Re: A question about goals and politics

[ABurke5054@aol.com]

NCLB set a target date of 2014 for reaching the goal of all children  
proficient. If that isn't "incrementalism" what is?  More importantly, if  schools 
are not "geared towards improving achievement" what on earth  are they geared 
for and what does that tell us about public education?   Addressing this is a 
much more fundamental than metaphysical discussions  about the deficiencies of 
goals and "theories of action."
 
Art  
 
In a message dated 5/22/2006 5:01:45 AM Pacific Standard Time,  
sdorn@tempest.coedu.usf.edu writes:

The  counterargument (whether Art makes it or not) is that unattainable  goals
are nonetheless useful. In 2014, no matter what the achievement of  the
country's students, there will be defenders of the original 100% goal  who
will say that it was necessary to prod schools to improve the education  of
everyone. The argument is essentially, "Even if it is impossible to  reach,
it's important to have a goal that's motivating."  

The  implied "theory of action" here -- that one needs to have an  official
"stretch goal" for education policy that is consistent with our  best ideals
while still unrealistic -- requires a straightforward matching  of actions to
goals and an understanding by educators of how to improve  achievement
dramatically....