3 responses so far ↓

• 

  Anonymous // March 31, 2008 at 11:05 am

  NCLB has been a huge detriment to school systems. In the school in which I taught, there was a wonderful and very successful vocational training program for special ed students. Once these students were mainstreamed, the program was abandoned because staff could not be stretched any farther. The mainstreamed students gained nothing! They were incapable of keeping up with their peers in regular classroom settings, in spite of extra help from special ed teachers in the class. Frequently those with more severe disabilities were major disruptions in the classroom with a variety of outbursts of temper and screaming. They were not benefited with mainstream classes, and they had lost a very valuable training program. They proved to be a major distraction and disruption to other students and classroom teachers. No one at all benefited from the changes wrought by NCLB. If I were the parent of a special ed student, I would be screaming at the top of my lungs for what my student had lost in terms of attention and training. If I were the parent of a “normal” student, I would also be screaming because of what he/she had lost, in terms of time spent calming a disruptive student and the loss of a teacher’s ability to teach under such circumstances.
  Additionally, the various sub-sets of scores fail to recognize that there will not be significant growth among those who are severely limited, and yet it is these scores that are causing the title of “failing schools” to be applied to schools that are performing satisfactorily in all other areas. It appears that with only this fragment of NCLB, students and schools have been done a great disservice!

• 

  Doug Newman // April 4, 2008 at 6:28 am

  Is “testing” really what we need to determine if a child is on track academically or would a clearly defined curriculum/teaching plan that is shared with parents coupled with say regular 6-week assessments do the trick?

  What good do these tests provide for the student when test results come in months after the test? In today’s world of best practices, explain that one to me.

  The test results assess the student body on one particular day in time; so know what? What good is that piece of information? Why is it needed?

  Do we really need a state-wide test score to determine that a child is having trouble reading or that another is excelling in math (while TAG programs for those who do excel continue to get cut).

  Why is it that when I ask for a copy of the annual curriculum and lesson plan for my elementary aged child I’m looked at like I have three heads.

  I do largely support teachers and public education, however some teachers really have to be shown the door and the teacher union contracts run diametrically opposed to what the school district needs. Really, pick one up and read it…see for yourself what the unions negotiate for. (Great information on this topic FYI, (http://www.edpartnership.org/?id=1104).

  All the time and cost associated with “testing” provides marginal benefit for the child.

  It should not have to be this complicated folks. You can thank the politicians and unions.

  No wonder that the number of home-schooled children continues to increase daily.

• 

  Rufus Choate // April 5, 2008 at 4:26 pm

  We certainly need more rigorous testing for our overly expensive and failed government school systems and merit evaluations. We need complete PRIVATIZATION, School choice and Academic OUTSOURCING. The American Teaching Profession is an embarrassment to this great nation. Thank God for Private Schools or we would have a nation of illiterates.

Leave a Comment