No Child Left Behind: Questions and Answers
A funny thing is happening to the No Child Left Behind program - reality is challenging its goals.
According to a recently released report by the National Evaluation Association. They develop tests for 43 states and 1,500 school districts. The results showed some upward creep (1-2 points) since the N.C.L.B. program started. But below those numbers a widening gap between minority and their white counterparts was evident. The explanation as per the Association is that better performing and/or interested students are getting more out of the classes than the less motivated or educationally challenged(white or any other race).
I don't think this is a bad thing if we can finally learn from those results. If the N.C.L.B program is about "universal proficiency" as per a Washington bureaucracy then two possibilities can be regarded as reaching that goal:
1) All students will advance at the same rate even if it means no one will reach their optimum potential. Ergo no child is left behind because nobody really advances.
Or.
2) All students will advance-some more than others- without regard to the uneven (undemcratic?) results. We are not all equal. Some will do better in school than others. It does not mean that the less scholastic children are or will be failures.
These results beg the question. Is the N. C. L. B program necessary? Isn't the problem with schools go back to the bureaucratic intrusion of the Federal Government in the 1960's? The mandate of equality in education broght in unproductive schemes like bussing, compromising the S A T and lowering academic standards to mention a few. I think the solution that these results point to is local control over school curriculum and paid by local monies. Utah and other states are leading in this direction.
The old days produced leaders like Jefferson and Franklin-true scholars that were also well-rounded. They were not like our modern leaders- kennel-raised politicians like Clinton and Bush.
1)
According to a recently released report by the National Evaluation Association. They develop tests for 43 states and 1,500 school districts. The results showed some upward creep (1-2 points) since the N.C.L.B. program started. But below those numbers a widening gap between minority and their white counterparts was evident. The explanation as per the Association is that better performing and/or interested students are getting more out of the classes than the less motivated or educationally challenged(white or any other race).
I don't think this is a bad thing if we can finally learn from those results. If the N.C.L.B program is about "universal proficiency" as per a Washington bureaucracy then two possibilities can be regarded as reaching that goal:
1) All students will advance at the same rate even if it means no one will reach their optimum potential. Ergo no child is left behind because nobody really advances.
Or.
2) All students will advance-some more than others- without regard to the uneven (undemcratic?) results. We are not all equal. Some will do better in school than others. It does not mean that the less scholastic children are or will be failures.
These results beg the question. Is the N. C. L. B program necessary? Isn't the problem with schools go back to the bureaucratic intrusion of the Federal Government in the 1960's? The mandate of equality in education broght in unproductive schemes like bussing, compromising the S A T and lowering academic standards to mention a few. I think the solution that these results point to is local control over school curriculum and paid by local monies. Utah and other states are leading in this direction.
The old days produced leaders like Jefferson and Franklin-true scholars that were also well-rounded. They were not like our modern leaders- kennel-raised politicians like Clinton and Bush.
1)
posted by Barry Leonardini at 9:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home