Ira, I love teaching but hate my job. I like your big picture point of view so much that I want to see you follow through and say what you think the system should look like so that these other objectives, smiling and caring, grow along with intellect. I thought maybe Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond might have had a good idea by looking at Finland, et al, open-ended assessments. I'm curious what you would make of that.
Hope is in short supply after seeing 20+ years of "program improvement." This has been especially true since 1999 when IIUSP changed California schools to allow sanctions into the Education Code. (IIUSP=Immediate Intervention Under-performing Schools Program) Essentially, politicians got together, especially governors, to be reformers of education. The problem is not in Arne's priorities, the problem is in their application in the classroom. My particular bias in wanting to change NCLB is about how the needs of EL (English Learners) are ignored.
#1 Data systems? OK. Substitute "use ready-made" for "build." AR (Accelerated Reader), and associated software is a perfect case-in-point. My 4th graders read at a first grade level but are not allowed to practice reading at their level independently because we are supposed to teach them directly from the publisher's scripted lessons so that they are taught "at grade level." The lock-step manner that programs are implemented in the classroom has more of an impact than the choice of program.
#2 Higher standards? Sorry. No. Substitute "thinking level required" for "standards." This also involves allowing competent teachers to address the problem solving needs of students. Also, the pinnacle of Math K-12 should be Statistics and/or Probability instead of Calculus. Standards need to be addressed, but not with pep talks.