merit pay. Adjustments could then be made in teaching strategies, in testing programs, and curriculum offerings without threat to teachers. Over time, if a general consensus is reached that our district has an excellent process in place, then institute merit pay. I contend that the most important element in quality education is good teaching and any process established should support, encourage, and reward their work.

Making Education Relevant

One of my strongly held educational philosophies is that all instruction should be relevant to students, especially at the secondary level. Before someone gets defensive, I’m not suggesting that it isn’t, I’m simply urging that with all curriculum planning we should be asking the question. “Why should students be required to learn this? We used to get away with answers like, because it is “knowledge for knowledge’s sake” or “learning this expands one’s mind” – no more. Quite frankly, there is so much information out there today that we have to be selective in what is taught. First and foremost, our educational system should be instilling in students the insatiable desire to see learning as a continuous life time experience. Secondly, our educational system should be teaching students the core knowledge and problem solving skills they will need to do the above. I think the best way accomplish these goals is to make sure what we teach is seen as relevant to students.

In some courses it is easy: for example civics, especially during an election year like we’ve just gone through, or economics when we are facing a financial crisis as we are today. Some courses are career oriented, like carpentry or agriculture, and relevance to that career is the focus. But, other courses, most in fact, are not so easy, and it takes some serious thought, creativity, and effort to make it relevant. Schools can be somewhat isolated from the working world and some courses of study can fall into the trap of being too sterile and artificial. I think it is important that all students should be involved in often held discussions where it is made clear to them what they are expected to learn and how this knowledge relates to their lives now and in the not so distant future. With this understanding, it should help students to develop an interest or it at least makes learning the skill or knowledge tolerant since they can see what they are expected to learn and how it will impact them. If this can’t be done, maybe we shouldn’t be teaching it!

Beyond discussing relevance with students, I think an excellent way to accomplish this is to expand the school environment, making it a community environment. There should be a revolving door of community people going into the school to speak with students about how things are done in the working world. And, where appropriate, students going out in the community to see, hear, and get a feel of how things are done in the working world.

The focus should not be career selection, although students might make judgments along those lines. The focus should be on relevance to their education. One can pick any course of study to illustrate this. Using chemistry as an example, speakers could be brought in from Hospira, NCRA, McPherson Hospital, Certainteed, Chemstar, just to name a few companies that have chemists on staff that can explain to students how chemistry is an integral part of their business. Plus, other companies like water treatment, sewage treatment, oil field workers, feed companies, etc. who make extensive use of chemistry, even though they don’t have chemists on staff, could explain how knowledge of chemistry affects their business. These people could bring some real world examples and every day problems where knowledge of chemistry is necessary. We just mentioned 9 different potential speakers without even working at it. I think we could do the same with other courses of study resulting in many speakers and a lot of real world relevance.

The nice thing is that it wouldn’t cost schools much to do it. It would take a couple of full time facilitators to take requests from teachers for programs, to go out and arrange for these speakers, video tape these classroom sessions, and compile a data base of DVD’s that could be used in the future. The subject matter could be as simple and/or as advanced as needed for the education level of the course. I’m confident that business owners, managers, and employees would look foreword to working with students and teachers a few hours each school year. I stumbled across this process in the last few years of my teaching career when I started teaching economics with no curriculum and no text book. I asked a wide variety of people from the community to come in and it worked out amazingly well. They were more than willing to come and students learned more than I could have taught them about the real world of business, labor, banking, agriculture, insurance, government finance, manufacturing, sales, management, etc. Remember, these speakers are almost always passionate about their work and very knowledgeable.

It would not be an easy process to set-up. It would take some serious organizational skills. Parameters would need to be developed for guest speakers, for teachers, and for students – they need to be simple. Initially you will have some sorting to do regarding the quality of experiences. But, just imagine the extent of the data base that could eventually be created where real world relevance would be the underlying goal.

Plus, the school district would get a bonus – large numbers of local people coming into the school and working with students and teachers which might very well give them some ownership in the school experience besides paying taxes.

Extra Curricular Activities in Our Schools

Let me be up front and clear about my attitude toward these sometimes expensive extra curricular activities in our schools – I am supportive of them within reason. To me they represent some of the best educational experiences that students are exposed to in their school years.

I am well aware that there are some in every community who do not look kindly on these programs. In times of budget cuts, which we are likely to face in tough economic times, some will want these activities cut back providing money for only the core subjects of “reading, writing, and arithmetic.” I don’t support this view. I think there are multiple reasons these activities are important in the school experience.

To begin with, most extra curricular activities stand the very severe test of public scrutiny. If the band is out marching in a parade or putting on a concert, a significant portion of the community sees and hears them and will evaluate their performances. Whether athletic teams win or lose is a matter of very public discussion. When a theatre performance is put on, it is out there for the community to critique. This is true of most extra curricular activities. Students and teachers, being well aware of this public scrutiny, strive to do their very best. It would be real interesting if the standard classroom functioned in a similar environment. I’ve never figured out how this could be done; but, if it were, I would suspect that the teaching that goes on there would be significantly impacted. The atmosphere would be different. The need to motivate, encourage, to include all students in the process, and the strategies employed to get students to learn the skills and concepts being taught might very well be “ramped up.”

Secondly, extra curricular activities provide students with the opportunity to pursue special interests that the school doesn’t offer in the normal classroom setting. Students often will spend hours beyond school time honing their skills and knowledge with these activities. If students are involved in debate they will spend hours preparing their arguments; if contest time is approaching, music students will spend hours practicing and rehearsing; if school newspaper or the Annual due date is approaching, hours will be spent to get it “just right”; when students from technical programs such as carpentry, FFA, and automotive go out and compete in state and national contests they are putting in significant prep time, etc. In preparing themselves for these activities, they are, without even thinking about it, putting to use core skills and knowledge they have learned in the classroom. If we could find ways to get all students to fully understand how the core skills impact their present interests as well as their future endeavors in life, I think their education would be more effective. How many of us have lamented our failure to learn skills and knowledge when we were in school? Maybe there is a lesson to be learned there by our educators – that all instruction should be prefaced with the question, “Why are we learning this?”

Thirdly, these extra curricular activities often give students the first opportunity to work collectively in a group organization. They may have to assume responsibility or maybe take some leadership role where they learn to work with others in accomplishing tasks. They may be forced to learn how to effectively conduct meetings, organize limited time and resources, delegate tasks, etc. All of these skills might very well be put to use as they get out in the working world.

In addition, these extra curricular activities can and often do create a social comradery that psychologists tell us is so important to our mental health. It can create relationships that continue on for years beyond their school experience. Ten, twenty, thirty years later it is often these activities that alumni spend their time reminiscing about. But more importantly, it teaches students the importance and joy that relationships provide; and, it often manifests itself in participation in churches, business organizations, clubs, and other social groups (formal and informal) that become a part of their lives.

Extra curricular activities are important to our school experience and should be encouraged and supported by our community as long as they have good leadership so that they are a positive learning experience.