Anonymous wrote:

History has already shown that this "let states and locals handle it" has never worked out well in the past toward improving math and language literacy, not to mention being massively more expensive, considering it costs tens of millions for a state or major school district to roll out standards and curriculum individually, multiplied by 50 for each state plus add multipliers of hundreds more for each of the major school districts as well.

History has shown that it doesn't cost tens of millions of dollars unless the fed is doing it.

WRONG! You obviously have no clue how much state standards and curriculum development costs. It was TYPICAL for a state to spend upwards of $50 million developing state standards. And then many school districts would go ahead and develop their own standards on top of that, which would cost additional millions.

Anonymous wrote:

As for government efficiency, how about Medicare - 2% overhead costs as compared to 30, 40, 50% overhead costs anywhere comparable.

Suggest that you try to find a doctor who takes Medicare these days. If you are not already a patient, good luck with that.

There are lots of doctors who do.

Reality check: What Medicare pays is far more in line with what the rest of the world pays. There's an inordinate amount of grotesque profiteering going on in the medical sector, no reason why routine procedures like MRIs have to cost triple, quadruple, 10 and 20 times more than they do in other countries, given it's the exact same equipment, exact same procedure, exact same level of training...

Doctors that whine about Medicare or who reject patients are greedy, selfish, whiny profiteering pricks who probably have no business being in healthcare, PERIOD!

There was a huge change in teaching before and after NCLB. Should there be? NO. Is it required? NO. it is just the law of unintended consequences. When job depends on test results, the test becomes the focus. Kids should be the focus.

^^ I forgot to add. I'm not a Republican in case someone assumes my complaint is politically grounded.

It was better before NCLB. Why? Because teaching was authentic. It came from the teacher, and teachers felt trusted to do their job instead of surveilled and monitored and punished if some numbers didn't meet expectation. And school wasn't an exploitation of children to perform for nothing but the reputation and job security of teachers, principals, administrators, etc. I moved here from a long stint in another country and witnessed a huge difference in elementary due to NCLB. Here I found kids who were stressed and under pressure to perform due to NCLB, and the teacher and administrator stress and pressure to push and manipulate children throughout the year to do so was visible and palpable. And the kids seemed to have so much less fun learning and being at school than where I was previously. NCLB is a terrible idea, is harmful to the learning experience (and I'm not just talking about time wasted on tests), and a waste of money.

History has already shown that this "let states and locals handle it" has never worked out well in the past toward improving math and language literacy, not to mention being massively more expensive, considering it costs tens of millions for a state or major school district to roll out standards and curriculum individually, multiplied by 50 for each state plus add multipliers of hundreds more for each of the major school districts as well.

History has shown that it doesn't cost tens of millions of dollars unless the fed is doing it.

The most local level is the family and they need to be empowered to educate the children. The next most local levels need to be the most empowered because they can accomplish the most. The feds can't do much except require standards and tests to "monitor" things and complain that the locals are not up to snuff. If that is helpful, go figure. Ask any student or parent what has been most helpful in their education and the answer won't be "standards" or "standardized tests". Guaranteed.

Anonymous wrote:
History has already shown that this "let states and locals handle it" has never worked out well in the past toward improving math and language literacy, not to mention being massively more expensive, considering it costs tens of millions for a state or major school district to roll out standards and curriculum individually, multiplied by 50 for each state plus add multipliers of hundreds more for each of the major school districts as well.



Sorry, it has worked in the past. What makes you think the feds can do it better? Do you really believe the feds will do it cheaper? Why don't you start by looking at the VA.


If it "worked in the past" we wouldn't today be stuck with tons of millennials who can barely make change, who can barely construct a coherent sentence, and who can't even find the Pacific Ocean on a world map.

As for government efficiency, how about Medicare - 2% overhead costs as compared to 30, 40, 50% overhead costs anywhere comparable.

Again, you are on the losing side of that argument.

It did work in the past. Very well. And it works very well for many, many today. Maybe you are hitting on something with the "millennials" who are not up to speed. Maybe something else changed for this generation. Or maybe you are just an oldster who does not see the greatness of the millennials. They are not necessarily having problems because of the things you are citing. They are having problems because the economy sucks.

As for government efficiency, how about Medicare - 2% overhead costs as compared to 30, 40, 50% overhead costs anywhere comparable.

Suggest that you try to find a doctor who takes Medicare these days. If you are not already a patient, good luck with that.

Anonymous wrote:

History has already shown that this "let states and locals handle it" has never worked out well in the past toward improving math and language literacy, not to mention being massively more expensive, considering it costs tens of millions for a state or major school district to roll out standards and curriculum individually, multiplied by 50 for each state plus add multipliers of hundreds more for each of the major school districts as well.

Sorry, it has worked in the past. What makes you think the feds can do it better? Do you really believe the feds will do it cheaper? Why don't you start by looking at the VA.

If it "worked in the past" we wouldn't today be stuck with tons of millennials who can barely make change, who can barely construct a coherent sentence, and who can't even find the Pacific Ocean on a world map.

As for government efficiency, how about Medicare - 2% overhead costs as compared to 30, 40, 50% overhead costs anywhere comparable.

Again, you are on the losing side of that argument.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another huge elephant in the room is poverty and shipping jobs overseas. Lift people out of poverty and scores will go up...but need to give it some time.

And the best way to reduce offshoring and reduce poverty is by making kids more employable. And the way that happens is that you give them BETTER math and literacy skills, not by bitching about and watering down / getting rid of standards.

The world is getting MORE complex, not less. It's getting HARDER to get hired, not easier. This is why we need to RAISE the bar, not lower it.

Actually, if your goal is reducing poverty, I think it's much more effective to actually address poverty directly, here and now, rather than to raise educational standards in the hope that this will make poor children more employable some day in the future.

But evidently actually addressing poverty directly is yet another thing that we used to be able to do in America but now can no longer do.

What do you mean, "directly address poverty?" and "we used to be able to do in America" - we never "directly addressed poverty" other than a.) handouts which solve nothing longterm (again, give a man a fish vs. teach a man to fish) or b.) stimulus and job creation (ARRA, WPA) - but your whole problem there is that our Republican controlled Congress thinks it's more important to spend money on foreign wars and wasting hundreds of billions of dollars US military equipment rotting in far flung Arab sand pits than they do on putting people to work here in the US to fix our crumbling roads, bridges, et cetera.

History has already shown that this "let states and locals handle it" has never worked out well in the past toward improving math and language literacy, not to mention being massively more expensive, considering it costs tens of millions for a state or major school district to roll out standards and curriculum individually, multiplied by 50 for each state plus add multipliers of hundreds more for each of the major school districts as well.

Sorry, it has worked in the past. What makes you think the feds can do it better? Do you really believe the feds will do it cheaper? Why don't you start by looking at the VA.

Anonymous wrote:I suggest two improvements:
Eliminate testing requirement in NCLB.
Eliminate Common Core--but that is up to the states.

1. As for eliminating NCLB, what do you propose to replace it with, because there still needs to be some consistent way of assessing academic achievement.

2. States already have the power to reject Common Core if they want to. There is no law or mandate forcing them to use it. So sorry, there won't be any idiotic Ted Cruz Green Eggs and Ham filibuster over it no matter how much you just love that shit. But ask yourself, where will the money come from for them to transition to something else? The feds won't step up to provide those funds, particularly now that your GOP buddies are out to kill Dept of Ed. And will the "something else" truly be better? You have no evidence to support that it will, particularly so given you have not come up with any alternative to replace it with.

And look, bottom line is that I'm really sick of all of this "repeal Common Core repeal NCLB" bullshit. How about coming up with a proposal FIRST. You don't just knock the foundation out from under a building without first propping it up and coming up with a means for replacing it. If you don't have a REAL PROPOSAL other than "just get rid of it" then you have NOTHING TO OFFER. And NOTHING is not a solution.

Anonymous wrote:

Why get rid of it? And if you get rid of it, what do you propose replacing it with?

Not PP--leave it up to the states or local boards.

History has already shown that this "let states and locals handle it" has never worked out well in the past toward improving math and language literacy, not to mention being massively more expensive, considering it costs tens of millions for a state or major school district to roll out standards and curriculum individually, multiplied by 50 for each state plus add multipliers of hundreds more for each of the major school districts as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So you are giving academics a short schrift in favor of soft skills. Well, if you think DCPS has historically been doing a good job of teaching kids soft skills then you are sorely mistaken there as well! Witnessed a whole bunch of shoving, yelling and a fight on a city bus just this morning! SORELY mistaken.

You saw kids behaving badly on a city bus this morning, and this proves that the public schools are failing? Really?

That's in response to the PP who is defending shitty academics by saying it's more important for schools to teach students soft skills. But obviously the kids aren't learning the soft skills either.