Re: 30K schools fail to make AYP
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: 30K schools fail to make AYP
- From: Gerald Bracey <email@example.com>
- Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 20:32:13 -0500 (EST)
Sometimes, Art, a little quote is a dangerous thing. Here's more:
"Bush's original proposal for no Child Left Behind, released just days aftr his inauguration, spelled out his vision for retooling the ESEA. A slender 28 pages, the blueprint cribbed generously from the Clinton administrations plans for reshaping the ESEA, with more testing, greater accountability, and a focus on closing the achievement gap--BUT it also included substandial efforts to advance conservative style reforms. The proposal promoted transparency, disciplined accountability, parental choice [Remember, Art, this plan contained a proposal for vouchers], greater flexibility for states and school districts [and we all know how THAT worked out], more rigorous standards for educational research, the use of federal funds to encourage state-level experimentation on metir pay and regulatory reform [read-vouchers and charter schools], and a federal role that was "tight" on results and "loose" on micromanagement." HA.
I think Rick puts the original in a better light than it deserves.
At the time I wrote (in Newsday, January 28, 2001, 5 days after the plan's release) that the vouchers were a gift to the Catholic Church. Since they were valued at only $1500.00, only those schools, heavily subsidized and hemorrhaging students would be able to afford them. Bush had made his biggest pitch for vouchers to 350 Catholic educators gathered in the White House (they were already in town for a convention). Barry Lynn, Executive Director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State saw it as kowtowing to the Religious right. "Vouchers are not scholarships. They are an attempt to force taxpayers to support religious and OTHER PRIVATE SCHOOLS at a time when many of our public schools are overcrowded and under funded. The American people see right through this ruse and reject vouchers out of hand" (they had done so recently in CA and MI even though the pro-voucher people had outspent the opposition 2-1).
After Dems killed the vouchers, Ohio's John Boehner attempted 6 times to get them back in, but had to settle for supplementary services. Boehner's chief education staffer, Sally Lovejoy, said, "The party leadership wasn't always on board with the President. And then when the President dropped vouchers so quickly, that really made a lot of conservative Republicans upset."
She told those who were disappointed at losing vouchers; "You know what you're getting with supplemental services is a huge deal. For the first time we'll have federal dollars paying for private services. Even in Catholic schools, for the summer or for tutoring or whatever. That's a huge issue and I just think because they they didn't get vouchers, they thought that was nothing."
Senator Judd Gregg, explaining to Republicans who were leaning against the bill said: "Well, the supplemental serives are a foot under the door for vouchers. They're going t show that these schools aren't working properly, and we'll finally be able to show that the schools aren't doin well. The assessments are going to prove the same thing."
Vouchers and privatization, Art, not one damn word about civil rights.
Post a Message to arn-l: