‘Things Can’t Go Back’

Spellings has tried to rally support. But on Capitol Hill, neither Republicans nor Democrats seemed in the mood to compromise. In school communities across the country—where Spellings has stumped tirelessly in an effort to get parents to support the law—she's been greeted mostly by bewilderment. In middle-class communities the reaction has been worse: disparaging No Child Left Behind has become convenient shorthand for a whole load of pent-up frustrations with the White House (Iraq, sinking economy).

These days, Spellings is looking at the bright side where she can find it. A Bush loyalist to the end, she's planning to stay on until January. Like everyone else in the education field, she's noticed that none of the presidential candidates are talking much about education. She takes their near-total silence on this heartland issue to be, if not a good, then at least a neutral sign. "None of them have locked themselves in to a position that they can't get out of," and by that she means that neither of the Democratic candidates have wholly adopted the agenda of the powerful teachers union.

But she worries about the future of No Child Left Behind. "The loopholes will get larger," Spellings predicts. "States will game the system as best they can in order to get out of doing what they should do to close the achievement gap. No Child Left Behind turned up the heat. And not everyone is comfortable with that."

Even if many despise the law—and the downstream effect it's had on their kids' schools—Spellings wants to think that she's done some good. At the very minimum, she hopes the heat and light surrounding No Child Left Behind has focused the attention of America on the shameful achievement gap between middle-class and poor kids, between white kids and kids of color. "And things can't go back the way they used to be—when we didn't have accountability," she implores. "When we didn't care that poor kids were falling behind." She pauses. "Can we?"

© 2008