Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
High time a President moved to weaken this law! The article slants it as being Bush' fault, calling it a "Bush-Era education law" but really it was a bi-partisan screw up that got dumped on the states by BOTH parties.
The law that Obama should allow states to opt out of is the one that created the Department of Education. That would do more to fix our education problems than any single thing I can think of.
Yes- teachers shouldn't be held accountable. That certainly makes sense. BTW: are these union employees?
Rick, did you see these words at the beginning of that article? I think they take some of the sting out of your words. "The purpose is not to give states and districts a reprieve from accountability, but rather to unleash energy to improve our schools at the local level."
And here is a collection of information on what has gone wrong with NCLB and why it has been ineffective. Rethinking Schools Online
Gee I'm surprised at what appears to be harsh knee-jerk criticism from the conservative quarter. My home state wanted to ban the use of NCLB funds because it was in violation of the state's constitution. So you guys aren't for state's rights I take it?
NCLB was a very sorry thing from the onset. Because no child was to be left behind those considered to be Special Education students were eventually shuffled in with other students. Now can you see that that move was really silly in that it caused teachers to wait for those kids thereby shorting out all the others.
The worst part of NCLB is that like all federal interference in education there were strings attached to it that were attached to federal money at a time when states were in need of money. That damned law did as much to harm education in general as anything I can think of.
Federal strings is about letting states choose the best possible way each of them believes they can accomplish. It is how federal government should work.
Federal strings are always attached to money on one end. Most states aren't going to leave NCLB and give up money to do so. I don't know one federal string that doesn't have money attached to it.
Federal strings are always attached to money on one end. Most states aren't going to leave NCLB and give up money to do so. I don't know one federal string that doesn't have money attached to it.
When the Highland Park school district in Dallas said we'll take no more federal money about the only thing parents noticed was the price of lunch went up. Granted, Park Cities was a high dollar real estate district with not many kids with special needs. The day they stopped with the feds, the price of real estate sky rocketed.
Putting all kinds of kids in the same classrooms is going to destroy public schooling for everybody. I'm all for mainstreaming those you can, but some of this is just plain stupid. One teacher is not trained to deal with 20 different needs. It is not fair to the kids, either.
High time a President moved to weaken this law! The article slants it as being Bush' fault, calling it a "Bush-Era education law" but really it was a bi-partisan screw up that got dumped on the states by BOTH parties.
When the Highland Park school district in Dallas said we'll take no more federal money about the only thing parents noticed was the price of lunch went up. Granted, Park Cities was a high dollar real estate district with not many kids with special needs. The day they stopped with the feds, the price of real estate sky rocketed.
Putting all kinds of kids in the same classrooms is going to destroy public schooling for everybody. I'm all for mainstreaming those you can, but some of this is just plain stupid. One teacher is not trained to deal with 20 different needs. It is not fair to the kids, either.
In the school that my wife just retired in I was here in 1969 and there was a good Special Ed program and it stayed that way until about the time I left in 1986 and after that they started mainlining (I call it that) and always had at least one Special Ed type in all classes with them. I couldn't have ever stood that. My area was history and I just couldn't drag it down for them. The worst part of this that when I started teaching in 1958 there was no such thing as Special Education and every kid, even one I had one year who couldn't read at all, got by somehow. That one did all his homework with his mother doing the reading, but he could write much better than many of them in the early 80s.
The whole thing has slid downhill since the day that the feds forced teachers to worry about kids' self esteem. In the days when I started nobody worried about that and kids got along fine. We have to get the feds out and get the Department of Education ditched since they are so tightly bound to the teachers' unions and that is where all this crap came from.
That can never happen unless we actually do dumb down kids so the slower ones can keep up.
You've seen the articles about the widespread cheating on the state tests.
No state will make 100% passing by 2014.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
