You wouldn't know it from the presidential campaigns, but there is some education news out there. For example, the U.S. Department of Education has issued a report on how students learn to read.

Improving kids' reading skills was a cornerstone of President George Bush's 2001 No Child Left Behind education law. The president saw reading as so fundamental that the government provided states with money to purchase a specific program. If local school districts used the Reading First program to teach kids, the state reimbursed them. If the district chose another program, it had to use its own money.

Of course, most schools bought the Reading First program -- why use local money when Washington's wallet is open?

But, as was printed here in March 2007, Reading First was controversial. Its consultants were accused of conflicts of interest because they were also employed by publishing companies that produced the program. The program's director in 2006, Chris Doherty, resigned just before a report on unethical behavior was issued.

Many teachers, however, had a different complaint -- Reading First wasn't very good.

Now, the U.S. Education Department reports those teachers were right -- Reading First doesn't work very well. The Education Department study reviewed the progress of students in 12 states.

Unfortunately, there wasn't much progress to review.

So, the program sponsored by the federal government, which had produced conflicts of interest, doesn't produce good readers.

Back in 2001, I was pleased that President Bush focused attention on public education. Schools serve so many children and are so integral to America, I hoped the new president would make things better.

I became less pleased as No Child Left Behind became more clear: It was inadequately funded, placed too much reliance on standardized tests, lacked attention to the educational disparities between rich schools and poor schools and had too many people making big money off the law while kids were, in fact, still left behind.

Wondering if our next president will help our schools, I listen to what they say about education. It's not a hard job, because they don't say much.

I watched Sen. Barack Obama's interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News. First, Wallace asked Obama about a Chicago man who used to be involved in violent anti-Vietnam protests. Then he asked about the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor. Obama had to explain why he was in the congregation of a man who sounds more like a loony guest on "The Jerry Springer Show" than a Christian preacher.

That was the first half of the show. All the other problems facing America could be crammed into the second half. Chris Wallace didn't ask about education, but Obama mentioned teacher unions and charter schools. It took less than 20 seconds.

A week later Tim Russert interviewed Obama on "Meet the Press." Russert also asked about Wright -- for more than a quarter of an hour.

There was no discussion of education.