Reading and Blogging Question for Wednesday, April 22
When the Congress passed the original No Child Left Behind Act in 2001 (it was reauthorized in 2007), it changed forever the K-12 educational landscape. It is a long and detailed document, which you can find at the U. S. Department of Education web site>. I encourage you to browse the site and read at least one short section that is interesting to you. (For instance, you might be interested in the section devoted to Teacher Quality.) In addition to one section that you will read from the No Child Left Behind web site, I would like you to read these two short articles. The first is from the Education Research Newsletter and provides you with a pros and cons overview of No Child Left Behind. The second is from the New York Times and provides you with a recent editorial about the stimulus package and the current proposals to strengthen No Child Left Behind. (The articles were distributed in class on Tuesday, April 14, and you can also find them loaded in the Content feature on the course D2L.)
Blogging Options (Due no later than 11:59pm on Wednesday, April 22)
Pick one of the following three options and write a short (150-250) word response. Begin by letting the others know which argument you are responding to.
A) In response to the section you read in the No Child Left Behind section of the U. S. Department of Education web site, did anything strike you as controversial? Useful? Damaging? Briefly summarize the portion you read, discuss it, and provide an explanation of your position.
OR
B) Having read the NCLB pros and cons in the Education Research Newsletter, review the four areas (assessment-driven reform; standards-based assessment; assessment-centered accountability; and high-stakes consequences). Which “pro” argument seems particularly strong and why? Which “con” argument seems particularly strong and why?
OR
C) Having read the New York Times editorial, do you think investing an additional $100 billion into education will make a difference and improve the education U. S. children experience? Why or why not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am going to do my post on the New York Times editorial. I am not sure that pumping more money will yield better results. In fact, the last book we read (We make the road by waking) mentioned briefly how slowly the education system changes.
ReplyDeleteI think the fact there is more money is a good thing, however, I do not think this will necessarily translate to higher test scores. To me the problem doesn't end with money. It is a fair place to start, but not an ending point. I don't subscribe to the theory of "If we paid teachers more, it would be easier to retain them". Typically, a person does not go into the teaching profession for enormous monetary gain. So to me, the retention argument is not a valid one.
The 54 Billion "stabilization" fund speaks to the retention piece. That leaves another 46 Billion to use inside the schools. There is a program called Race to the top that will use 5 billion of those funds. in my opinion this program will further create gaps between states, instead of bringing them closer together.
The true problem is in the language of the bill. As the article mentioned, there were stats that were "dummied" up just so schools could say they hit certain thresholds. In my eyes that where education stops and covering one's backside begins. Job security should be given only if its merited. Using stats that are phony in order to somehow demonstrate success in the schools are just as artificial as the NCLB law.
Numbers can tell any type of story you want them too. This is why, to me, 100 Billion dollars will not change the issue at hand. You need a different line of thinking.
When you have more of the same with additional funds being thrown at it, the results will more than likely be more of the same.
I like that assessment driven reform measures performances of students and staff. I feel like the pro argument for assessment driven reform made sense to me because we need something to measure in order to create changes and shifts in desired teaching and learning areas. Globally speaking, the U.S. isn't doing as hot as we should be when it comes to academics. The con argument is that our schools are misdesigned and lack qualified teachers. I feel like this is a starting ground to try and weed out weather or not that is true. We've got to start somewhere.
ReplyDeleteI'm liking the high stakes consequences argument for the most part as well. If you know you have a lot to loose you are way more likely to take that task or test more seriously. I also feel that not everyone is designed to handle the pressures of such serious matters. Some people cave when that much pressure surrounds them. How we can we overcome that issue
The standards based assessment is a joke to me only because the rules are so rigid and shaming to a large population of our society. I agreed with the argument that called this a one-size-fits-all way of doing things. I think the intentions of these tests and NCLB were good, but not all kids can reach the same standards at the same time. And some kids will never meet the same standards as some of their peers. I think it's unfair to assume that they have to. I think that standard and high stakes are good ideas, but they need some major remodeling. It's a lot to ask a teacher to reach an unrealistic goal of getting everyone to pass these tests. I hope "they" look at the whole picture before condemning anyone of failure to do their job. There are always exceptions to the rules and there should be because some of the rules only pertain to a certain population. What's fair about that?
Tracy,
ReplyDeleteI also think that money gets to much attention when we hear about the issues our schools face. It's like they don't get it? How many times can we pour money into something and watch it fail before we try something else? Or implement other means of change/help along with the monetary solutions. It's the same thing as families. You can have a very well-to-do family that can monetarily provide whatever any family member may want or need, but educationally and emotionally may not have a clue how to provide for their kids. And we've all seen cases like this so many times. We've also seen the kid with nothing but the shirt on his back have all the love and support imaginable which made it possible for him to have self-worth and find success in life. Having a balance of both would be ideal, but it's NOT all one way or the other. It's a combo. People rely on money to fix everything and it's not always that simple. It's a waste is what it is.
Just a quick "gut-level" response to both Lindsey and Tracy's comments about $$$. For many, many years, I felt the same way - that teaching was rewarding in and of itself, that the pay isn't what lured me here in the first place. However (you knew that was coming:)), I do think that salaries are something that future teachers and youth workers should consider. Sure, it is gratifying to work with young people (and when it ceases to be, I'll find a new job). However, it certainly must be gratifying as a doctor to heal somebody who is ill. It must be gratifying for a lawyer to fight for someone's innocence; it must be gratifying for a mutual fund manager to take a client's money, invest it wisely, and make the client wealthier. Surely these are all gratifying activities. Yet, no one from those professions is suggesting that they get paid less for what they do.
ReplyDeleteLike Tracy says, I didn't get into this to get wealthy. I didn't. However, it is discouraging to me to see how we as a state decide how to spend our money. Even as a fanatical baseball fan, I am frustrated that we will be pouring millions of dollars into the new Target Field at the same time that we as citizens of this state are facing some really serious questions about how to fund the basics (education, health care, and so on). I admire Joe Mauer and Justin Morneau. They are very good at what they do. Are they worth millions and millions of dollars? I guess the "market" says that they are. What does the "market" say about my skills and talents? About yours?
Just sharing with you the chip on my shoulder . . . .
Kuhne....
ReplyDeleteYou are right. The market will define your worth. There's a line in the movie, "The Program" where the coach and the Dean of students are talking about the student athlete's. When the Dean asked the coach why the athlete should have special treatment over the student body, The coach responded by saying, "When's the last time 70,000 people watched a kid take a math exam"?
All skills are transferrable, yet some skills fetch a higher pay than others. Just as I can not hit a wicked curve ball, I would like to see Justin or Joe do the job some of the educators have done at MCTC. If anything, I think the "market" tells us not only to realize our worth, but not to be afraid to ask for our worth.
C.) I think that in many ways the money will improve U.S. education, however I don't necessarily believe that it will change things greatly. This is because teachers (as stated in the article) salary needs to be safe, which will account for $54 billion of the $100 billion. This is very good that so much is planned to go directly to staff since I believe they are what have the greatest effect on a student's education.
ReplyDeleteFocussing on the appropriate payment of "highly quaified teachers," rather than looking for a quick fix and sending in the least qualified staff to the schools that need the most help. I feel as though this will greatly improve the education provided to our Nation's children. It has been completely unfair to have provided superior services to those who need the most attention and I feel incredibly hopeful for out country's future.
Well that,s a yes and a no depending on how it's looked at. Yes all of that money would do wonders for buying new equipment and supplies for the students and teachers. But I also think it will take a hell of a lot more than a lot of money. I think it is up to the teachers to have a "will not lose" state of mind and to take the initiatve in any situation economic, personally, and socially to take the responsibility to be the best teacher they can be. There is no amount of money that can make a child feel as accepted and embraced as a teacher who is dedicated to helping mold a better future. Sure we all want to get paid but that is something that is priceless. Like Tracy said I really didn't get in this line of work to make money. I could do a number of different things to make money but it's the feeling I get when there is a troubled child who I have crossed paths with continues to seek my guidance. I wouldn't trade that for all the money in the world.
ReplyDeleteHaving read the New York Times editorial, do you think investing an additional $100 billion into education will make a difference and improve the education U. S. children experience? Why or why not?
ReplyDeleteSure, if the schools don't blow it. If states and schools can resist the temptation to spend the money on stuff that does not enhance education and raise achievement. If the governors of those states do not refuse stimulus money in a bid to be considered for the 2010 RNC nomination.
There are systemic problems in our school systems that have little to do with money. Racism is the prime factor in the achievement gap. Teachers who have no business in the middle of the ghetto are discriminating against kids every day. This is the major problem that I can see. Until non-WASP's are given the same treatment in school that their honky counterparts, we will not really see any improvements worth trumpeting. In Minnesota, only about 1/3rd of blacks graduate from high school, compared to about 3/4ths of whites. The reasons for this are evident as soon as you walk into a racially "integrated" school. Whites receive preferential treatment across the board. Black kids are treated as criminals if they wear baggy pants or a baseball cap, and the response to this is usually a police liaison officer, instead of a tutor or career counselor.
Is it any surprise that in a country ran by a criminal syndicate that lied about everything they could get away with, that those morals didn't "trickle-down" with the pennies and nickels to infect the lower structures of power? When a school superintendent is facing retribution for failing schools, and the example set by those in power is to deny the problem, or falsify results, or to simply lie, there is a very strong precedent to do the same thing on all levels. There is no way that a dishonest government could create honest schools. Hopefully, Arne Duncan (who seems like a really righteous dude), will end the era of lies and omission that have plagued our schools since 2002 (or 1776, depending on your viewpoint).