U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
February 10, 2012 08:23 AM UTC

No Child Left Behind Gets Left Behind

  • 19 Comments
  • by: droll

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

(Apologies if I missed someone else covering this. I looked, but I’m not that bright.)

Colorado joins nine other states in opting out of NCLB for flexibility’s sake. In total, 29 other states, Puerto Rico and DC will be opting out with alternate plans.

The idea is that each state will set its own goal, surpassing the minimum standard of NCLB in different ways. For instance, lowering dropout rates, or increasing graduation rates in lieu of standardized tests.

Hilariously, some members of the GOP are upset and think that states cannot be trusted to set their own standards. Instead they suggest that the biggest brother knows best. On more local levels the scheme enjoys broad support, from Republican governors, to the National Education Association.

The biggest question is can the states be trusted to do better? Well, there is an upside in the wildly different experiences schools will have. It may not be the fairest to the students in less than spectacular states, but we should see what works and what doesn’t fairly quickly.

Although, specific successful reforms have a nasty way of being spun. It honestly just occurred to me that this could really fuel the charter v union fight. My hope is that we all work together to make our school system strong again, both in and outside of our own communities. I’m also partial to the idea of unicorns (aren’t they pretty in your imagination? I like them in moonlight best).

Anyway, here’s the President, a brief break down of the scheme and NCLB history. http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/09/…

Comments

19 thoughts on “No Child Left Behind Gets Left Behind

  1. I hope the CEA and other parties responsible for the new plan do a great job. I wish them well. Whatever they come up with couldn’t be much worse than what it’s replacing (knock on wood).

  2. First it made very public that some schools were doing a poor job. This has led to a lot of the pressure to improve schools.

    Second by breaking out be SES it made public how, even in good schools, many times subsets of the kids were not being well educated.

    Third, that public shaming of bad scores got school districts to step up and try hard to improve those poorly performing schools.

    1. I have seen proof of none of it. Those were the talking points when Bush sold us the bill of goods, but I’ve seen no research to say any of it was accomplished. I’ve talked to hundreds of educators over the past ten years, and every person I have talked to said nothing good about NCLB. In fact, a number of them left the profession because they felt it had created impossible work situations.

      I would seriously love to see some research backing up claims 2 and 3. As for pressure (claim number 1), where is there evidence that more pressure actually helped with long-term outcomes?

      1. Look at the test scores. They showed that even in high performing schools, most often kids from a poor SES had low scores. And over the years we saw many schools improve their results.

        NCLB had problems and needed to be improved as those problems became apparent. But it was a first good step.

            1. Many educators, parents and students hate those tests. Many of us feel they don’t represent actually learning. I want to know where the research is that says the tests actually reflect learning. I haven’t seen any.

              1. Widespread systemic cheating by teachers.

                Also, my point was not that NCLB fixed the schools. It’s that it publicized the problem. That districts then put in a lot more effort trying to improve poorly performing schools. And that in places we did gt improvement.

                If NCLB had fixed everything we wouldn’t need to improvement, we could instead celebrate a superb K-12 system.

                1. The part about the tests not reflecting actual learning is serious, though. Everyone who has been in the schools since NCLB knows teachers are forced to teach to the tests, rather than encourage their students to follow their curiosity, develop critical thinking skills, and challenge each other interactively. I think I have asked you this before, Dave — how much time have you spent volunteering in the schools in the past ten years? I think you would find, as I have, practically every teacher, and every parent who volunteers regularly, thinks CSAPS are a giant waste of precious classroom time.

                  1. I did a lot of room mom duty when my kids were in grade school. Form what I saw the teachers saw the CSAPs about he same as he kids saw end of the year finals – something that required prep but it did not drive the school year.

                    And yes, I’m sure the teachers would have preferred to not be measured. Accountability is uncomfortable.

            2. The one making the contention is the one obligated to back it up around here. If you haven’t seen any studies just say so. Even if you are basing your support entirely on scores only, not necessarily a universally agreed upon criteria, you’re the one obligated to come up with a link to them.

                1. Sometimes, in some schools, test scores go up, but how do you know the students are really learning, and not just being able to regurgitate material for the tests? Teachers spend a substantial amount of time giving the kids practice tests and practice questions. Teachers call it “teaching to the tests”. Most of them do not want to do it because the kids do not enjoy it, and because it misses the mark in many ways.

                  Dave, have you read any books on “Best Practices” in education? If you do, you will understand what I mean. Quality education that results in higher level thinking skills includes lessons that are hands-on, developmentally-appropriate, thematic rather than in isolation, collaborative rather than competitive, multi-sensory, and much more. There is an incredibly rich body of research that goes into teaching, and teaching well.

                  Teaching just the things that are known to be asked on the test is a low-level manner of educating, and gives only a superficial understanding of the material, not to mention, poor retention of what is learned.

                  When Barbara Bush came to Denver many years ago to sell NCLB, I was at her sales pitch. At the time, it sounded promising, but there was no additional funding to improve upon teaching methods or reduce student-teacher ratios. It wasn’t long before we learned Bush’s cronies had investments in the companies that provided the tests.

                  NCLB was flawed from the start. Improving education in America will require some societal sacrifices (better funding, more community involvement, teacher incentives, more time in class, lower student-teacher ratios, more team-teaching, and proven teaching methods based on pedagogical research). There are a number of countries which excel in public education and these are the things they are doing — not standardized testing with unfunded mandates.

                    1. how our students measure up in international comparisons and how much No Child left Behind and CSAP have contributed to any improvement over the years. A better solution might be to adapt practices and priorities that have proved effective in other systems such as that of Finland.  

                    2. we have comprehensive public education. There are a number of countries who only test those in the “academic” pre-college tracks. In many countries, kids are identified early as “vocational” students or pre-college, and their coursework goes off into two different directions. The vocational students are usually not tested using standardized tests. Not to mention that some countries drop-out rates are higher than ours, so the ones who make it to high school to take the tests are already pre-selected through attrition. Thus, international scores are often skewed against the US and countries like ours.

                    3. I think there would probably be value to some sort of compromise between a rigid tracking system that locks students in to one path or the other too soon and too tightly and an assumption that all students should ideally be on a university bound track.

                      There are vocations, some of them not easily out-sourced, that pay very favorably compared to what many university graduates find available with their degrees. Basic skills can be made  meaningful to students who don’t see themselves as on the university track if they can see them as, nevertheless, relevant to a satisfying, well paying job upon high school graduation.

                      As long as enough flexibility is maintained to allow for late bloomers and changes in direction, as opposed to the very rigid systems we see in some countries, I do think we need to get away from the idea that the goal is to prepare every student for that college education.   The high percentage of students who graduate high school needing remedial work upon entering college because they are, in fact, far from prepared, even with good grades and standing, demonstrates what a lack of success we are having in that regard in any case.  

                      That said, Finland, so often cited for success, apparently does so without an early, rigid tracking system, and the structure, including compulsory education only to 16 isn’t so different from our system in that respect since our system isn’t compulsory beyond that point either with many dropping out.  The difference is in the nature of the compulsory portion and the post-compulsory opportunities.

                      The Finnish education system is an egalitarian system, with no tuition fees and with free meals served to full-time students. The present Finnish education system consists of well-funded and carefully thought out daycare programs (for babies and toddlers) and a one-year “pre-school” (or kindergarten for six-year olds); a nine-year compulsory basic comprehensive school (starting at age seven and ending at the age of sixteen); post-compulsory secondary general academic and vocational education; higher education (University and Polytechnical); and adult (lifelong, continuing) education. The Nordic strategy for achieving equality and excellence in education has been based on constructing a publicly funded comprehensive school system without selecting, tracking, or streaming students during their common basic education.[1] Part of the strategy has been to spread the school network so that pupils have a school near their homes whenever possible or, if this is not feasible, e.g. in rural areas, to provide free transportation to more widely dispersed schools. Inclusive special education within the classroom and instructional efforts to minimize low achievement are also typical of Nordic educational systems.[1]

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

68 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!