FW: Open Letter

["Peter Majoy" <pwmjoy@earthlink.net>]

Peter Majoy
pwmjoy@earthlink.net
Why Wait?  Move to EarthLink.


> [Original Message]
> From: Marion Brady <mbrady22@CFL.RR.COM>
> To: <CESNEWS@listserv.brown.edu>
> Date: 11/18/2006 12:43:34 PM
> Subject: Open Letter
>
> An Open Letter to Margaret Spellings and Congress
>
> "Human history," said H. G. Wells, is "a race between education and 
> catastrophe." If we stay the course with No Child Left Behind,
catastrophe 
> is a sure bet.
>
> You'll soon be deciding the fate of this well-meant but appallingly 
> simplistic piece of legislation. Continued failure to answer the
legitimate 
> questions of those you expect to carry out your mandates will further
erode 
> trust in your leadership.
>
> Here are some of those questions:
>
> 1. NCLB reflects the views primarily of leaders of business and industry 
> rather than of active, working educators. Does this make sense?
>
> 2. Did at least some of those who originally helped shape NCLB hope to 
> discredit public education as a step toward privatizing the institution?
>
> 3. On critical, instruction-related questions, NCLB removes local
educators 
> and school boards from the decision-making loop. Does the history of 
> top-down, centralized control of complex institutions suggest this change 
> strategy works?
>
> 4. Will manipulating the curriculum to "maintain America's competitive 
> position in world trade" be more likely to ensure America's future 
> well-being than helping the young come to love learning because it allows 
> them to pursue their abilities and interests?
>
> 5. Management experts say that poor institutional performance almost
always 
> indicates a "system" problem. NCLB blames poor performance not on "the 
> system" but on the people in the system. Are the management experts wrong?
>
> 6. NCLB relies on market forces to improve schools. Does this mean that 
> learning is unnatural and won't take place unless teachers and students
are 
> threatened or bribed?
>
> 7. Do NCLB-mandated subject-matter standards, based as they are on an
1892 
> curriculum design, adequately address present and future individual and 
> societal needs?
>
> 8. If there are problems with the present, same-thing-for-every-student 
> curriculum, don't "raising the bar" and "rigor" make them worse?
>
> 9. NCLB is rapidly pushing "frills" out of the curriculum. Has research
now 
> established that art, music, physical activity and so on have nothing to
do 
> with scientific and mathematical reasoning ability and workforce skills?
>
> 10. Nationwide, hundreds of thousands of students are being held back 
> because of poor reading and math skills. Is the ability to interpret
written 
> symbols the only way the young learn, and therefore sufficient reason to 
> retain them in grade?
>
> 11. Education is supposed to teach kids to think for themselves, not
merely 
> recall what they've been ordered to remember. Are the centerpieces of
NCLB 
> (corporately produced, machine-scored tests) able to judge the quality of 
> complex thought processes?
>
> 12. Should life-changing decisions for the young hinge on the results of
a 
> single test?
>
> 13. Attempting to avoid the "failing" label, schools use myriad
strategies 
> to "game" the system. For example, knowing which students are likely to
fail 
> and which will succeed on high-stakes tests, schools give "marginals" the 
> most attention. Is it possible to anticipate and counter all such 
> strategies?
>
> 14. Has provision been made for coping with NCLB's unintended
consequences - 
> increased drop-out rate, loss of teacher autonomy and professionalism, 
> negative student reaction to excessive rote instruction and drill,
increased 
> costs of testing and test-related materials, the destructiveness of the 
> "failure" label - (just to begin a list)?
>
> 15. Are NCLB-related contracts entirely free of conflicts of interest?
>
> [This post may be reproduced, forwarded, or otherwise used for the
purpose 
> for which it is obviously intended without the express permission of the 
> author.]
>
> Marion Brady Cocoa, Florida 11/18/2006
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------
> Text inserted by Panda Platinum 2005 Internet Security:
>
>  This message has NOT been classified as spam. If it is unsolicited mail
(spam), click on the following link to reclassify it:
http://127.0.0.1:6083/Panda?ID=pav_50034&SPAM=true
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------