Re: NCLB on YouTube

["GERALD BRACEY" <gbracey1@verizon.net>]

SAM:

I don't think it's misleading at all.  The Statement of Purpose of Title I, 
Section 1001 of PL 107-110, January 8, 2002 says "The purpose of this title 
is to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant 
opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minium, 
proficiency on challenging State academic achievment standards and state 
academic assessments."  The third item in then says  "This purpose can be 
accomplished by-

   (3) closing the achievement gap between high and low performing 
children, especially the achievement gaps between minority and nonminority 
students, and between disadvantaged children and their more advantaged 
peers."

This text can be challenged on a number of grounds as stupid in the extreme, 
but it is what the law says.

Jerry

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <samlubell@verizon.net>
To: <arn-l@interversity.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 11:41 AM
Subject: Re: [arn-l] NCLB on YouTube


> It's very misleading to claim that NCLB says anything about closing 
> achievement gaps.  Even if somehow, all students, of all races reach the 
> "proficiency" goals of their state, a sizable gap could still exist in the 
> average scores.
>
> Think of a race in which all runners eventually reach the finish line. 
> There can still be sizable gaps in their times.
>
>
> > From: GERALD BRACEY <gbracey1@verizon.net>
> > Date: 2007/09/06 Thu AM 07:52:23 CDT
> > To: arn-l@interversity.org
> > Subject: Re: [arn-l] NCLB on YouTube
>
> > Thanks Elsa.  In my feedback to the producers, I mentioned the "systems
> > approach" comment, too.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "ElsaHaas" <ElsaHaas@si.rr.com>
> > To: <arn-l@interversity.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 11:00 PM
> > Subject: Re: [arn-l] NCLB on YouTube
> >
> >
> > Jerry,
> >
> > Overall, I liked it.
> >
> > The sixth-grade girl pauses and looks off at someone/something on the side
> > for so long that it might look to some that she's getting a cue for what
> > she's going to say next.
> >
> > I also think that you might need at least one kid who speaks about what it
> > feels like to be tested. Some kids throw up over testing. Could you find a
> > kid to talk about that, rather than just about whether testing is going to
> > prepare kids for the future? That ends up being a speculation (and one 
> > that
> > might have come to the kid from some adult). The strength of an interview
> > with a younger child lies in the "insider's view" they have of reality,
> > rather than theory.
> >
> > You say that there will be more interviews of students in other versions, 
> > so
> > maybe this is already being thought about.
> >
> > I also thought there was a mismatch at one point (near the beginning, just
> > after you were standing in front of that "little red schoolhouse" - a 
> > great
> > visual, I thought) between the words on the screen (about the goal of 100%
> > proficiency by 2014), and what you were saying at the same time (about the
> > goal being to eliminate the achievement gap by 2014). This was just after
> > you said something about NCLB being one of the weirdest laws ever.
> >
> > I think it is truly weird that anyone would ever imagine that every single
> > child will be proficient by 2014. I think it's also weird that anyone 
> > would
> > ever imagine that there will be no more achievement gap by 2014. But the 
> > two
> > things are different, and I think the first one gets lost because of the
> > mismatch.
> >
> > I especially liked what one woman said about imagining what's going to
> > happen when these kids who have grown up learning to fill in the bubbles
> > then have to face the real world and think outside of the bubble/box.
> >
> > Last thing: there was a one-liner about NCLB not being a systems approach 
> > to
> > solving a systems problem. I don't think most people will know what that
> > means (I don't). Maybe what follows this statement explains it by example,
> > but I didn't get it.
> >
> > Elsa Haas
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: arn-l-owner@interversity.org [mailto:arn-l-owner@interversity.org] 
> > On
> > Behalf Of GERALD BRACEY
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 1:11 PM
> > To: eddra@yahoogroups.com; LiteracyForAll@yahoogroups.com;
> > arn-l@interversity.org
> > Subject: [arn-l] NCLB on YouTube
> >
> > There is now a 9:25 video about NCLB at 
> > www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSTzLILQx3c
> > .  It was produced by a Fairfax County teacher, Katie Keier, and a
> > videographer friend, Joe Landreth.  Let us know what you think--I'm sure
> > constructive feedback will be welcome.  My initial understanding was that 
> > it
> > was to dispel ignorance about what the law actually said, and I spent my
> > time talking about the law's contents.  The video has me talking about 
> > AYP,
> > 100% proficiency, and the choice option, but it seems to me it came out 
> > more
> > talking about the law's impacts which are not necessarily functions of the
> > law's provisions--e.g., test scores arriving late, high performing 
> > students
> > using the choice option, etc.
> >
> > Other versions are anticipated which make more use of interviews with
> > students.  Katie and Joe are on the EDDRA list so they'll automatically 
> > see
> > anything that turns up there.  I can relay anything from LFA or ARN.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------
> > Direct list questions to listmom@interversity.net