Re: Bush Insider Admits Some Had NCLB Hidden Agenda

[aburke5054@aol.com]

You're so far off you're not even on the right planet, although you're 
going to have plenty of company.  Even granting that some people in the 
Bush administration are gung-ho for privatization, vouchers, "shaming" 
schools - the whole bit - that does not mean these things are all there 
is to NCLB, or even that these things are big parts of NCLB.  They're 
not and never were.

Art

-----Original Message-----
From: MONICALUCIDO@comcast.net
To: arn-l@interversity.org
Sent: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 4:35 pm
Subject: Re: [arn-l] Bush Insider Admits Some Had NCLB Hidden Agenda

So, maybe I'm not off when I say that this law is leading to CAPITALISM 
RUN
AMOK.

Joe
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Bob Schaeffer <bobschaeffer@earthlink.net>
> NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND: DOOMED TO FAIL?
> TIME Magazine -- June 8, 2008
> by Claudia Wallis
>
> There was always something slightly insane about No Child Left Behind
> (NCLB), the ambitious education law often described as the Bush
> administration's signature domestic achievement. For one thing, in 
the
> view of many educators, the law's 2014 goal — which calls for all 
public
> school students in grades 4 through 8 to be achieving on grade level 
in
> reading and math — is something no educational system anywhere on 
earth
> has ever accomplished. Even more unrealistic: every kid (except for 
3%
> with serious handicaps or other issues) is supposed to be achieving 
on
> grade level every year, climbing in lockstep up an ever more 
challenging
> ladder. This flies in the face of all sorts of research showing that
> children start off in different places academically and grow at
> different rates.
>
> Add to the mix the fact that much of the promised funding failed to
> materialize and many early critics insisted that No Child Left Behind
> was nothing more than a cynical plan to destroy American faith in 
public
> education and open the way to vouchers and school choice.
>
> Now a former official in Bush's Education department is giving at 
least
> some support to that notion. Susan Neuman, a professor of education 
at
> the University Michigan who served as Assistant Secretary for 
Elementary
> and Secondary Education during George W. Bush's first term, was and
> still is a fervent believer in the goals of NCLB. And she says the
> President and then Secretary of Education Rod Paige were too. But 
there
> were others in the department, according to Neuman, who saw NCLB as a
> Trojan horse for the choice agenda — a way to expose the failure of
> public education and "blow it up a bit," she says. "There were a 
number
> of people pushing hard for market forces and privatization."
>
> Tensions between NCLB believers and the blow-up-the-schools group 
were
> one reason the Bush Department of Education felt like "a pressure
> cooker," says Neuman, who left the Administration in early 2003. 
Another
> reason was political pressure to take the hardest possible line on
> school accountability in order to avoid looking lax — like the 
Clinton
> administration. Thus, when Neuman and others argued that many schools
> would fail to reach the NCLB goals and needed more flexibility while
> making improvements, they were ignored. "We had this no-waiver 
policy,"
> says Neuman. "The feeling was that the prior administration had given
> waivers willy-nilly."
>
> It was only in Bush's second term that the hard line began to succumb 
to
> reality. Margaret Spellings, who replaced Paige as Secretary of
> Education in 2005, gradually opened the door to a more flexible and
> realistic approach to school accountability. Instead of demanding
> lockstep, grade-level achievement, schools in some states could meet 
the
> NCLB goals by demonstrating adequate student growth. (In this "growth
> model" approach, a student who was three years behind in reading and
> ended the year only one year behind would not be viewed as a 
failure.)
> "Going to the growth models is the right way to go," says Neuman. "I
> wish it had come earlier. It didn't because we were trying to be 
tough."
> Neuman also regrets the Administration's use of humiliation and shame 
as
> a lever for school reform. Failure to meet NCLB's inflexible goals 
meant
> schools would be publicly labeled as failures. Neuman now sees this 
as a
> mistake: "Vilifying teachers and saying we are going to shame them 
was
> not the right approach."
>
> The combination of inflexibility and public humiliation for those not
> meeting federal goals ignited so much frustration among educators 
that
> NCLB now appears to be an irreparably damaged brand. "The problems
> lingered long enough and there's so much anger that it may not be
> fixable," says Neuman. While the American Federation of Teachers was
> once onboard with the NCLB goals, she notes, the union has turned
> against it. "Teachers hate NCLB because they feel like they've been
> picked on."
>
> Is there a way out of the mess? Neuman still supports school
> accountability and the much-maligned annual tests mandated by the 
law.
> But she now believes that the nation has to look beyond the 
schoolroom,
> if it wishes to leave no child behind. Along with 59 other top
> educators, policymakers and health officials, she's put her name to a
> nonpartisan document to be released on Tuesday by the Economic Policy
> Institute, a Washington think tank. Titled "A Broader, Bolder 
Approach
> to Education," it lays out an expansive vision for leveling the 
playing
> field for low-income kids, one that looks toward new policies on 
child
> health and support for parents and communities. Neuman says that 
money
> she's seen wasted on current programs should be reallocated 
accordingly.
> "Pinning all our hopes on schools will never change the odds for 
kids."
> http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1812758,00.html
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Unsubscribe ARN-L:
> http://interversity.org/lists/arn-l/subscribe.html