Parenting & Family Quote by Sue Kelly

“Bipartisan” does a lot of work here, less as a description than as a political solvent. Sue Kelly is framing No Child Left Behind not just as legislation, but as a consensus achievement, the kind that pre-empts dissent by implying the argument is already over. In the early 2000s, when national unity was a governing aesthetic and “accountability” was the buzzword that could pass as moral clarity, this language fit the moment: it reassured moderates while signaling toughness to voters skeptical of public institutions.

The phrase “important step” is calibrated modesty. It lowers the bar for proof and raises the ceiling for hope. You can’t easily measure a “step,” but you can applaud it. Then comes the real pitch: “federal education policies” that “will allow” students “to learn and achieve at the highest possible level.” The agency is quietly shifted away from classrooms and toward Washington. The subtext is that local systems have been insufficiently ambitious or insufficiently accountable, and that federal benchmarks and testing can unlock latent excellence.

What’s left unsaid is the trade-off embedded in that promise. “Highest possible level” sounds like uplift; in practice, NCLB’s mechanisms meant standardized assessments, sanctions, and incentives that reshaped curriculum time and school priorities. Kelly’s wording keeps the moral frame (kids thriving) while smoothing over the administrative reality (metrics, compliance, pressure). It’s aspirational language designed to domesticate a controversial expansion of federal influence: sell the policy as a ladder for children, not a lever for the state.