[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Zero Percent Chance" to Reach NCLB Target
Sure. Dumb down American schools to blunt the magnificent liberating and democratizing teaching of the Gabbards and Horns and create a nation of wage-slaves. That's got to be it, all right. Next up: Enrich the testing companies.
Art
-----Original Message-----
From: gbracey1@verizon.net
To: arn-l@interversity.org
Sent: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 6:27 AM
Subject: Re: [arn-l] "Zero Percent Chance" to Reach NCLB Target
No, the offspring of the BRT are already in private schools. NCLB is to stupefy the proletariat.
----- Original Message ----- From: <aburke5054@aol.com>
To: <arn-l@interversity.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 2:28 AM
Subject: Re: [arn-l] "Zero Percent Chance" to Reach NCLB Target
> Don't tell me, the goal of 100 percent proficiency is to bamboozle > Americans into thinking that the public schools are failing, which will > send them into a frenzy of paying for private schools for the offspring of > the Busniness Roundtable. How could I not have seen that? Art
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gbracey1@verizon.net
> To: arn-l@interversity.org
> Sent: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 10:54 AM
> Subject: Re: [arn-l] "Zero Percent Chance" to Reach NCLB Target
>
> Sometimes I think there's only one person who doesn't get it.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: <aburke5054@aol.com>
> To: <arn-l@interversity.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 10:54 AM
> Subject: Re: [arn-l] "Zero Percent Chance" to Reach NCLB Target
>
> > It's amazing how many people still don't get it. The goal of 100 percent > > > proficiency is not simply a rhetorical flourish or an inspirational > > appeal > to a generalized American can-doism. The goal of 100 percent > > proficiency > is supposed to spur states to improve their schools. Many > > people seem > unable to see the forest of school improvement for the > > trees of students' > test scores.
> >
> > Art
> >
> > -----Original Message----- > > From: bobschaeffer@earthlink.net
> > To: arn-l@interversity.org; arn2-strategy@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 4:56 AM
> > Subject: [arn-l] "Zero Percent Chance" to Reach NCLB Target
> >
> > "NO CHILD" TARGET IS CALLED OUT OF REACH
> >
> > GOAL OF 100% PROFICIENCY DEBATED AS CONGRESS WEIGHS RENEWAL
> > Washington Post -- March 14, 2007 -- Page One
> > by Amit R. Paley
> >
> > No Child Left Behind, the landmark federal education law, sets a lofty > > > standard: that all students tested in reading and math will reach grade > > > level by 2014. Even when the law was enacted five years ago, almost no > > one > believed that standard was realistic.
> >
> > But now, as Congress begins to debate renewing the law, lawmakers and > > > education officials are confronting the reality of the approaching > > > deadline and the difficult political choice between sticking with the > > > vision of universal proficiency or backing away from it.
> >
> > "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."
> >
> > The debate over the perfection standard encapsulates the key arguments > > for > and against No Child Left Behind.
> >
> > Critics, including some teachers unions and many testing experts, view > > the > law as a forced march toward an impossible education nirvana. They > > are > lobbying Congress to reduce the 100 percent target and delay the > > 2014 > deadline. They are also pushing for the elimination of > > sanctions -- which > can cost millions of dollars and result in school > > takeovers -- that school > systems face for failing to make yearly > > progress toward the goal.
> >
> > But critics face an uphill challenge because of the rhetorical power of > > > the argument for a universal proficiency target and a deadline. > > Anything > less, advocates say, will hurt children, especially society's > > most > vulnerable: poor and minority students.
> >
> > "We need to stay the course," U.S. Deputy Education Secretary Raymond > > > Simon said. "The mission is doable, and we don't need to back off that > > > right now."
> >
> > President Bush is pushing this year for reauthorization of one of his > > top > domestic programs. In a joint House-Senate hearing yesterday, > > senior > Democrats and Republicans said they would work toward renewal > > of the law. > But in interviews in the days before the hearing, some key > > lawmakers said > that universal proficiency is all but impossible to > > meet.
> >
> > "The idea of 100 percent is, in any legislation, not achievable," said > > > Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate education > > > committee. "There isn't a member of Congress or a parent or a student > > that > doesn't understand that."
> >
> > Kennedy added that the law's universal proficiency standard served to > > > inspire students and teachers. But "it's too early in the process to > > > predict whether we'll consider changes" to the 2014 deadline, he said.
> >
> > Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), a former U.S. education secretary and > > > supporter of the law, said Americans don't want politicians to lower > > > standards.
> >
> > "Are we going to rewrite the Declaration of Independence and say only 85 > > > percent of men are created equal?" Alexander asked. "Most of our > > politics > in America is about the disappointment of not meeting the > > high goals we > set for ourselves."
> >
> > Foes and supporters alike praise the law for drawing attention to > > student > achievement gaps. The law requires testing for all students in > > reading and > math from grades 3 through 8 and once in high school; it > > also requires > reporting of scores for groups of students including > > racial and ethnic > minorities, those from low-income families, those > > with limited English > skills and those with disabilities who receive > > special education.
> >
> > But testing experts say there are vast academic differences among > > children > of the same racial or socioeconomic background. Countries > > with far less > racial diversity than the United States still find wide > > variations in > student performance. Even in relatively homogenous > > Singapore, for example, > a world leader in science and math tests, a > > quarter of the students tested > are not proficient in math, and 49 > > percent fall short in science.
> >
> > "Most people are afraid that once you acknowledge this variation, then > > you > have to tolerate major inequities between black and white > > students," said > Daniel Koretz, a Harvard University education > > professor. "That's not > necessarily true, but that's why the political > > world does not really > address the issue."
> >
> > Although no major school system is known to have reached 100 percent > > > proficiency, Education Department officials pointed to individual > > schools > across the country that have reached the standard as evidence > > that it is > possible. In Virginia, schools have achieved universal > > proficiency on > reading and math tests 45 times since 2002, officials > > said.
> >
> > The only school they cited in the Washington region as having met that > > > mark was the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in > > > Fairfax County, a regional school with selective admissions. Principal > > > Evan M. Glazer said his school, which has an elite reputation, was > > hardly > a representative example. On whether the nation can replicate > > that > success, Glazer said: "I don't think it's very realistic."
> >
> > Fairfax County School Superintendent Jack D. Dale said it was "absurd" > > to > expect total proficiency, especially when federal officials require > > > immigrant children who have been in U.S. schools for little more than > > a > year to meet the standard. His 164,000-student system, the largest > > in the > Washington region, is sparring with the Education Department > > over the > immigrant testing rule.
> >
> > Dale and other critics of the law have called for No Child Left Behind > > to > measure the growth of students from year to year instead of > > expecting them > to meet fixed benchmarks. But Dale said he understood > > why federal > officials and lawmakers take a different view.
> >
> > "How can you publicly state it's okay to have some children not meet > > > standards?" Dale said. "Politically, you're committing suicide if you > > say > it."
> >
> > Some experts predict that states will weaken their definition of > > > proficiency to make it appear that all students are on track. The law > > > requires students to meet "challenging academic standards" but allows > > each > state to define proficiency on its own terms and design its own > > tests.
> >
> > Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), who voted against the law in 2001 and > > > remains a leading critic, derided the universal proficiency standard. > > > "It's just like a communist country saying that they used to have 100 > > > percent participation in elections," Hoekstra said. "You knew it wasn't > > > true, but a bureaucrat could come up with that answer. And that's what > > > will happen here."
> >
> > Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-Calif.), ranking Republican on the House > > > education committee, said the 2014 deadline forces educators to pay > > > attention to each student. He said he is open to slight changes in the > > law > to exempt certain students with disabilities from the proficiency > > > requirement. But he said he won't back down from the law's core ideal, > > > citing his own six children and 28 grandchildren. "Which one of them > > would > I like to leave behind?" McKeon asked.
> >
> > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/13/AR2007031301781_2.html
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------ > Direct list questions > > to listmom@interversity.net
> >
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> > AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free > > > from AOL at AOL.com.
> >
> ------------------------------------------------ > Direct list questions to listmom@interversity.net
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free > from AOL at AOL.com.
>
-----------------------------------------------
Report list problems to listmom@interversity.net
________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.