- maybe relax the standards on schools for kids that were physically not capable of meeting the criteria (ie special needs, recent immigrants, etc)
- maybe develop national standards instead of the current standards that vary from state to state
- maybe reset the clock somewhat, since we have failed to meet the educational needs of the impoverished and minorities in the allotted timeline
- Removing the regular time based testing progress checks (ie milestones) that ensure kids are proceeding per plan. Then waiting until graduation to see if the schools have failed. How are we going to help the kids at that late date?
- Lessening the focus on math, science, reading and writing, and allow credit for soft skills. This is just a way to lower the standards. (ditch diggers)
Just a reminder, though Bush signed NCLB. Its champion was Senator Kennedy. Therefore it was truly a bi-partisan solution to an American crisis. Thoughts ?
Star Tribune Obama Unveils
Syracuse Huge NCLB Changes
MSN Dismantling NCLB
Wiki NCLB
G2A Sir, The Class is Too Hard
G2A Teaching to the Test
G2A AYP Top 10
G2A AYP Pick Your Corner
G2A AYP, NCLB, PDCA
G2A School Priorities
4 comments:
NCLB needed to go away or be completely overhauled. I'm hopeful this will finally happen.
Kids are coming home with so much more homework than we did when we were kids. I think in big part because the teachers are working on MCA practice questions, the day flies by and they hand the child a packet of something else that should have been taught in school. It never fails, the day my child brings home a couple of English and Math homework packets, it was the same day the teacher worked on MCA practice question. I'm not saying it's the teachers fault by any means, because they have to work stay under the NCLB umbrella.
So 2 questions:
Is "what you learned in school" acceptable to be competitive in the modern world? Remembering that at one time an 8th grade education was plenty...
If the schools are teaching well enough on a daily basis, what requires them to be studying of practice questions? (ie cramming)
In my history of many many many tests. The only time I needed to cram was when I had not really learned the subject in advance of the test.
My personal opinion is we need more "school hours" per year in which to learn the additional content that is required in our modern information age.
With my first daughter the homework load peaked in 6/7th grade. Then it got easier or her study skills improved. The second daughter is facing the 6th grade challenge right now.
Good luck with the homework. Thanks for your thoughts.
I was very interested to see the proposals. NCLB may have been done with the best of intentions, but it has been flawed since the beginning and I wonder if it's done much at all to address the real issues--achievement gap and changes/improvements in failing schools. On a macro scale it seemed to be heavy on consequences without much support. On an individual scale it focused on the bottom end of the scale and didn't take into account kids' different capabilities or potential.
So--the changes? I'm glad to see the pass/fail go away and that great schools can do their own thing, mostly good schools can fix their own problems, and really poor schools can get more intervention.
I'm happy to see that the measurement will be more broad--test scores don't tell a whole story, and including evaluation of grad rates and attendance matter. I wish there were a way to quantify parental involvement. Identifying ways to increase that metric would pay huge dividends.
I like that teachers will be evaluated on how their students are progressing, not just on their credentials. Common sense, really.
Unlike you, Give, I'm actually glad to see it a little less heavy on reading/math. Innovation and problem solving are going to be just as important for success in the global economy of the future, and turning out test-taking drones who haven't been encouraged to think creatively won't support that goal.
For all the grumping about teachers, I think they know best how to make each individual class (in each individual school/community/state--take your pick) achieve a year's worth of learning if they know what that goal should be, and in most cases I trust them to integrate the 3Rs with softer skills like music, logic, kinesthetic learning and working in teams.
I have some concerns--I think "readiness for college or career" is a little too squishy to be measurable, and I'd like to see more specificity especially about how special needs kids work in that goal. Extremely low-IQ students will never test at a "normal" level, and neither they nor their school should be punished for their disabilities.
And while I support national standards--clearly, state ones have been abused and useless--I always wonder if tests and measures alone are really helpful. They work to identify the failures, but then there needs to be 2x that effort into real support and improvements, not punishments. The plan seems to fix some of the problems on the front end of evaluation, but still weak on the back end.
Overall, I think it will bring education back to the fore, and that's always a good thing.
--Annie
Give, thought you might be interested in this related piece--a review of a new book by Diane Ravitch, former Bush education advisor and NCLB champion.
It's called The Death and Life of the Great American School System. She's conducted and reviewed available research on what really creates success, and has some very interesting findings. I'm looking forward to reading this book.
http://www.slate.com/id/2247300/
--Annie
Post a Comment