^ The problem in the past with little accountability was that teachers/educators were "passing" kids that were illiterate. Kids were graduating HS with only being able to read/write at a grade school level, if even that. Without the accountability, it is difficult to root out such teachers/educators. It's not just some teachers that were doing this, but Principals were also allowing it. So, how would you stop this from happening without some kind of standardized testing?

Sure, it's fine to not necessarily tie a teacher's pay to the testing, but we do need *some* kind of standardized testing to measure how well a kid is doing over the years.

Jesus fucking Christ. YES, it's a threat, and obviously you've never worked a day in the private sector because out in the real world you DO get fired for failure. Failure should be dealt with. But it hasn't. Millions of kids all around the country are graduating from high school unable to make change, unable to use proper grammar or put together a coherent sentence, unable to point out the Pacific Ocean on a world map, unable to discern whether Abraham Lincoln was one of the Founding Fathers or not. This has been going on for the last couple of decades, and it was NOT dealt with. What IS your proposal? What IS your fix? You've already had decades to deal with it, but you've come up empty. People like you need to take off your rosy colored glasses and get a serious reality check.

Okay. First let's calm down. You don't have to get my attention by saying "Jesus fucking Christ" (because I don't think he was).

Second, I have worked in both the private sector and the public sector. I am currently a teacher and I happen to teach kids who have been deemed "failures". I deal with "failure" every day. It IS being dealt with despite your contention that it is not being dealt with.

Third, I need a source for your claim that "millions of kids are graduating from high school unable to make change, unable to use proper grammar, etc." I honestly think that lots of people are not graduating from high school (the rate I saw nationwide is a 40% drop out rate). The 40% drop out rate signals to me that there are some standards. Lots of students are not getting through high school. In fact, there are barrier tests to graduation in every state that I know about.

I don't think I need a reality check since I see these kids every day (ages 15-21).

My proposal is to attract good teachers by making this a true profession again. By that I mean that teachers should be able to diagnose student needs, use their professional knowledge to meet those needs, and not be threatened when students don't perform and it is not their fault (and, believe it or not, this happens). Teachers should be free to ask for help and get it without fear of retaliation. Teachers should not work in untenable conditions (high class size and too many students, many of whom have learning disabilities or do not speak English). The students deserve attention and there should be money to pay for that.

Maybe you don't like my ideas to make education better. Maybe your high stakes testing idea (which is an old idea now) will work the next time around. But I doubt it.

And just one more thing . . . yes, this is not the private sector and we should not make it into the private sector. The private sector is not inherently superior to the public sector and something to be lauded as such. They are two separate and distinct sectors because (gasp) they are DIFFERENT from each other (in many, many ways). If you threaten teachers with removal if they don't do X or Y, they will do X or Y and they will become the robots that you want them to be. But you will raise a generation that does X or Y really well and not much else.

Finally, we need to value the unique assets of each of our teachers and let them pass those on in their classrooms. This kind of diversity in teaching and learning makes America strong.

Anonymous wrote:

and if a school is failing its students they need to either bolster their program or let someone else handle it. That's MY deep sentiment

This is the scary part. You are threatening by using these words. You are asking for a punitive action to be taken. You are not saying, "We want to understand why the failures are occurring and find solutions that are appropriate to a given situation or given circumstances." You are sending the message "Do what we tell you to do or we will fire you." Guess what outcome you are going to get by continuing with this strategy? Hint: You are seeing the outcome now.

Jesus fucking Christ. YES, it's a threat, and obviously you've never worked a day in the private sector because out in the real world you DO get fired for failure. Failure should be dealt with. But it hasn't. Millions of kids all around the country are graduating from high school unable to make change, unable to use proper grammar or put together a coherent sentence, unable to point out the Pacific Ocean on a world map, unable to discern whether Abraham Lincoln was one of the Founding Fathers or not. This has been going on for the last couple of decades, and it was NOT dealt with. What IS your proposal? What IS your fix? You've already had decades to deal with it, but you've come up empty. People like you need to take off your rosy colored glasses and get a serious reality check.

If a school sucks, there should be no accountability?

If your proof that the school sucks is based on test scores, that is a serious problem and indicates that you have no clue.

and if a school is failing its students they need to either bolster their program or let someone else handle it. That's MY deep sentiment

This is the scary part. You are threatening by using these words. You are asking for a punitive action to be taken. You are not saying, "We want to understand why the failures are occurring and find solutions that are appropriate to a given situation or given circumstances." You are sending the message "Do what we tell you to do or we will fire you." Guess what outcome you are going to get by continuing with this strategy? Hint: You are seeing the outcome now.

If a school sucks, there should be no accountability? Whether it's the feds or the state or local should make zero difference, the distinction people keep trying to make there is bullshit as we live in an era of globalization, where tailoring education by locality is not particularly relevant or, for that matter, appropriate - there absolutely does need to be accountability, and if a school is failing its students they need to either bolster their program or let someone else handle it. That's MY deep sentiment - I DO NOT want our kids to be failed by the schools. FIX it, don't just pretend there's no problem and everything's fine and complain about intrusion.

Of course there are problems. What those problems are, how they have arisen, and how to solve them are all questions worth discussing. Nobody wants our kids to be "failed by the schools" if, in fact, that is the institution in society that is failing them.

If you look at where there are good schools (the "non failing" ones), there are usually parents and community holding those schools accountable (and that is why the schools are good). That is also why private schools are generally good and not "failing". What I contend is that the problems go way beyond "standards and tests" and that by focusing on "standards and tests" a whole lot of solutions are being left behind. And, I don't agree that it doesn't matter whether it's the feds or state or local. Responsibility for children starts at home and then goes out to the community. The feds are pretty much last on the chain. I don't care how "global" we are; the smallest social unit---the family---is the most important one in all ways. The community has a big interest in making the kids successful because the local economy depends on having skilled workers in practically all regions of America. We don't have a whole lot of unskilled areas left. I don't think the feds are the only level concerned about the kids. Most families and communities are very, very concerned (and if they are not, there is little the feds can do).

Anonymous wrote:

Where on earth are you getting all that? There's *NO* fed takeover of schools, they aren't forcing closures or privatization, nor are they forcing firings of teachers of busing of kids, et cetera. Holy shit.

NCLB included "sanctions" for schools that were underperforming. There were not federal takeovers, but schools were forced to give kids "choice" to move to a different school and schools were forced to hire tutors. This all cost money at the local level. There were districts where boundaries were changed and schools were closed in order to increase scores (so that the punitive rules of NCLB could be avoided). The federal government did influence those things even if they were not the ones actually "on the ground". The fed's fingerprints are there. I have no idea why the feds would want to put themselves "out there" again. I did notice that NCLB was never mentioned in the last two elections (and Obama sure as heck wasn't going to bring it up in the SOTU). There is nothing positive to say about this stuff. It is totally divisive and nobody wants to touch it. They'd rather talk about immigration (and that tells you a lot).

Teachers definitely feel threatened by the requirement that their evaluations be linked to "standardized tests".
This country has done better than other countries precisely because we have not been "standardized" or "centralized". We have been free to pursue different ideas that work for different parts of the country. As much as the pro CC people will say that this is all not a big deal (the CC), it is definitely an area that the feds were not involved in before and any effort like this is going to be viewed as an intrusion. Nobody wants to cede control to a far away federal government agency (look at Washington state). Maybe it's not good to try to tame the "wild west". Don't kill the frontier spirit. That is a pretty strong current in parts of America and many people believe that America is being killed by the quashing of its individualism. This is a deep sentiment for many and will be hard to assuage with saying "take off your tinfoil hat". Of course this is an emotional issue. You are challenging what people believe it means to be American.

If a school sucks, there should be no accountability? Whether it's the feds or the state or local should make zero difference, the distinction people keep trying to make there is bullshit as we live in an era of globalization, where tailoring education by locality is not particularly relevant or, for that matter, appropriate - there absolutely does need to be accountability, and if a school is failing its students they need to either bolster their program or let someone else handle it. That's MY deep sentiment - I DO NOT want our kids to be failed by the schools. FIX it, don't just pretend there's no problem and everything's fine and complain about intrusion.

The regs gave schools a certain amount of latitude and did not prescribe a specific thing that forced disaster.


So, if the locals "screwed up" (whatever that means---I'm guessing low test scores), are the feds prepared to send their people in and take over the local schools? Or will they just force the locals to close schools, have private "takeovers", fire teachers, bus kids, and/or hire tutoring services (some of which NCLB did)? Are the feds prepared to pay for all of that or will the locals have to jack their taxes to do it?

Don't look for too much "love" from the locals. Don't look for their votes either.


Where on earth are you getting all that? There's *NO* fed takeover of schools, they aren't forcing closures or privatization, nor are they forcing firings of teachers of busing of kids, et cetera. Holy shit. You must be one of those wacky people who also believes in FEMA concentration camps and UN Agenda 21, with that kind of talk, you're seriously off the deep end.

Those were rhetorical questions. I was trying to expose the stupidity of all the regulations. There is no way to enforce the new CC or the teacher evaluation mandate. Look, they have been giving waivers to NCLB so now we are all primed for waivers on CC testing when that doesn't work out. What is the purpose of linking teacher evaluations to testing? Even if tests are put out there, people are becoming numb to so much testing. They realize that there is no real benefit to the testing. The students do not take them seriously anymore. The districts are starting to see that the emperor has no clothes as well. The feds are only going to make themselves look weaker and undermine whatever they are trying to do (what ARE they trying to do anyway?). There is no clear purpose to all of it (oh, except we will be able to compare states to each other). States are all different in many, many ways. What does it all help us to do?

^^^^^+1000

Teachers definitely feel threatened by the requirement that their evaluations be linked to "standardized tests".
This country has done better than other countries precisely because we have not been "standardized" or "centralized". We have been free to pursue different ideas that work for different parts of the country. As much as the pro CC people will say that this is all not a big deal (the CC), it is definitely an area that the feds were not involved in before and any effort like this is going to be viewed as an intrusion. Nobody wants to cede control to a far away federal government agency (look at Washington state). Maybe it's not good to try to tame the "wild west". Don't kill the frontier spirit. That is a pretty strong current in parts of America and many people believe that America is being killed by the quashing of its individualism. This is a deep sentiment for many and will be hard to assuage with saying "take off your tinfoil hat". Of course this is an emotional issue. You are challenging what people believe it means to be American.

You must be one of those wacky people who also believes in FEMA concentration camps and UN Agenda 21, with that kind of talk, you're seriously off the deep end.

I have no idea what FEMA concentration camps and UN Agenda 21 are. They sound wacky.

Where on earth are you getting all that? There's *NO* fed takeover of schools, they aren't forcing closures or privatization, nor are they forcing firings of teachers of busing of kids, et cetera. Holy shit.

NCLB included "sanctions" for schools that were underperforming. There were not federal takeovers, but schools were forced to give kids "choice" to move to a different school and schools were forced to hire tutors. This all cost money at the local level. There were districts where boundaries were changed and schools were closed in order to increase scores (so that the punitive rules of NCLB could be avoided). The federal government did influence those things even if they were not the ones actually "on the ground". The fed's fingerprints are there. I have no idea why the feds would want to put themselves "out there" again. I did notice that NCLB was never mentioned in the last two elections (and Obama sure as heck wasn't going to bring it up in the SOTU). There is nothing positive to say about this stuff. It is totally divisive and nobody wants to touch it. They'd rather talk about immigration (and that tells you a lot).

Teachers definitely feel threatened by the requirement that their evaluations be linked to "standardized tests".
This country has done better than other countries precisely because we have not been "standardized" or "centralized". We have been free to pursue different ideas that work for different parts of the country. As much as the pro CC people will say that this is all not a big deal (the CC), it is definitely an area that the feds were not involved in before and any effort like this is going to be viewed as an intrusion. Nobody wants to cede control to a far away federal government agency (look at Washington state). Maybe it's not good to try to tame the "wild west". Don't kill the frontier spirit. That is a pretty strong current in parts of America and many people believe that America is being killed by the quashing of its individualism. This is a deep sentiment for many and will be hard to assuage with saying "take off your tinfoil hat". Of course this is an emotional issue. You are challenging what people believe it means to be American.

Anonymous wrote:

The regs gave schools a certain amount of latitude and did not prescribe a specific thing that forced disaster.

So, if the locals "screwed up" (whatever that means---I'm guessing low test scores), are the feds prepared to send their people in and take over the local schools? Or will they just force the locals to close schools, have private "takeovers", fire teachers, bus kids, and/or hire tutoring services (some of which NCLB did)? Are the feds prepared to pay for all of that or will the locals have to jack their taxes to do it?

Don't look for too much "love" from the locals. Don't look for their votes either.

Where on earth are you getting all that? There's *NO* fed takeover of schools, they aren't forcing closures or privatization, nor are they forcing firings of teachers of busing of kids, et cetera. Holy shit. You must be one of those wacky people who also believes in FEMA concentration camps and UN Agenda 21, with that kind of talk, you're seriously off the deep end.

Anonymous wrote:

Kids walk at 9 months and at 18 months. Both are totally normal. We've now decided as a nation the academic eqivalent that all kids need to walk at 9 months, or they are "failures" who don't have enough "grit."

According to the people on the Maryland Public Schools forum, the Common Core standards are the academic equivalent of all kids needing to be able to walk by 24 months.

Anonymous wrote:
One of the huge problems with NCLB and standards based outcome education is that the focus is on a certain bar (what people call the "standards"). Those way under the bar and those way over the bar lose out. The teacher is forced to try to maximize the number of students getting to the bar because the tests are high stakes. Anybody way under or way over is placed in second priority status. If too many are way under, you get the drill and kill, teaching testing strategies, and ultimately cheating in some schools. We need to start teaching kids where they are and moving them ahead. Timetables with associated tests are not useful (especially in K-6).

Great post. There's this assumption that if we just throw up a bunch of standards, everyone will rise to the occasion! That's not how this works, at all. All the federal regulations undercut any flexibility and are the undoing of the standards over the long haul.

Kids walk at 9 months and at 18 months. Both are totally normal. We've now decided as a nation the academic eqivalent that all kids need to walk at 9 months, or they are "failures" who don't have enough "grit."