Obama's No Child Left Behind "Revision"

[lsbskins1]

Look, tons of people hated No Child Left Behind. Now that Mr. Democrat is in charge, it's no longer a problem if he supports it. Apparently a change from an R to a D makes you exempt from any criticism.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/14/ed...n/14child.html

By announcing that he would send his education blueprint to Congress on Monday, President Obama returned to a campaign promise to repair the sprawling federal law, which affects each of the nation’s nearly 100,000 public schools. His plan strikes a careful balance, retaining some key features of the Bush-era law, including its requirement for annual reading and math tests, while proposing far-reaching changes.

The administration would replace the law’s pass-fail school grading system with one that would measure individual students’ academic growth and judge schools based not on test scores alone but also on indicators like pupil attendance, graduation rates and learning climate. And while the proposal calls for more vigorous interventions in failing schools, it would also reward top performers and lessen federal interference in tens of thousands of reasonably well-run schools in the middle.

In addition, President Obama would replace the law’s requirement that every American child reach proficiency in reading and math, which administration officials have called utopian, with a new national target that could prove equally elusive: that all students should graduate from high school prepared for college and a career.

“Under these guidelines, schools that achieve excellence or show real progress will be rewarded,” the president said in his weekly radio address, “and local districts will be encouraged to commit to change in schools that are clearly letting their students down.”

Administration officials said their plan would urge the states to achieve the college-ready goal by 2020.

Ok, so...just what do you want me to chase him with a pitch fork over, here? That he is trying to change the bad parts of the law? That he is trying to improve the effectiveness of Federal intervention? Or is it that you just want him to waste time by attempting to play the "repeal and replace" game like the Republicans do with health care, to no real effect and at considerable waste of time and money? Just what is it that you find so damn ass disappointing here?

[Dan74]

That article was written nearly a year ago. Clearly he has changed his position.

[kitten]

Angry Citizen

So you'll forgive the fact that I consider No Child Left Behind even more horrifying a legacy for George Bush than the Iraq War.

I agree, because Bush foolishly trusted the senate's biggest "progressive" to write the bill, instead of asking the teachers to come up with much needed accountability measures.

Why does the teachers' union so vehemently oppose teacher accountability, when there are far more good teachers than poor ones?

sources:

Bill Clinton Blames Kennedy for No Child Left Behind Flaws - Political Radar


FEC Fails to Investigate Teachers’ Complaint of NEA Union Money Laundering Scheme | Restore Oklahoma Public Education

No Child Left Behind - Kennedy's Top 10 Legislative Battles - TIME

[lsbskins1]

That article was written nearly a year ago. Clearly he has changed his position.

Clearly? How? From your own link, another link: Obama seeks to make No Child Left Behind more flexible

And, quoting from the link you posted itself:

The Obama administration is pushing for a rewrite of the No Child Left Behind law by the end of the year, as well as increased funding for education in the 2012 federal budget. It's unclear if either goal will be accomplished; Republicans in Congress are trying to cut funding in education and other programs for the rest of the 2011 budget and have given little indication they would support increased money in the near future.

And No Child Left Behind, the federal education law that passed with support from both Democrats and Republicans in 2002, has not been embraced by some of the new conservative members of Congress, who argue it has given the federal government too large of a role in education policy.

"This year, we're going to have to work with Congress to fix No Child Left Behind," Obama said here. "We're going to replace it with a law that does a better job focusing on responsibility, reform and most of all, results."

Again I will ask you, what about this is supposed to make me think he is a "hack" and that he should be drummed from office?

[rmnunez]

Critical lefties have two problems with Obama's revision of the "No Child Left Behind" law; first, that the whole thing isn't simply repealed since Bush enacted it, and second, that this law requires students be tested to evaluate the job their teachers are doing (teachers are union members who should not be evaluated based on any tangible standards).

[lsbskins1]

Critical lefties have two problems with Obama's revision of the "No Child Left Behind" law; first, that the whole thing isn't simply repealed since Bush enacted it, and second, that this law requires students be tested to evaluate the job their teachers are doing (teachers are union members who should not be evaluated based on any tangible standards).

Well, I'm a lefty with a sister and a step-mother who are teachers, and I don't have a problem with teachers being held accountable. I just care that they are held accountable in ways that are reasonable. You simply can not expect a teacher from a very poor district to get the same results that a teacher from a very wealthy district gets. It isn't "that" there is testing to monitor progress that bothers me, it is that the system did not provide for reasonable evaluation based on where the students began and relative improvement.

[rmnunez]

Yes of course, teachers should be accountable -to their union.

[lsbskins1]

Yes of course, teachers should be accountable -to their union.

Can you please show me where I said that.

[Angry Citizen]

Yes of course, teachers should be accountable -to their union.

If I were you, I'd seriously stop drumming the union beat. It's not working for anyone. Unions are a good thing.

[Dan74]

Clearly? How? From your own link, another link: Obama seeks to make No Child Left Behind more flexible

And, quoting from the link you posted itself:



Again I will ask you, what about this is supposed to make me think he is a "hack" and that he should be drummed from office?

Fine, the plan does apparently contain some good things.

That's not to say that Obama won't cave in the way he has nearly every time.

[kitten]

lsbskins1

You simply can not expect a teacher from a very poor district to get the same results that a teacher from a very wealthy district gets.

I don't see why not. Catholic schools side by side with public schools in the same neighborhoods attended by the same local demographic have consistently better results... usually substantially better, and at a fraction of the cost. Their enrollment is at least as racially, socioeconomically and culturally diverse as the public schools in the same city.

There have even been instances where Catholic schools have offered free open enrollment to everyone in their communities and others offering scholarships in pilot programs that was not allowed by politicians---presumably because of conflict with the teachers union.


Angry Citizen

Unions are a good thing.

I agree... except that their role---collectively negotiating the cost of the workers' labor against the profits the employer enjoys as a result of that labor--- is incompatible with the unfair dynamic that exists in the public service/politician/taxpayer equation.

Public employee unions have come to serve only as a means to secure political careers and the greed of union bosses and their members while circumventing the interest of the public at large.

[lsbskins1]

lsbskins1

I don't see why not. Catholic schools side by side with public schools in the same neighborhoods attended by the same local demographic have consistently better results... usually substantially better, and at a fraction of the cost. Their enrollment is at least as racially, socioeconomically and culturally diverse as the public schools in the same city.

There have even been instances where Catholic schools have offered free open enrollment to everyone in their communities and others offering scholarships in pilot programs that was not allowed by politicians---presumably because of conflict with the teachers union.

Please, I would love to see the stats supporting this.

Catholic school, same neighborhood, same demographic, same teacher to child ratio, same cost to the parent and it beats the public school.

I also want to see where a Catholic school was barred from offering free tuition. Also, the Catholic school that offered open enrollment at no charge and was denied because of teacher union protest. Links, please.