Re: Do We Need National Standards with Teeth? (response to Art Burke)

[aburke5054@aol.com]

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Hays <shays@ccwebster.net>
To: arn-l@interversity.org
Sent: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 7:19 am
Subject: Re: [arn-l] Do We Need National Standards with Teeth? 
(response to Art Burke)


I was just struck by something as I read the last part of your comment, 
Art.  Perhaps I have stopped paying attention and have just missed it, 
but what concrete and empirical evidence do we have that the "strong 
interventions" envisioned for "chronically underperforming districts" 
have been successful or will succeed in "turning schools around", 
should they actually be implemented?
_____________________________________________________________________
Carey's point was that for the most part states are not intervening 
strongly at all, and he argues that NCLB should be amended to eliminate 
room for them to wriggle out of their responsibilities.  Still, your 
question is a fair one.  But it cuts both ways:  The obverse of your 
question is what "concrete and empirical" evidence suggests that 
dysfunctional systems such as Birmingham's should continue to do what 
they are doing.  The argument that we just don't know what to do to get 
good schools has always struck me as an odd one for anyone in public 
education to make, but then again these are strange times.

Art
________________________________________________________________________
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - 
http://mail.aol.com