Anonymous wrote:
The testing requirement hasn't changed, so that answer doesn't make sense.
Go back a few posts: It is a suggestion of how to improve it. Get rid of NCLB testing requirement. That's step one.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
So your idea is to go back to every state having its own set of standards? Why would this be an improvement?
Because the states are closer to their own issues.
Their own issues of, for example, how and when to teach fractions? Why would this be different in Alabama than in North Dakota?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
So your idea is to go back to every state having its own set of standards? Why would this be an improvement?
Because the states are closer to their own issues.
Less unwieldy--more easily changed when there are problems. We have state governments for a reason.
Well, we can test this empirically, because the states already did all have their own sets of standards. How did that work out? Did the states have high-quality standards? Did they fix the standards when there were problems? And how much money did it cost the states to all develop their own sets of standards?
The testing requirement hasn't changed, so that answer doesn't make sense.
Anonymous wrote:
Well, we can test this empirically, because the states already did all have their own sets of standards. How did that work out? Did the states have high-quality standards? Did they fix the standards when there were problems? And how much money did it cost the states to all develop their own sets of standards?
Better than they are now with all the testing, that's for sure.
Well, we can test this empirically, because the states already did all have their own sets of standards. How did that work out? Did the states have high-quality standards? Did they fix the standards when there were problems? And how much money did it cost the states to all develop their own sets of standards?
Anonymous wrote:
So your idea is to go back to every state having its own set of standards? Why would this be an improvement?
Because the states are closer to their own issues.
Less unwieldy--more easily changed when there are problems. We have state governments for a reason.
So your idea is to go back to every state having its own set of standards? Why would this be an improvement?
Because the states are closer to their own issues.
Anonymous wrote:
So your idea is to go back to every state having its own set of standards? Why would this be an improvement?
Because the states are closer to their own issues.
So your idea is to go back to every state having its own set of standards? Why would this be an improvement?
Anonymous wrote:And replace the Common Core with what? NCLB also requires states to have standards.
And, states had standards before CC and they will have them when it is eliminated. State can use the CC standards if they like--but it will be LOTS easier to eliminate the crappy ones.
And replace the Common Core with what? NCLB also requires states to have standards.
Anonymous wrote:Answer: get rid of both Common Core and NCLB testing requirement.
Problem solved.
Spend the buckets of money on extra help for underachieving schools.
Answer: get rid of both Common Core and NCLB testing requirement.
Problem solved.
Spend the buckets of money on extra help for underachieving schools.
If you got rid of Common Core and NCLB, the first thing that would go away along with it would be the money.
Didn't say get rid of NCLB--just the testing requirement.
Money on a bad program like Common Core is a waste.