"There is a zero percent chance that we will ever reach a 100 percent target," said Robert L. Linn, co-director of the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards and Student Testing at UCLA. "But because the title of the law is so rhetorically brilliant, politicians are afraid to change this completely unrealistic standard. They don't want to be accused of leaving some children behind."
Thursday, March 15, 2007
NCLB target out of reach?
The Washington Post discusses the federal debates over NCLB targets.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
STOP BLOCKING ALL THE WEBSITES......everyone uses msn all the time to look up research. When we need pictures for a report or something this was the only site we could use to get them. And now you took thatand it seems like you care less about our eduaction and more of how you look. not everyone uses all these sites you block for bad. in fact less then you think do. You think your being helpful by blocking every website ever made but your making it to be useless to even have internet at school. you might as well just take away the computers.
off topic -- and, of course, odd that EVERYONE does anything ALL THE TIME.
Wow, the Post really hit the nail on the head. The Bush administration has been particularily good at naming initiatives; however this is a very old propoganda tactic. Another example is the Clear Skies legislation Bush pushed. Who can argue with Clear Skies? Well, many of those who know much about environmental issues will tell you the legilsation was a step backward from existing regulations. A more accurate name might have been Not Quite as Clear Skies. Then there is Enduring Freedom. Gosh, who can argue with freedom - let alone freedom that endures.
I didn't take time to read the Post article, but NPR had an all things considered report yesterday on the DC debate over NCLB.
For the NPR story:
NPR ATC story
The summary of the story is that NCLB is bad, because it's from the Bush administration, which is even worse. (But that's a given)
Two schools in Seattle are showcased, one has almost no free lunch students, but an involved PTA, which contributes $200k to the school budget.
The second school spends $1k more per student from the district, but has lower test scores. NPR concludes that if the second school also had the PTA money from the first school then their problems would be solved.
Oh, and NCLB needs to be totally repealed, because it unfairly 'measures' students. However, testing of students who attend charter or private schools, clearly shows that these private sector "schools for the rich" are failing to properly educate students.
Piling On made the following assertions from the NPR story.
1. NCLB is bad because it is from the Bush administration, which is even worse. Actually, I didn't get that summary at all. Perhaps they just talked about some of the problems with NCLB and you thought it was bad. I have read and re-read the article (and listened to it) and I didn't see or hear anyone summarize the story that way.
2. Two schools in Seattle were showcased. I wasn't a math major, but it was pretty clear to me that three schools were showcased, not two. It makes me wonder if we read/listened to the same report.
3. If the second school had the PTA money that the first school had, things would be ok. That wasn't in the report at all.
4. NCLB needs to be totally repealed because it "measures" students. Again, I didn't see anything that came to that conclusion.
What's your point, Piling On? If you think NCLB is the type of reform that schools should be involved in, then make your case. Your response seems to be more anti NPR than anything else. I'm not sure I can make the connection that since NPR is bad, NCLB should be reauthorized.
Post a Comment