[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Zero Percent Chance" to Reach NCLB Target
"Of course, it is true that when Jovanovich saw NCLB's structure he said "This almost reads like our business plan." (Ed Week, 2/21/01). And Sharon Robinson of ETS was reported to have called the law the Test Publishers Full Employment Act."
Jerry:
It can't be true. There's weapons of mass destruction and mushroom clouds in tests ?
No, just in Iraq,Iran and North Korea. It is a scientific fact that our allies China, India and Pakistan do not have any nuclear intention, much less weaponry. Please observe quiet and decorum while we are spreading torture, I mean democracy.
It is the state's fault, says the scarecrow... or is that the tin man ? The NCLB target must be the caged quail Dick Cheney is shooting at.
Quan
-----Original Message-----
From: gbracey1@verizon.net
To: arn-l@interversity.org
Sent: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: [arn-l] "Zero Percent Chance" to Reach NCLB Target
Of course, it is true that when Jovanovich saw NCLB's structure he said "This almost reads like our business plan." (Ed Week, 2/21/01). And Sharon Robinson of ETS was reported to have called the law the Test Publishers Full Employment Act.
JB
----- Original Message ----- From: <aburke5054@aol.com>
To: <arn-l@interversity.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [arn-l] "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.
> ------------------------------------------------
> Direct list questions to listmom@interversity.net
>
-------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe ARN-L:
http://interversity.org/lists/arn-l/subscribe.html
________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.