The Retort

Obama’s Speech to Schoolchildren

September 25th, 2009 by Mike Schrage Of The Retort Staff

Intending to kick start the school year with a positive message, President Barack Obama made a speech that has drawn a fair amount of unexpected criticism around the nation:

“But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world, and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed. And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself,” (Transcript of Obama’s Speech) said Obama during the nationally streamed broadcast.

Professor Judy McEnany, Associate Professor for Educational Theory and Practice at Montana State University Billings, calls Obama’s speech “well-intentioned and nonpartisan.” In an email regarding the story, Professor McEnany said, “Presidents George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan addressed the school children without a furor. Why did this happen? I wish I understood. Did you know that there were protestors outside of Wakefield High School in Arlington? The signs read ‘Children of God, not Obama’ and ‘Obamanation’.”

One saving grace for the Obama camp is the fact that the speech was circulated beforehand, allowing school districts to decide if the message was in line with mission statements while affording parents the opportunity to choose what place, if any, the President’s speech would have in their children’s education.

Professor Michael Scarlett, one of Montana State University Billings’s newest faculty members, arrived from Minnesota earlier this summer to teach at the College of Education. Professor Scarlett imparted that he was impressed by the Billings school district’s decision to request parental approval prior to playing the speech to his second-grader.

“In general, I think any president has an obligation to send a positive message to the children of the United States and that doing so through a televised speech is an appropriate medium to do so. But, as I mentioned, allowing parents to have the option to not view the speech was ultimately the right call,” Professor Scarlett remarked.

According to one student (who asked not to be named), the speech sends children a mixed message that while lofty dreams and standards are attainable, there is still a probable outcome of failure. She suggested that the President was subtly singling out the impoverished black minority when he referenced rappers and athletes as opposed to computer engineers or astronauts.

She also questioned the timing of the speech, suggesting that the President was trying to do some damage control using a seemingly feel-good message to children to divert American attention from the much-publicized health care reform proposal.

For an administration still in relative infancy, approval ratings have plummeted. Arguments have been made to suggest that this dip is because Obama is facing unrealistic expectations. While opinions are obviously divided, the fact remains that these issues, as well as future criticisms, are not going away.