NCLB: The Bad, the Worse, and the Ugly

Want to know how the No Child Left Behind Act has actually affected overall student achievement and the gaps between students of different races and socio‐​economic backgrounds? Want a guided insider tour of the political sausage factory that produced it and the political calculus that allowed it to pass in the first place? Look no further than the podcasts that are available here.


They’re enough to make H.L. Mencken look like a political optimist.


Just one highlight, uttered by former House majority leader Dick Armey, who voted against national education standards under President Clinton but for the NCLB under President Bush: “My NCLB vote, perhaps more than any other one thing, was the reason I left Congress.… If I couldn’t be myself and vote my conscience, why stay?”


According to Armey, opposition to national education standards under Clinton and support for them under Bush were driven overwhelmingly by political considerations that had nothing to do with the evidence of what works. That’s not surprising, of course, but it’s one thing for pundits to opine about it and quite another to have a key player openly acknowledge it.


There are a lot of other interesting bits throughout the podcasts, including an appearance by Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R‐​Mich.) pre‐​announcing legislation that he will formally reveal next week that would give control over federal education spending to the states. Perhaps not an ideal solution (the feds should not be involved in the first place, according to the Constitution), but it would be better than any other serious legislative proposal I’ve seen.