[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 42, Number 2 (Monday, January 16, 2006)]
[Pages 26-31]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks on the No Child Left Behind Act in Glen Burnie, Maryland

January 9, 2006

    Thank you all. Please be seated. Thanks for the warm introduction. 
It's great to be here with Laura. She is a fantastic mom. She 
understands something that's very interesting--all education begins at 
home. I can remember her reading to our little girls all the time. 
Occasionally, I did, too, but stumbled over a few of the words and might 
have confused them. [Laughter] Laura cares deeply about education, as do 
I.
    Thank you all for coming. We're here at North Glen Elementary School 
because it is a center of educational excellence. That's why we're here. 
We're here to herald success. We're here to say--[applause].
    It so happens this is the fourth anniversary of when I signed the No 
Child Left Behind Act. I think the No Child Left Behind Act is one of 
the most significant accomplishments in education in a long, long time. 
I want to thank both the Republicans and Democrats who worked together 
back then to get this piece of legislation passed. It is a really 
important piece of legislation that is working. And I'm here today to 
talk about the spirit of the No Child Left Behind Act, the evidence that 
says it's working, and my deep desire to work with Congress to make sure 
it continues to have the desired effect on children all across the 
country.
    First, I want to welcome our Secretary of Education, Margaret 
Spellings. I've known her for a long time. She is a dear friend of mine 
who also happens to be a significant warrior when it comes to leaving no 
children behind in our society. She believes that I believe--like I 
believe, that every single child can learn, and we've got to make sure 
that every child does learn. I want to thank you for your leadership, 
Margaret. You're doing a heck of a job as the Secretary of Education.
    I want to thank the first lady, as well, for being here--Kendel, 
thanks for coming. Tell that old husband of yours it's okay to sleep in 
occasionally. [Laughter]
    Dutch, I want to thank you for being here--Congressman 
Ruppersberger's district--real proud you took time out of your life to 
be here. Thanks for coming. I also want to thank Congressman Wayne 
Gilchrest for being here as well. Wayne, appreciate you taking time.
    I want to thank all the local and State officials who've joined us. 
I want to thank Nancy Mann, the superintendent of schools for this 
school district. Julie, thank you--the principal, Julie Little-McVearry, 
who is the--listen, let me say something--and by the way,

[[Page 27]]

Maurine Larkin, who is the former principal here.
    One of the things that's interesting, that when you look at public 
schools, when you find centers of excellence, you always find a 
principal that is capable of setting high standards, working with 
teachers, demanding results and following through to make sure that the 
schools achieve the results. Every school requires a dedicated 
educational entrepreneur, someone willing to challenge the status quo if 
there's failure and being imaginative about how to achieve results. And 
you've got such principals here. Again, I want to congratulate Julie and 
Maurine for leading this school. You've done a heck of a job, and we're 
proud--we're proud to honor you.
    We went to Laneie Taylor's fifth grade class. I see that they're 
here. Laneie, thank you--second-year teacher. Listen, schools succeed 
because they've got teachers that care. And I want to thank all the 
teachers who are here.
    One of my predecessors as the Governor of Texas was Sam Houston. You 
may have heard of him, may not have heard of him--[laughter]--
interesting old guy. He was the President of the Republic of Texas. He 
was a United States Senator. He was a Congressman from Tennessee. He was 
the Governor of Texas. He had done a lot of things. He led the battle of 
San Jacinto. I mean, he was a heck of a guy. They asked him, ``Of all 
the things you've done in your life, what is the most important job?'' 
He said, ``Teacher.'' And so, all the teachers here, thanks for 
teaching. It is really an important job, and we appreciate your 
dedication in the classroom.
    And to the parents of the students who come here, thanks for caring. 
Schools that succeed have got parents who are involved at the school. 
And so, whatever is working here in terms of parental involvement is--
needs to be duplicated around this State and around the country, because 
parental involvement is a very important part of the success of schools 
around America.
    So the No Child Left Behind Act--we got here to Washington, and I 
decided to make sure that the public school system in America met the 
promise of--and the hopes of our country. I understand how important it 
is to have a public school system work really well. A vibrant America is 
one in which the public schools provide a avenue for success. And it's 
really important we have a good public school system. It's been 
important in the past that the public school system function well, and 
it's going to be really important in the future.
    Secondly, we have a moral obligation to make sure every child gets a 
good education. That's how I--it's a moral obligation to make sure that 
we herald success and challenge failure. It's not right to have a system 
that quits on kids. I mean, some schools may not think they're quitting 
on kids, but when you shuffle kids through the schools without 
determining whether or not they can read and write and add and subtract, 
I view that as quitting on kids. I called it the soft bigotry of low 
expectations. In other words, you believe certain children can't learn, 
so, therefore, just move them through. It's kind of a process world, 
isn't it? It's more important that somebody be shuffled through than it 
is to determine whether or not they're capable of meeting certain 
standards in certain grades.
    And it troubled me to realize that in my own State of Texas, as well 
as other States, there wasn't that sense of urgency; there wasn't that 
sense of focus on results. It was kind of a process world we lived in. 
And we were beginning to realize that as a result of a process world, 
the kids were coming out of the school system that were illiterate. And 
it wasn't right. It was morally wrong, in my judgment, not to challenge 
a system that wasn't achieving great national goals such as an 
illiterate--a literate workforce. See, we live in a competitive world. 
And we'd better make sure our--the future of this country has the got 
the capacity to compete in that world.
    And the best place to start is to make sure every child can read and 
write and add and subtract. And so that was the spirit behind proposing 
the No Child Left Behind Act. And as I mentioned, there was a lot of 
non-partisan cooperation--kind of a rare thing in Washington. But it 
made sense when it come to public schools.
    The No Child Left Behind Act embodied these principles: First, there 
is a role for the

[[Page 28]]

Federal Government, a funding role. In other words, the Federal 
Government has committed and should be committed to helping Title I 
students, for example. As a matter of fact, Title I program spending has 
increased 45 percent since 2001. There is what's called the elementary 
and secondary school program; that's up by 41 percent. In other words, 
there is a Federal dollar commitment--certainly not as big as the State 
government or as local government, nor should it be. I don't think you 
want the Federal Government funding all public schools. But I do think 
you want the Federal Government focusing money on certain aspects of 
public education.
    I also believe that sometimes you can have so many goals there are 
no goals. In other words, there's just this kind of long list of goals, 
and so nothing gets accomplished. I'm the kind of person that believes 
that we ought to set specific goals, and one of the most specific goals 
we've set is that every child should be reading at grade level by the 
third grade and remain at grade level. That's a clear goal; it's easy to 
understand, there's no ambiguity with it. It says every child--not just 
some children, every child--ought to be reading at grade level by the 
third grade--no doubt--it's not the 2d or 10th; it's 3d--and remain 
there.
    And so we back that goal up. And by the way, it's the understanding 
that if you can't figure out--if you can't read, you can't do math or 
science. Reading is the gateway to educational excellence. That's why I 
asked the kids in your classroom whether or not they read more than they 
watched TV. I was pleased to see a lot of hands went up. It's kind of a 
hard question to ask in this day and age, isn't it, particularly since 
we've got too many TV channels to begin with. [Laughter]
    And so we quadrupled the amount of money available for what's called 
the Reading First Program. In other words, we set the goal, and the 
Federal Government has provided the money for certain parts of the 
education system around the country. We're not going to fund it all, but 
we're going to make targeted funding. And it's a good use of money, in 
my judgment.
    On the other hand, it seems like to me if we're going to spend 
money, we ought to be asking the question, is it--are we getting the 
results for the money. In other words, once there's a commitment, a 
logical follow-up to that commitment is, why don't you show us--why 
don't you show us whether or not we're meeting goals. So, in other 
words, let's measure, finally. And so the No Child Left Behind Act has 
said that in return for Federal money, we'll test 3 through 8. Children 
will be tested grades 3 through 8.
    And why do we do that? Well, one is to figure out whether or not 
kids are learning. It's an interesting way to determine whether or not 
the curriculum you're using works. I remember when I was the Governor of 
Texas, there was a lot of debate about different types of curriculum, 
different ways to teach reading. You might remember those debates. They 
were full of all kinds of politics. The best way to cut through the 
political debate is to measure. The best way to say, the program I'm 
using is working, is because you're able to measure to determine whether 
or not it's working. That's what this school has done. They said, ``We 
welcome accountability, because we believe our teachers are great, and 
the system we use can work.''
    Another reason to measure is so that the parents stay involved. You 
know, there's a lot of anecdotal evidence about parents believing that 
the school their kids go to is doing just fine. That's what you would 
hope if you were a parent. I mean, it's a natural inclination to say, 
``Gosh, my kid goes to a really good school. I like the principal, I 
like the teachers.'' But sure enough, in some cases, the performance 
might not have been up to par.
    And so making sure there's an accountability system that the parents 
get to see is one that says to a parent, you know, if things aren't 
going so well, get involved with the school and help. Or if things are 
going well, make sure you thank the teachers. Make sure you take time 
out of your day to thank the person whose soul is invested in the future 
of your child. It's like the teachers right here in this school have 
invested their time and efforts to make sure the children learn to read. 
I bet there's nothing better than a teacher to have a thankful parent 
come up

[[Page 29]]

and say, ``Thank you for making sure my daughter or my son has got the 
capacity to be able to succeed in this great country.''
    Measurement also is a way to let schools understand how they're 
doing relative to other schools, or school districts to see how they're 
doing relative to other school districts. In other words, if you're 
living in the school district here, and one school like this was doing 
fine, another one is not, it should provide an opportunity for the 
principal of that school or the parents of that school to say, ``Wait a 
minute. Look at this school over here; it's doing fine. How come we're 
not?'' You can't solve a problem until you diagnose it, is what I'm 
telling you. And our accountability system helps us all diagnose 
problems and solve them early, before it's too late.
    One of the interesting parts of the No Child Left Behind Act was 
what's called supplemental service money. I don't know if you've used it 
here or not--bet you have to a certain extent. It basically says, if a 
child is falling behind, here is extra money from the Federal Government 
to help you catch up. If a child needs help in reading, we've diagnosed 
a problem early and said, let's make sure this child is not left behind. 
That's what it says.
    This is a bill that says, in return for Federal money, we're going 
to measure; we'll adjust. We'll change to achieve the most important 
objective of all, to make sure every single child in America can read by 
the third grade and stay at grade level, that children can read and 
write and add and subtract.
    Listen, I've been through this debate about testing. Again, I 
remember when I was the Governor of Texas, there was a lot of people 
saying, ``How can you be for testing?'' My answer is, how can you not be 
for testing? They said it was discriminatory to test. I said it's 
discriminatory not to test. If you can't know what a child--whether a 
child can read and write, how can you solve the problem? I've heard 
people say, ``Oh, all you're doing is teaching to test.'' My answer is, 
if you teach a child how to read, they will pass the test. 
Accountability is crucial, in my judgment, for making sure the public 
school system meets the important goals of our society.
    Having said all that, an important part of the No Child Left Behind 
Act is the understanding that one size does not fit all when it comes to 
public schools, and that the governance ought to be local. If you've 
noticed, I've never said the Federal Government is going to tell you how 
to teach. That would be the worst thing that could happen to the public 
school system. The worst possible thing is, we're sending you money and 
now we're going to tell you how to use it and how to teach and what 
curriculum to use. That's the opposite of the spirit of the No Child 
Left Behind Act. The No Child Left Behind Act understands there needs to 
be flexibility and local control of schools.
    We did not design a Federal test. There was great pressure to say, 
let's have a Federal test. All that would mean, that once you have a 
Federal test, it could lead to local prescriptions for that test. We 
said the States ought to develop their own accountability systems, and 
that local people ought to have input into the design of the State at 
the--of local accountability systems. And so for those of you who think, 
well, the Federal Government has reached too far into the governance 
issue, it's just not true. It's not the case. As a matter of fact, quite 
the contrary; it makes sure that there was local control of schools. It 
made sure that the State had the option and opportunity to say to the 
local superintendent and principals, ``Design your program that works. 
You're closest to the people; you listen to the parents; you see the 
issues firsthand in the neighborhood in which you live. Come up with a 
curriculum that meets your own needs.''
    The system is working. That's what's important for people to 
understand. And by the way, any attempt to roll back the accountability 
in Washington, DC, will be--I'll fight any attempt to do that. I'm just 
not going to let it happen. We're making too much progress. There's an 
achievement gap in America that's closing. We don't need achievement 
gaps in this country. It's not good for us to have achievement gaps 
where certain kids can read in fourth grade better than others. One of 
our goals has got to be to achieve that--close that achievement gap. And 
we're doing it. How do we know? Because we're measuring.
    There's what they called the Nation's Report Card--it's the National 
Assessment of

[[Page 30]]

Educational Progress, NAEP. It's a way to kind of norm testing scores 
across States without having a national test. It's a way to determine 
whether or not the great State of Maryland is doing okay relative to 
your neighboring States, for example. It's a way for us to kind of get a 
glimpse about whether or not we're making progress toward achieving 
certain goals. In 2005, America's fourth graders posted the best scores 
in reading and math in the history of the test. That's positive. Ever 
since the test has been issued, 2005 was the best scores. If we didn't 
test, by the way, you could never say--I could never stand up and say 
this. I'd just be guessing, wouldn't I? It could be that we're doing 
fine--maybe not, maybe so.
    African American fourth graders set records in reading and math in 
2005. Hispanic 4th graders set records in reading and math. That's 
really good. It's important for our country that all children from all 
walks of life have the ability to realize the great promise of the 
country. The NAEP also showed that eighth graders earned the best math 
scores ever recorded; eighth grade Hispanic and African American 
students achieved the highest math scores ever.
    As I said, there's an achievement gap--we know because we measure--
and it's closing, and that's positive. And our goal has got to be to 
continue to work to make sure there is no achievement gap in America.
    Now, let me talk about North Glen Elementary School. I don't know if 
you--those of you interested in this school have paid attention to these 
results, but I would like to share some--[applause]--if I might, I'd 
like to share some statistics with you, and perhaps this will give you 
an indication about why Laura and I came here.
    In 2003, 50 percent--57 percent of North Glen students scored 
proficient in reading--57 percent--and 46 percent were proficient in 
math. Now, that's unacceptable. Fifty-seven percent is a lousy number. 
Forty-six percent, obviously, is even worse. But it was unacceptable to 
the principals and the superintendent and the teachers--that's most 
important. And so they got after it, and they figured out how to make 
sure that goals were met.
    I didn't spend a lot of time talking today to the principal about 
the different analysis that went on, but I bet it was pretty indepth. 
But one thing for certain is, the test in '03 said we better do 
something different. When we find out something is going right, let's 
stay on it, and if something is going wrong, let's change. That's what 
happened here, because guess what--in 2005, 82 percent of North Glen 
students were ranked proficient in reading, and 84 percent were ranked 
proficient in math.
    It's great news, isn't it? It's a system that says, why don't we 
show everybody whether or not we can succeed. And if we're not, we'll 
change; and if we are, we now have a chance to have the old President 
come by and say thanks, you know. [Laughter]
    Interestingly enough, in 2003, 45 percent of the African American 
students in this school rated proficient in reading; in 2005, 84 percent 
are proficient. In other words, this is a school that believes every 
child can learn. Not just certain children, every child. And then they 
work to see to it that it happens. This--the statistics I just 
announced--oh, by the way, in 2003, 35 percent of African American 
students rated proficient in math. You've got to know math if you're 
going to compete in this 21st-century world. It's really important that 
math and science become a focal point of our high schools, for example. 
But it's not going to work if kids coming out of elementary school can't 
do math. Thirty-five percent of the African American students rated 
proficient in math; now it's 82 percent. It's a good score.
    This is a fine school. We're here to herald excellence. We're here 
to praise the law that is working. I'm here to thank the teachers not 
only here but around the State of Maryland and around the country who 
are dedicating their lives to providing hope for our future. I want to 
thank the Members of Congress for working together on this vital piece 
of legislation, a piece of legislation that's laying the cornerstone for 
a hopeful tomorrow.
    Laura and I's spirits are uplifted any time we go to a school that's 
working, because we understand the importance of public education in the 
future of our country. We also believe, strongly believe, that every 
child can

[[Page 31]]

learn. And with the right focus and right energy, every child will 
learn. And as every child learns, the future of this country will never 
have been brighter.
    Thanks for a job well done. God bless the teachers here and the 
principal. God bless the parents. And may God bless the students as 
well. Thank you.

Note: The President spoke at 10:26 a.m. at North Glen Elementary School. 
In his remarks, he referred to Kendel S. Ehrlich, wife of Gov. Robert L. 
Ehrlich, Jr., of Maryland. The transcript released by the Office of the 
Press Secretary also included the remarks of the First Lady. The Office 
of the Press Secretary also released a Spanish language transcript of 
these remarks.