S/O The Obama/Ayers connections

[Stacy in NJ]

Here's a CNN report on the relationship.

 

 

This link explains what the Annenberg Challenge actuall was.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Annenberg_Challenge

 

 

 

The most ****ing information I found on Obama was this tidbit found at the bottom of the Wiki entry:

 

"The results of an August 2003 final technical report of the Chicago Annenberg Research Project by the Consortium on Chicago School Research "suggest that among the schools it supported, the Challenge had little impact on school improvement and student outcomes, with no statistically significant differences between Annenberg and non-Annenberg schools in rates of achievement gain, classroom behavior, student self-efficacy, and social competence.""

 

So, after 50 million dollars (thankfully not tax payer dollars) were spent on educational programs by Obama and the Annenberg board no statistically significant impact was found on educational outcomes.

 

Wow, just, Wow. How do we find ourselves in a place were you can accomplish next to nothing in effective real *change* politically, but still run for and probably win the Presidency of the USA?

Edited October 7, 2008 by Stacy in NJ
sp

[TXMomof4]

I don't know about Obama's attempt to *fix* education, but it seems to me, the problem isn't that things aren't being taught. It's the lack of involvement and expectation from the parents. When I was a kid, I was expected to attend school, behave, and do my work well. I know there are some parents in some areas that still have that expectation, but not the majority by any stretch. School is a babysitter beginning at age 4 in most cases and if anything is accomplished there, kudos to the teacher for being exceptional. It doesn't seem to matter how much money you put into it, it has to do with how lucky you are in your classmates and your teacher.

[asta]

And just think: he's going to be your President!

 

W00t!

[dawn of ns]

"The results of an August 2003 final technical report of the Chicago Annenberg Research Project by the Consortium on Chicago School Research "suggest that among the schools it supported, the Challenge had little impact on school improvement and student outcomes, with no statistically significant differences between Annenberg and non-Annenberg schools in rates of achievement gain, classroom behavior, student self-efficacy, and social competence.""

 

So, after 50 million dollars (thankfully not tax payer dollars) were spent on educational programs by Obama and the Annenberg board no statistically significant impact was found on educational outcomes.

 

I had to laugh. Don't 95% of similar initiatives have a similar outcome? This should be expected, not shocking.

[Stacy in NJ]

I had to laugh. Don't 95% of similar initiatives have a similar outcome? This should be expected, not shocking.

 

I didn't say the results were shocking. I said that to accomplish nothing and then be nominated for and possibly the winner of the presidency is shocking.

[Jean too]

Wow! On CNN! Thanks for posting this.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

So, after 50 million dollars (thankfully not tax payer dollars) were spent on educational programs by Obama and the Annenberg board no statistically significant impact was found on educational outcomes.

 

Wow, just, Wow. How do we find ourselves in a place were you can accomplish next to nothing in effective real *change* politically, but still run for and probably win the Presidency of the USA?

 

I wonder how much impact this tax funded initiative has had? What has been the net positive result of that one? Have any studies been done, or do we only have the negative anecdotal evidence to look at?

 

For my future President to have worked on a board that privately funded an education program to try to improve poor-performing schools is, I think, wonderful. I have used Annenberg materials in my own home school, and I find them well done and helpful. In fact, I still get their teacher emails every month. You can, too, if you like. I found this month's unit on the constitution to be quite interesting.

 

That he put his time where his mouth is in an effort to use private rather than federal or state funds to sit on a board that was trying to do a bottom up reform of education rather than pandering to the same old same ol' via the NEA? Yea, I don't know how it came to that, but I'm sure glad it did.

 

Sen. Obama is, at least, not a person who says, "Well, unless I'm assured that it will work and not be a perceived liability for me politically, I'm not going to even try. I'll jump on your bandwagon after you've done the hard work and proved that this good idea is statistically effective. Let me know so I can attach my name to it after the fact." That he rolled up his sleeves and helped this good idea and the private funding get some legs impresses me. That he's helping a whole lot of others push a boulder uphill and this particular initiative couldn't overcome that Sisyphean task? I'm not particularly disillusioned with him, personally, because of it.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I didn't say the results were shocking. I said that to accomplish nothing and then be nominated for and possibly the winner of the presidency is shocking.

 

This is the only thing you think Sen. Obama has ever attempted? That this is the pinnacle of his life? That this is why he won the nomination?

 

I can understand why you would be shocked since you believe this, though. I would be shocked as well. A committee member on an initiative that was intended to change a whole culture of educational neglect and failure, but did not change a whole culture (statistically speaking) and that's all he has ever done is not enough, I think. I can truly see how that only one thing, if it were the only thing a person's ever tried to do or accomplish, would provoke shock if he garnered the nomination.

 

And that an apparently respected University professor who once committed crimes in his youth (when other members of the committee were children) is on the same board might be shocking, too. :-)

Edited October 7, 2008 by Pam "SFSOM" in TN

[kokotg]

I wonder how much impact this tax funded initiative has had? What has been the net positive result of that one? Have any studies been done, or do we only have the negative anecdotal evidence to look at?

 

 

It just so happens that the first major study was released a couple of weeks ago:

 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/22/MN7N132L5U.DTL&feed=rss.news

 

If the system mandated by No Child Left Behind to fix thousands of failing schools were subjected to its own rigorous standards, it too could fail.

 

That's the conclusion of the first large study examining whether school-restructuring programs required by the federal No Child Left Behind education act are actually working.

[kokotg]

I posted this link to an NPR story on the subject on another thread:

 

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95442902

 

Regardless of his background, it was never a problem for anyone — including Republicans and Chicago's most powerful business leaders — to work with Ayers on Chicago's public schools. In fact, Ayers is widely respected in the field of urban education.

 

"It was never a concern by any of us in the Chicago school reform movement that he had led a fugitive life years earlier," said former Illinois state Republican Rep. Diana Nelson, who worked with both Obama and Ayers over the years. "It's ridiculous. There is no reason at all to smear Barack Obama with this association. It's nonsensical, and it just makes me crazy. It's so silly."

[kokotg]

I'm curious about this, actually, and I'm not sure how to search for it....the NPR story quotes more than one person who was there saying/suggesting that no one ever objected to working with Ayers based on his background. I wonder if this is true. Does anyone have any evidence that anyone has refused to work on projects Ayers was associated with because of his background?

 

Andrew Sullivan, of The Atlantic is an unabashed Obama supporter, but criticizes him for the association:

 

I find Bill Ayers' refusal to disown his use of political violence in the 1960s to be repulsive. If I were forced to meet him, I would not shake his hand. Obama's fault, however, is not being a terrorist sympathizer, as Palin absurdly declares to mob cheers. Obama's fault is in being a go-along-to-get-along Hyde Park liberal. You can see why he made the decision not to wreck polite liberal society in Chicago by calling out these former thugs.

 

But is it truly about being a "Hyde Park liberal"? Maybe, but there seem to be a lot of conservatives who've worked with Ayers as well. Until this election, has anyone raised a stink about it?

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

 

But is it truly about being a "Hyde Park liberal"? Maybe, but there seem to be a lot of conservatives who've worked with Ayers as well. Until this election, has anyone raised a stink about it?

 

Well, I'm not sure, but it looks like a case of "strange bedfellows" to me. In the same NPR piece:

 

The Obama campaign says he first met Ayers in 1995, when Obama became chair of the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a $50 million fund that awarded grants to groups trying to implement new programs to improve inner city education in Chicago.

 

Walter Annenberg, a lifelong Republican and former ambassador who was appointed by Presidents Nixon and Reagan, funded an ambitious program to reform urban education in many cities in the mid 1990s. Ayers was an important member of the group that developed and wrote the grant proposal to the Annenberg Foundation.

 

then...

 

...no one on the board or on the Annenberg Challenge staff remembers Obama being any closer to Ayers than to any other member of the board. The Annenberg board also included several civic, business and education leaders, many of them Republicans...

 

Here's again the page that links the audio.

 

ETA: kokotg, I'm repeating a lot of what you wrote, and I'm sorry. I have a massive headache and am not coherent, exactly. I'm leaving this, though, so please forgive me.

Edited October 7, 2008 by Pam "SFSOM" in TN

[Spy Car]

I wonder how much impact this tax funded initiative has had? What has been the net positive result of that one? Have any studies been done, or do we only have the negative anecdotal evidence to look at?

 

For my future President to have worked on a board that privately funded an education program to try to improve poor-performing schools is, I think, wonderful. I have used Annenberg materials in my own home school, and I find them well done and helpful. In fact, I still get their teacher emails every month. You can, too, if you like. I found this month's unit on the constitution to be quite interesting.

 

That he put his time where his mouth is in an effort to use private rather than federal or state funds to sit on a board that was trying to do a bottom up reform of education rather than pandering to the same old same ol' via the NEA? Yea, I don't know how it came to that, but I'm sure glad it did.

 

Sen. Obama is, at least, not a person who says, "Well, unless I'm assured that it will work and not be a perceived liability for me politically, I'm not going to even try. I'll jump on your bandwagon after you've done the hard work and proved that this good idea is statistically effective. Let me know so I can attach my name to it after the fact." That he rolled up his sleeves and helped this good idea and the private funding get some legs impresses me. That he's helping a whole lot of others push a boulder uphill and this particular initiative couldn't overcome that Sisyphean task? I'm not particularly disillusioned with him, personally, because of it.

 

Awesome post Pam! :001_smile:

[dawn of ns]

For my future President to have worked on a board that privately funded an education program to try to improve poor-performing schools is, I think, wonderful. I have used Annenberg materials in my own home school, and I find them well done and helpful. In fact, I still get their teacher emails every month. You can, too, if you like. I found this month's unit on the constitution to be quite interesting.

 

 

Ooh! I know and have used that site! They have some great video on demand. Thatnks for the reminder Pam!:D

[ma23peas]

But is it truly about being a "Hyde Park liberal"? Maybe, but there seem to be a lot of conservatives who've worked with Ayers as well. Until this election, has anyone raised a stink about it?

 

 

Well, clearly it's because NONE of those 'conservatives' are running for the highest political role in our government...and you can't even say that Annenberg even knew that Ayers was part of the one divising the plan...Annenberg FUNDED the venture, I know many who FUND projects but have little or no oversight...they have teams to do that...

 

The problem I have is that Obama lived in a politically left leaning government (Hyde Park/Chicago )...he pandered to anyone he could to promote his political career regardless of their failure to admit wrongdoings on a terrorist act. I would feel completely different if this Ayers fellow had professed remorse and changed the course of his life...on the contrary, he is now just trying to use more 'legitimate means' like being a professor of education to promote his continued ire for "social injustices"...the same man who instructed youth to "kill their parents"...that's who I want as professor of my kids education..I would hope atleast in some period of time over the past 40 years that he would have shown one ounce of remorse for his reckless and violent messages.

 

Tara

[kokotg]

Well, clearly it's because NONE of those 'conservatives' are running for the highest political role in our government...

 

I'm not suggesting that it wouldn't have been brought up had one of the many Republicans who've worked with Ayers decided to run for president. I'm saying...did anyone have a problem with the fact that, from everything I've heard, pretty much anyone involved in education reform in Chicago--conservative and liberal alike--also had a working relationship with Ayers BEFORE it became something that could be exploited for political gain?

 

I'm saying the fact that this did not become an incredibly important issue that simply couldn't be ignored until McCain was down 7 points in the polls (and, likewise, did not become so terribly important for Hillary Clinton until she unexpectedly found herself in 2nd place) is....curious.

Edited October 8, 2008 by kokotg

[Parabola]

Does the fact that this "scandal" (for lack of a better word) is being brought up again mean that the opposing party has nothing new?

 

I mean, this was gone over, what, in January?

[lovemyboys]

Here's a CNN report on the relationship.

 

So, after 50 million dollars (thankfully not tax payer dollars) were spent on educational programs by Obama and the Annenberg board no statistically significant impact was found on educational outcomes.

 

Wow, just, Wow. How do we find ourselves in a place were you can accomplish next to nothing in effective real *change* politically, but still run for and probably win the Presidency of the USA?

 

I could be wrong but I thought I've heard or read that the grant which was awarded to the Ayers group was for pretty marginal initiatives, not for strengthening foundational subjects and basics, so it's really not a wonder that it didn't do much toward any real improvements.

 

You could ask why such a large grant would be awarded for stuff like that but I guess stranger things have happened. I just remember when I originally heard about the grant that my impression was that it would be surprising if it made any difference at all. A shame with that much money.