Re: NCLB Sets Up Schools for Failure

[ABurke5054@aol.com]

Ali's congressional representatives will reply that NCLB says nothing about 
graduation requirements.  That is a matter entirely for Ali's state and 
district.  Art

In a message dated 2/23/2004 9:33:25 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
kvscanty@pacbell.net writes:
Ali,

Just know that there are a lot of us out here who know that one test
does NOT the person make...in two paragraphs, you were able to make real
for us the problem with NCLB...and I agree that you should write your
senators/congressman and say exactly what you said to us...

Karen Canty

-----Original Message-----
From: arn-l-owner@interversity.org [mailto:arn-l-owner@interversity.org]
On Behalf Of Ali M.
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 3:46 PM
To: arn-l@interversity.org
Subject: Re: [arn-l] NCLB Sets Up Schools for Failure

I'm a high school senior and have been affected by this law because I
have 
to re-test on the math section of my state test and if I don't pass this

re-test(I have already taken one), a panel of teachers will determine 
whether or not I can graduate. I'm sure the law itself had good
intentions 
when it was first passed, but now it has the ability to ruin students' 
self-esteem and increase drop-out rates in schools. This article just
shows 
that this law is getting to the point of ridiculous, and the
requirements of 
it are unattainable. Nobody is perfect in everything, and taking
multiple 
choice tests and re-testing those of us that are unsuccessful won't make
us 
any more proficient in something we're just not good at. I'm not good in

math and I know one test won't make me outstanding in it.

Until this mess, I had been on honor roll every quarter, been inducted
into 
National Honor Society, and earned acceptances to all the colleges I
applied 
to. I don't want to share my life story, but the point is, NCLB is not
only 
setting schools up to fail, it's setting up students to fail and lose
their 
dreams and self-confidence as well; it has to stop.

>From: Bob Schaeffer <bobschaeffer@earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: arn-l@interversity.org
>To: ARN Main List <arn-l@interversity.org>,ARN State 
><arn-state@yahoogroups.com>,ARN2 Strategy
<arn2-strategy@yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: [arn-l] NCLB Sets Up Schools for Failure
>Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:15:28 -0500
>
>         CRITICS SAY THE "NO CHILD" PROGRAM IS A SETUP
>                           FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL FAILURE
>                 Salt Lake Tribune -- February 23, 2004
>                                 by Mike Cronin
>
>   There may be widespread disagreement about the virtues and vices of 
>President Bush's landmark education-reform law, but all sides agree on
one 
>thing: Naming it No Child Left Behind was politically brilliant.
>    "They came up with a clever name," says Karyn Storey, a Farmington 
>mother of three grade-schoolers. "Who wants to leave a child behind?"
>    Certainly not congressional members, who overwhelmingly passed No
Child 
>Left Behind in 2001. But 2 1/2 years later, that bipartisan support is 
>turning into bipartisan opposition as political perceptions about the
law 
>give way to practical frustrations of implementing it.
>    Call it the Chalkboard Rebellion. The chorus of critics from the
left 
>and the right -- which keeps growing in voices and volume -- includes 
>stalwart Bush backers such as Utah's Republican legislators. They, like

>many educators, are attacking the law as intrusive, misguided,
unworkable 
>and underfunded.
>    Utah lawmakers even considered scrapping participation and
forfeiting 
>the $106 million it brings to low-income schools throughout the state. 
>Earlier this month, the Utah House voted to stick with No Child Left 
>Behind, but barred districts from tapping state and local money to
carry 
>out the act's mandates.
>    "If the act's regulations were tea, we could have our own tea party

>right here in the middle of Utah," says Rep. LaVar Christensen,
R-Draper, 
>referring to the 1773 Boston Tea Party.
>      Popular rebellion: That spirit of insurrection still lives in New

>England -- this time directed at Bush's education law instead of King 
>George III's England.
>    "If [Education Secretary Rod Paige] doesn't want to make the
necessary 
>changes, let's find someone else to run the ship and he can go fishing
with 
>his grandkids," says Bob Green, who heads the Republican Town Committee
and 
>serves on the school board in Salem, Conn.
>    Paige's department responded last week, loosening the testing rules
for 
>students learning English. The feds are determined to make No Child
Left 
>Behind work. For several months, U.S. officials have been trekking to 
>states -- including Utah -- touting the law's benefits and flexibility.
>    "There is a lot of misunderstanding," says Ronald Tomalis, a top
Paige 
>aide, during a trip to Salt Lake City earlier this month. "There is no 
>federal 'one way' for NCLB. The role of the federal government is to 
>supplement what is taking place at the state and local level."
>    Utah tests grades one through 11 in language arts, math and
science. 
>The federal law requires annual reading and math exams in grades three 
>through eight and once in high school.
>      Smoke and mirrors? Critics charge that the Bush administration's 
>public-relations blitz is merely meant to dupe the masses.
>    "No Child Left Behind was prompted by the same belief that has
prompted 
>so many Bush initiatives -- that the American people are too stupid to
look 
>at the specifics of legislation and will be taken in by names," writes 
>Sheila Kennedy, a Republican and a professor of law and public policy
at 
>Indiana University's School of Public and Environmental Affairs, in an 
>e-mail to The Salt Lake Tribune.
>    Some argue that No Child Left Behind is seeking a shrouded,
sinister 
>goal: the ultimate privatization of public schools.
>    "The way NCLB judges schools creates the impression of widespread 
>systemic failure in the public system," says Stan Karp, a teacher in 
>Paterson, N.J., and an editor of the journal Rethinking Schools. "This 
>would undercut support for public schools and be used to push for more 
>divestment and privatization."
>      200 Utah schools marked: By codifying almost 40 ways that schools

>must measure up, Karp says, the law sets up schools for failure.
>    This year, more than 200 Utah schools fell short on at least one 
>measure. Of those schools, 80 face sanctions if they fail to improve.
The 
>act says that if those high-poverty schools lag for five years, they
could 
>be converted to charter schools. The state school board also could opt
to 
>hire private companies to operate the schools -- though the schools
would 
>remain under state control.
>    Education Department spokeswoman Susan Aspey scoffs at such
conspiracy 
>talk, calling it "ridiculous and special-interest hyperbole."
>    "The only so-called agenda this president and this secretary have
is 
>implementing a bipartisan law that, simply put, ensures accountability
for 
>all children being able to read and do math on grade level," Aspey says
in 
>an e-mail.
>    No Child Left Behind requires, in essence, that public schools meet

>annual benchmarks toward 100 percent proficiency by 2014 in reading and

>math among four key groups: English learners, ethnic groups, low-income

>students and students with disabilities.
>      Minority support: Minority groups have been among the law's
strongest 
>supporters because they see it as a powerful motivator for schools to
make 
>changes that will raise their children's academic perform- ance.
>    In Utah and across the nation, American Indian students trail other

>groups in almost every academic measure. The law finally will compel 
>schools to close that gap, said Carla Knight-Cantsee, director of
education 
>and truancy intervention for the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe in southeastern

>Utah. "A lot of times our students are classified as special-education 
>students because of the [native] language," she said. "In San Juan
[School 
>District], they're trying to figure out how to improve, and that's a
good 
>thing. This is a start."
>      Incompetence vs. conspiracy: A few critics say the act is not so
much 
>nefarious as it is simply bad law.
>    "I always say you have to dismiss incompetence before conspiracy,"
says 
>Gary Orfield, professor of education and social policy at Harvard 
>University. "I don't think those who voted for it understood the 
>consequences of the law's provisions."
>    Karyn Storey, the Farmington mom, is getting a taste of those 
>consequences. One of her children is a special-needs student who will
be 
>expected to score at grade level with his peers. Another is struggling
with 
>reading comprehension -- even though she carries nearly a 4.0 GPA --
after 
>being injured in a scooter accident three years ago.
>    "My concern as a mother is that the whole No Child Left Behind
concept 
>might actually make a child be left behind," Storey says.
>      Respect and reason: Orfield says driving the Bush
administration's 
>implementation approach is a kind of fundamentalism that pervades the 
>Education Department. "They don't have a lot of respect for the public 
>education community," he says. "They think public education people are 
>lazy, that they just want money."
>    Bill Fullmer worries about that perception.
>    "They think we just pass [the students] on," says the Farmington
Junior 
>High principal. "It's a worthy goal to make sure kids aren't left
behind. I 
>think we've always tried to do that. I'm just concerned that the
mandate is 
>not reasonable. To expect schools to improve every year is not
reasonable. 
>Of course, there's going to be a dip sometimes."
>
>