Tuesday, August 9, 2011

What Do You Think About This?

Obama Administration Exempting Schools From Federal Law’s Testing Mandate


I realize that No Child Left Behind was not wildly popular. I will go on record though with saying that I supported it, with the thought that there could have been changes to it.

With that said, and ignoring the merits or faults of NCLB, think of the implications of this ruling.

Is this the solution to getting rid of NCLB? Does it shortchange kids in public schools? Is this simply a nod to teacher's unions whose members are under fire for poor performance? Is it just a further attempt to dumb down the US education system.

Finally, is this a decision that should solely left to a presidential administration? Should this decision be made by unelected bureaucrats or Congress?

What are your thoughts?

9 comments:

Z said...

Of course your reasons are exactly right; how else to politicians pay back unions? How else can they dumb our kids down enough to where they swallow the socialist KoolAid?
geeeeZ

So, where are the Republicans? ARe they arguing, fighting, doing hearings? ANYTHING? Or, again...stone cold SILENCE.?

Always On Watch said...

School systems here in the DC are THRILLED with the possibility of getting a waiver and, thereby, squirming out of any accountability in the local education system.

So, why does Obama want to give these waivers? So that unionized teachers can keep their jobs -- never mind how the students are learning or performing?

I, for one, want the federal government to butt the hell out of education. Nothing in our Constitution justifies even having a Department of Education on the federal level!

In my view, federal intervention in our public education system is but one more manifestation of the Nanny State. I felt that same way with GWB's policies for education too.

Always On Watch said...

Here's a thought....Has college education become more expensive because of the availability of federal loans and, even worse, federal grants? I think so! After all, every time the federal government butts in where it doesn't belong, there is a screw up -- and one that costs a lot of money, too.

Brooke said...

AOW is the expert here.

All I know is, that I had to fight tooth and nail to get my son any kind of help, rather than the 'title one' program they stuck him in which was not helping.

They were trying to teach him to test, rather than teach him to learn. Title one was a way to keep their numbers looking good.

Chuck said...

Z, dead on about the GOP.

AOW, I am not real comfortable about the feds being involved in education either but something had to be done. Our educational system has become so bad in this country that it has risen to a national security/stability level. We cannot maintain our level of national strength into the future with the children we are turning out now.

As to the Pell grants, I tried to find a link for you but I could not. A few years ago an economist ran a study and found a direct correlation between the Pell grants and rising tuition costs. He was able to show that colleges have simply raised tuition to keep pace with increases in Pell grants. They have not made college more affordable for the poor as much as they have made it further out of reach for the middle class who do not qualify for the grants.

Brooke, when NCLB came out all of the bitching was about it being an unfunded mandate. This was BS, we have been funding this mandate for over a hundred years. The only difference is that for the first time teachers were being required to deliver.

I get so pissed off when schools teach kids to pass the (in Michigan it's the MEAP). If they would simply teach them, they would pass the test. We now have MEAP coordinators in the schools. For about a 100 thou a year they oversee the testing program. Fire them, hire another teacher, and teach my kids.

Brooke said...

Amen, Chuck.

Randy said...

Regarding raising rates to match Pell grants. SC formerly had a "Hope Scholarship" that paid $1000/year. Not every kid with a B average got the scholarship, but most did. Then came the lottery, with a promise to pay for in-state college tuition. The year it came in to place, Clemson raised their rates 40%, USC raised their rates about 30%. The lottery scholarship doesn't cover tuition.

Good timing, I posted some ideas on "fixing" education on my blog today. Interested in anyone's response.

cube said...

With as much money as we're pouring into education in this country, we should be seeing better results in our kids.

Chuck said...

Randy, Michigan got caught pulling a fast one on the lottery money for schools. They advertised that all money from the lottery went to schools. What they did not say was they took an equal amount less out of the general fund for schools. They had to fix the issue

Cube, dead on