Does the public know that our current Secretary of Education, in charge of the whole ball of wax, not only never taught a day in the Public School system, that he never even attended a public school as a child? 

How can he (or all but one modern Secretary, since the position was reinstated under President Jimmy Carter), dictate policy for a profession which he has no practical experience at at all at?

Terrrell Bell, under the Reagan Administration, is the only Secretary of Education in modern American history who ever taught in public schools.  One Secretary, out of nine... and we wonder what is wrong... perhaps Professional  Educators (not "Education Experts") should write Education Law.

You are absolutely right! Someone who has NEVER taught is still advocating a one size fits all approach to testing students and  holding teachers "accountable."

100% will never be proficient at anything. ALL kids will never be STEM kids. Individual needs & ability are still ignored under NCLB and are unlikely to go away when ESEA is reauthorized.

 ALL children will not go to college. Career readiness is declining due to state cuts to Vocational programs. More testing & retention of students leads to more dropouts.

Duncan & this President support Charter schools, and our Unions were thrown under the bus after he got our votes.

WAKE UP Teachers!!

Our country's education system needs to be totally restructured.  Do away with the beauracracy at both federal & state level.  Take that money and put it into vocational programs.  We should model after other countries: educate all students in the basics until 8th grade, then give a test to help determine whether they pursue a trade or college prep.  Let the trade students learn a good trade and let them go.  Not all students are college bound, yet we insist on educating and testing them like they were.  This just creates frustration, dropouts, and a pool of graduates who are poorly equipped to earn a living after high school.  As a high school teacher, I see this every day.

When the "educrats" continually compare our education system unfavorably to other countries, this angers me.  Other countries just educate the "cream of the crop" and let the others farm and do manual labor.  We are the only country that tries to fit all students into one mold, and it is NOT WORKING.

Teachers need to be higly qualified in order to be able to know their content, teach the content effectively, evaluate students, counsel students, ensure the health and safety of students, etc. Knowing this -  how can programs like Teach For America (who train folks in 5 weeks then put people into our classrooms with ongoing professional development) expect high student achievement?  In order for our students to achieve high standards we need the same for our teachers!  Teachers who have spent 4 years in college (which includes many hours of hands on experiences in classrooms and at least a semester of full time teaching with a mentor teacher) are far more prepared to take on the challenges of the 21st century classrooms.  We need to support those newly coming into the profession so they stay (so many of Teach For America participants don't last - I wonder why?!).

When we speak of highly qualified teachers shouldn't we also consider highly qualified administrators? In PENNA, a law was just passed that allows for hiring Superintendents with no education teaching experience. The gas industry has brought many jobs to our state for which many people are grateful. However, for even the lowest entry jobs, they want some experience or background knowledge. Shouldn't our Superintendents be education leaders and experts in the field of public education? What am I missing in this conversation?

Teacher unions are part of the problem. Modern unions have become special interest groups that lobby politicians to not make the changes that need to be made.

I am an experienced elementary school teacher who took a student loan to obtain a MEd. in Admin. My student loan is 15,000. and I receive 1,000 more a year for my degree. So do the math. 15 years to pay off my education investment. I spend an easy $500-600 a year in classroom necessities. How does Obama plan to increase the level of teachers education? 

Where exactly does a blanket statement "Teacher unions are part of the problem. Modern unions have become special interest groups that lobby politicians to not make the changes that need to be made." come from? Was this a discussion about teacher qualifications or teacher unions. My union protects my rights as a worker. I have do process because of my union. I have a voice because of my union, at the local, state and national level. I can not imagine walking into a classroom without being a team player and belonging to a union. This is not a forum to union bash. I would suggest the influence being peddled at our politicians is less union based than the writer of this statement understands. Please!