<p>
</p>
<p>Please identify what these might be. [Don’t forget that each state, not the feds, sets its own standard for “proficiency.”]</p>
<p>cornfed:</p>
<p>You said it all better than I could. The only thing you left out is the part that makes me the most angry: the gender-based assault on Clinton by the media with the deafening sound of crickets from the Democratic Party.</p>
<p>I’m with your husband. I’m voting for someone with experience and a spine. If the Democrats can offer me that, fine. If they can’t, screw 'em. I’m not voting for any more Dukakis/Kerry types.</p>
<p>^^nope, that is incorrect. Indeed, many claim that is the exact failure of NCLB – the feds didn’t set any standard at all, just % proficiency levels – but the feds allowed the states do determine what is proficient. For example, one state could require Algebra I in 8th grade, but another could require it Senior year in HS; the feds don’t care - they just require that ALL students (including minoritiies) be proficient in whatever is taught. Suggest YOU do research instead of reading standard talking points.</p>
<p>From what I know where I live, each state was forced to adopt a set of “standards” and a set of guidelines as to what test score you needed to be said to have achieved various proficiency levels relative to the state standards. There is not only variety among the states as to the standards, different states use different end of year tests to determine if you’ve met them. A year ago TIME had a good discussion of what some of the issues were:</p>
<p>[How</a> to Fix No Child Left Behind - TIME](<a href=“http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1625192,00.html]How”>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1625192,00.html)</p>
<p>From the time article cited above:</p>
<p>"Federal law requires that students be tested annually to determine their reading and math skills but leaves it to each state to devise the exam. The result, critics say, is that some states make their tests easier so it appears that their students are doing well. The evidence: huge gaps between state results and scores on national standardized tests. State test results Percentage of fourth-graders scoring as proficient or better in reading Federal test results Percentage of fourth-graders scoring as proficient or better in reading</p>
<p>By its own count, Mississippi is tied for the best score in the country. But on the U.S. test, the state drops to 50th place—a whopping 71 points lower."</p>
<p>A lot of the controversy appears to come from the fact that the states vary so much in what they choose to require that it it hard to tell if anyone is making the progress they should.</p>
<p>I will see if I can find a cite to the Washington Post article.</p>
<p>The US test referred to is the NAEP, the National Assessment of Educational Progress.</p>
<p>Here’s the WashPo article:</p>
<p>[washingtonpost.com</a> - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines](<a href=“http://washingtonpost.com%5Dwashingtonpost.com”>http://washingtonpost.com)</p>
<p>It deals with the different results between the schools that use Reading First and the schools that don’t use it. No one is forced to use Reading First, but if you choose to use it, the feds give you grant money to help pay for it. All that’s rqd by NCLB is that the students score at a certain level on their reading tests. School districts can pursue that any way they want, but the feds encourage phonics by paying for Reading First. If a school district or state wants to use a different method, I’m pretty sure they can.</p>
<p>Actually, the score rqt is not a number per se, just (i think) that they want everyone reading on grade level by 3d or 4th grade. Not a bad goal, imho, although admittedly difficult to achieve.</p>
<p>Shoot. Checked my washpo link and it doesn’t go to the Reading First article. If you search for NCLB there is an article for May 3 that is about Reading First, a phonics based program that the federal govt will give grants to states to implement as part of NCLB. Don’t know why it wouldn’t link. Sorry.</p>
<p>AS far as education, I think everyone is missing the point. I worked in the field for @6 yrs, I left out of frustration. Our problem with education is not the teachers, but the fact that the govt does not realize it is a socio-economical issue.</p>
<p>How will children thrive and be a success if their parents are working 2 jobs and not home to help the child with homework? How is it that in almost every state there are parental rights for their childs education, but the teacher is blamed for the failure? My favorite 2 examples:</p>
<ol>
<li> Child in 1st grade missed every spelling test! Why? Because the mother pulled him out every Friday knowing he would fail it and had determined by doing so we wouldn’t fail him. He was so far behind we asked her to allow us to give him an IEP (Individualized Educational Plan) she refused, because she tied out hands we failed him…since 1st is not a gateway we were required to pass him when she refused to allow us to retain him. Needless to say he failed 2nd, got promoted and failed 3rd, which is a gateway, thus she lost her right to fight. Meanwhile he lost all motivation to attend school, became a disruption problem in the classroom and spent 3rd grade in the principal’s office.</li>
<li>A kindergartener in April had missed 58 days of school (60 is automatic retention), with no medical issue. I call one Friday and dad answers, I asked where is their son? Well, you see I am a painter and when it is raining I don’t work, so we sleep in.</li>
</ol>
<p>We need to stop asking teachers to swim with their hands tied and tell parents, if they spend more waking hours a day with us, than we have the last say. </p>
<p>We also need to go back to when I was younger, and my kids were little with giving them the Ohio and California exams, since every state did it, we had a national level. Now we are even seeing how this is pouring over into our collegiate world, because we allow these kids to take the test over and over and over again with no penalty (my day you took 2x, b/c on the 3rd they avg) I am now seeing scores of 750+ on each section…that is not realistic…what professor says go ahead keep retaking until you’re happy with your score? What boss is going to allow you to keep re-doing a project? This is also showing up with now the fact that the avg student graduates college in 5 yrs 9this does not add in mandated 5 yr programs)</p>
<p>When we grasp the fact that more parents are saying you will not single outmy childs flaws and make them realize that life is difficult, then we will be able to address the true educational problems. Yet, as long as we tie our hands and now use purple pens for correction, b/c it is not as threatening as red we are will never be successful in education. </p>
<p>The day a teacher can say to a parent this is my job, I have a degree in this do you without reprucussion is the day this country wil finally start having a true conversation about education! Then we will be able to turn the direction, but until then it is the parent who refuses to allow their child to be “labeled” (which the parent in their own mind) that has caused the real problem.</p>
<p>I only ask to those who will retort this post one question… are you helping them or hurting them when you do not acknowledge their problem, and are you not acknowledging it out of your own pride?</p>
<p>The ones that have acknowledge it actually have better students, the parents, teachers and school work together to make the child a success. When you can give them an IEP it is typically for only a few yrs, because they get so much 1 on 1 that they are able to learn how to handle their own issues instead of being lost among a sea of 25 -30 kids. </p>
<p>The difference also is teachers do talk, so the next teacher will look at the record and have a conference with the current teacher…Here is how it typically goes…they are a really sweet kid, but Mom and Dad refuse to believe there is anything wrong with them, I have, and Teacher XXX before asked for an IEP, but they won’t do it, so you’ll just have to deal with it…SORRY …great motivation for a college educated person who in NC only makes @30K!</p>
<p>It also works this way: The parents are great, the child is sweet, they will support you, child X has been through IEP evaluation, but doesn’t make the quals for an IEP, they are really the best, you might just want to keep an eye on this, and if you see a problem call the folks! </p>
<p>Which parent will the teacher call first? Which child will they give more leeway to? Which child will they keep fighting to get them on the right track?
Typically the latter parent has been an involved parent (economic issue, since the min. wage person is working 2 jobs to stay a float). The latter person is most likely also more educated, thus the socio aspect</p>
<p>Now as far as Wrights comments about African Americans learning differently…that is bull***** unless he is willing to prove to me that African Americans heart pumps differently also! Is he saying that African Americans have different brain composition? Yet, what I think he meant was the situations I posed, giving excuses based on socio-economical issues…again it is to him the Teachers faults due to the govt., and not the parents fault for not being involved! G*D I love Bill Cosby, he laid it out there and took a lot of heat, but at least he was trying to do something positive and motivational instead of blaming everyone else for the problem</p>
<p>doctormom:</p>
<p>sry, didn’t mean to insult, but to educate. Personally, I’ve already done a lot of research on NCLB. Mercymom and the Post got it right in post 342.</p>
<p>btw: still awaiting examples of your assertion about “unrealistic guidelnes.”</p>
<p>i-dad:</p>
<p>There will be a reckoning I assure you over the unbelievable gender bias come november. The idea that Clinton be demanded to drop out by Dodd, Richardson etc. ,two unbelievable losers, when no man ever was told to when they were hundreds of delegates down will not be forgotten.</p>
<p>Of course this is part and parcel of the dismissal of voters like you & I i-dad. You see the AA,kids and"educated" voters will get Obama elected, don’t you know?</p>
<p>Got reality?</p>
<p>“There will be a reckoning I assure you over the unbelievable gender bias come november.”</p>
<p>What kind of reckoning? Alternative female write-ins?</p>
<p>As to the educated voters that you put it quotation marks, It just could be that</p>
<p>they… get… tired…of …being…spoken …to …as…if…they’re …</p>
<p>in…cre…dib…ly un…e…du…ca…ted (by Hillary Clinton)</p>
<p>(Yes, even the words get broken down by syllables when she speaks. Please!)</p>
<p>Maybe this is her ESL approach, but it doesn’t fully cut it with educated voters.</p>
<p>I don’t understand why peopel keep on saying that educated people are for Obama. I know a lot of educated people (a lot of them with PhD in economics) who don’t support Obama. I have studied their policies and Obama does not provide any new progressive ideas at all. </p>
<p>After all the research that I have done on Obama, I can’t vote for him for anything.</p>
<p>In one of his mails to Oregon, he told them how he was going to help protect the great lakes. This can be an honest mistake, but if you are going to send something out at least you should do your homework.</p>
<p>I agree completely, epiphany. After eight years of having a bumble-mouthed moron in the White House, I’m craving someone brilliant, intellectual, well-spoken, calm and cerebral. Yes, Obama has some issues of his own, but nothing deserving of the hateful bile spewed all over him in this thread. Clinton, who I’ve always liked, has run a sad, fear-mongering, generally revolting campaign. And yes, when this extremely smart, well-educated woman gets up on stage and pretends she’s just one of the “good 'ol gals,” well, I for one, find it offensive.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hindoo, this is why the Democrats don’t win the White House. A lot of people will want to have a beer with Bush, but I don’t think those same people would want to have caviar and quiche with John Kerry. If you are serving the people you have to be seen as one of them, the moment they sense an aura of elitism arround you they wont vote for you.</p>
<p>The Republican Party, which I think has more elitists than the Democratic party, has mastered the art of being like the common folks. It’s no wonder that they controlled the white house for a lot longer than the other party for the last couple of decades. The leaders of the Democratic Party are seen as elitist and out of touch with the people.</p>
<p>I’ve quietly observed these past few days while various posters slammed Obama over and over again with increasing venom. Well, we all have our opinions, and a right to them, I might add. Here’s mine. I’m a middled-aged, educated, middle-class caucasian woman from the “heartland” who plans to vote for Obama. I do not believe that he is a racist, an Islamic terrorist, an elitist who despises the working class, an uninformed lightweight, a spineless jellyfish, or a rabid idealogue who would jeapodarize our safety, deliberately or out of incompetence. OK, let the attacks begin.</p>
<p>tega, Unfortunately, you have a point. I’ve always wondered why Americans would rather have an evil moron (Bush) they could hoist a beer with rather than a president who was actually intelligent and thoughtful. It wasn’t always this way. FDR would never be elected today because he wouldn’t have been able to play the clown well enough to satisfy the masses.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Crazy, isn’t it? By any measure, the Republicans carry the water of elite interests.</p>
<p>It just goes to show how politically brain-dead the Democrats really are. They just love cerebral, detached, aloof snobbish candidates that any decent opponent can lampoon up one side and down the other.</p>
<p>I don’t think I have slammed Obama, I have presented some of the reasons why I don’t support him, and I think they are very legitimate reasons. They all deal with the issues that are important to me.</p>
<p>No, interesteddad. I’m not politically brain-dead. I’m just scared to freaking death–with the extremely low standards America seems to set for its successful presidential material–that we’ll continue to have Bush-like presidencies for the foreseeable future. Maybe when we’re so diminished in the world’s eyes, so bankrupted by our immoral, endless wars, and on a par with a Third World country, people will wake up and stop lampooning those pathetic “aloof, snobbish” candidates who might have actually made things better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Look at the candidates the Dems threw against Bush.</p>
<p>In 2000, Gore had the charisma of a wooden Indian and a braintrust that decided it would be brilliant to distance him from a two-term Democratic President with a country at peace, a strong economy, and a budget surplus.</p>
<p>We don’t even need to talk about John Kerry. Certainly the worst candidate since Mike Dukakis. Maybe the worst candidate in history. People in Massachusetts can’t even stand the guy.</p>