Obama's Speech to the Nation's Students: Political Posturing or Pep Rally?

For those of you who have been on a media blackout over the past couple of days, President Barack Obama has announced his plans to address our nation's youth. The broadcast is set for Tuesday, September 8, 2009, at noon; however, the speech will be available via the internet for future downloading.

The firestorm of debate over the speech is really not over the fact that the President is talking to the country's children, but how it is being delivered to them - for many, they will see it on screens at their public schools either via a C-Span broadcast or video streaming from the White House website (www.whitehouse.gov). There will be no Republican response, and, in most cases, teachers or administrators (not parents) will be watching with the children.

How did so much melodrama get started? It began when lesson plans were distributed to assist teachers in incorporating the speech into their classroom studies. The original wording stated that students should write letters to themselves "about what they can do to help the president". This gave many the impression that the President was going to push policy in the speech and enlist the help of our children to get it accomplished.

According to Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education, who spoke on the September 6^th edition of CBS' Face the Nation, the original wording, which he claims was not written by the President but by teachers for teachers, was in error. It has been changed to suggest that the students' letters focus on their own goals. He stated that this speech is designed to encourage young people to stay in school and to study harder.

In the meantime, however, political commentator Glenn Beck weighed in calling the speech part of the indoctrination of our young people.

The chairman of the Republican Party, Jim Greer also complained that "taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology."

This is not the first time opposition to a Presidential speech to students has arisen. It came up back in 1991, but that time it was the Democrats crying 'foul'.

According to an opinion piece in Friday's New York Times, when President George H.W. Bush addressed the nation's students via a live broadcast from Deal Junior High in Washington, DC, congressional Democrats accused him of using $27,000 in taxpayer money for "paid political advertising".

The topics Bush covered? He urged students to study hard, avoid drugs, and ignore negative peer pressure.

According to The St. Petersburg Times' PolitiFact, both Representative Richard Gephardt, who at the time was the House Democratic majority leader, and Representative Patricia Schroeder (D-Colorado) spoke out against Bush's address.

"The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," said Gephardt. "And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.'"

Schroeder said the speech showed "the arrogance of power," and that the White House should not be "using precious dollars for campaigns" when "we are struggling for every silly dime we can get" for education.

Sounds very much like the arguments the Republicans are using against Obama's message.

On Sunday, Duncan remarked that he did not understand why it had been 18 years since a president had spoken to the nation's children. Perhaps it's been because, regardless of which side of the aisle you sit on, the other side is going to find fault. And, when it comes to political battles, the one for our children's education seems to be the one few want to stand up and fight.

So, I say: Stand up, parents, and fight it yourself.

As I homeschool my children, the decision is purely mine as to whether or not I turn on the broadcast. But, for those of you who have your children in public school, the choice is yours also.

Here are some things you can do to govern your child's viewing of the President's address.

First, find out if your child's school is even airing the address. Some are not. But, don't take anything for granted. After speaking with some teachers at a local middle school, I discovered that their principal has announced that all students will watch the speech. In checking on the county's website and the school's website, I find no mention of the speech. My point? Speak directly to a teacher or administrator - do not assume just because you have not been told your child is viewing the speech, that they will not be viewing it.

Find out if your child's teacher is using the accompanying lesson plans. If so and you are concerned, check out the materials yourself. The "Classroom Engagement Resources" are divided into two categories - one for Kindergarten through 6^th grade, the other for 7^th through 12^th. They are currently available on The White House website and the Department of Education website (www.ed.gov).

As mentioned earlier, the speech will be available for download after it is broadcast live. If you have any concerns about the teacher who will be moderating your child's viewing of the video, opt out and watch it at home, together, as a family.

Turn off the pundits and stop reading others' opinions (once you've finished reading this one) and read the actual speech. On Monday, September 7, Duncan has stated that the speech, in its entirety, will be made available on The White House website.

If you are still concerned, then you should not allow your child to watch the speech at school. While some have called for parents to keep their children at home on Tuesday, losing an entire day's instruction due to an 18-minute speech may be a bit extreme. And, there could be other measures available. Write a note to your child's teacher stating that you want your child exempted from viewing the broadcast. Most schools are honoring such requests. If in doubt, ask. If they won't accommodate children opting out, inquire as to removing your child just for the noon period when the speech is being shown.

I am not a Democrat. I am not a Liberal. I am a mother who has been in the classroom as a parent and as a substitute teacher.

So, as a mother, I ask you to forget the political posturing and the debate over tax dollars - surely, we've wasted (and will waste) tax dollars on far more frivolous things. It's your child - do what is best for them.

And, as a teacher, I ask you to consider: If this speech encourages one child who is struggling academically, makes one child think twice about dropping out of school, gives one child a glimmer of hope that he/she can succeed, shouldn't we all be supporting it?