This morning, NYT columnist David Brooks turns in an uneven????analysis????of President Obama's education speech. ????His opening hook (the president's anecdote about studying early in the morning with his mother) takes him off the rails a bit. ????An extended discussion about the importance of "relationships" culminates in this curiosity:
Most important, it would increase merit pay for good teachers (the ones who develop emotional bonds with students) and dismiss bad teachers (the ones who treat students like cattle to be processed).
Both parentheticals are inapt.
After reviewing the president's support of high standards, good assessments, and quality data, Brooks ends by properly chastising Mr. Obama for being "shamefully quiet" about????the DC scholarship program, which congressional Democrats have all but killed. ????But then he writes the following:
But in the next weeks he'll at least try to protect the kids now in the program.
We don't know that. ????The president hasn't said as much, and he signed legislation that does quite the contrary. ????While his press secretary provided a small ray of hope, this problem now cannot be easily solved through the budget or appropriations process. ????Due to language in the omnibus, reviving the program now requires action by the full Congress and the DC government.