Last Tuesday I wrote about ASBJ’s December forum, which features seven education experts commenting on the Obama Administration’s ambitious agenda for the public schools.

It’s titled “Year One,” for obvious reasons, and perhaps by the time we get to “Year Four,” or possibly, “Year Eight,” we’ll have a better idea of whether those policies were successful.

I also want to point you to a sidebar (at the end of the main forum) that examines, among other things, No Child Left Behind. Somehow “Year Seven” doesn’t sound as dramatic as “Year One,” but the fact is that the Bush administration’s seven-year-old initiative, while still a work in progress, is having a big impact on policy at the state and district level.

What do our pundits think of the law? Well, we quote several, including a pragmatic Eric Hanushek, of the Hoover Institution, who offers four ways to improve it; and a downright pessimistic Diane Ravitch, of New York University. Here’s what she has to say:

“When President [Obama] ran for office, he promised ‘change,’ and I assumed that he would change the punitive nature of NCLB. Since he assumed office, little has been said about the future of NCLB. At some point, the Obama administration will have to draft its plan for reauthorization. I hope that they will do so with the intent of supporting and helping struggling schools instead of punishing and closing them. However, given the administration’s rhetoric about closing 5,000 low-performing schools, I am not encouraged about their willingness to abandon the tough-guy stance.

“They seem to believe that it is easy to create new schools and that any new school will be a winner, but experience does not bear out that assumption. Creating good schools is the work of years and many willing hands; it does not happen overnight. Good schools cannot be willed into existence, no matter how devoutly politicians may believe in the possibility.”

Lawrence Hardy, Senior Editor