This was inevitable given how Congress wrote the law.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41992391/ns/us_news-life/
Quote82 percent of US schools may be labeled 'failing'
Affected schools will face sanctions ranging from offering tutoring to closing their doors
By CHRISTINE ARMARIO, DORIE TURNER
The Associated Press
updated 3/9/2011 7:35:40 PM ET 2011-03-10T00:35:40
The number of schools labeled as "failing" under the nation's No Child Left Behind Act could skyrocket dramatically this year, Education Secretary Arne Duncan said Wednesday.
The Department of Education estimates the percentage of schools not meeting yearly targets for their students' proficiency in in math and reading could jump from 37 to 82 percent as states raise standards in attempts to satisfy the law's mandates.
The 2002 law requires states to set targets aimed at having all students proficient in math and reading by 2014, a standard now viewed as wildly unrealistic.
"No Child Left Behind is broken and we need to fix it now," Duncan said in a statement. "This law has created a thousand ways for schools to fail and very few ways to help them succeed."
Duncan presented the figures at a House education and work force committee hearing, in urging lawmakers to rewrite the Bush-era act. Both Republicans and Democrats agree the law needs to be reformed, though they disagree on issues revolving around the federal role of education and how to turn around failing schools.
A surge in schools not meeting annual growth targets could have various implications. The most severe consequences — interventions that could include closure or replacing staff — would be reserved for those schools where students have been failing to improve for several consecutive years.
Obama talks education in Boston
Duncan said the law has done well in shining a light on achievement gaps among minority and low-income students, as well as those who are still learning English or have disabilities. But he said the law is loose on goals and narrow on how schools achieve them.
"We should get out of the business of labeling schools as failures and create a new law that is fair and flexible, and focused on the schools and students most at risk," Duncan said.
Russ Whitehurst, director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institute, said some states and districts have dug themselves into a hole by expected greater gains in the final years.
"The reality is coming home that you can't essentially demonstrate very little progress for ten years and then expect all of your progress to occur in the last two or three years," Whitehurst said.
He said some states believed improvement would accelerate as students advanced, creating a "snowball effect," while others put off the heavy lifting to avoid the consequences.
Daria Hall, Education Trust's K-12 policy director, said it was also important to distinguish between schools that don't meet the annual growth benchmark for one year, versus those who have failed to do so for two consecutive years and are labeled as being "in need of improvement."
Read more school coverage on NBC's Education Nation
Both distinctions could mean vastly different outcomes in terms of how many schools are subject to which interventions. The Department of Education was not able to provide data breaking down how many of the 82 percent would be failing to meet yearly goals for one year, versus consecutive years.
Hall said there are many ways states can meet their annual achievement benchmarks, and questioned whether the 82 percent figure took them all into consideration. Amy Wilkins, Education Trust's vice president for government affairs and communications, also noted that schools which are struggling are given various options — contesting Duncan's assessment that the law is tight on means and loose on goals.
"There is an objective finish line with annual finish line targets for everybody," Wilkins said.
Paul Manna, a professor focusing on education policy at the College of William & Mary, noted that while there are specified goals, what is considered "proficient" in math and reading varies by state.
He said the rising number of schools not meeting the benchmarks could become unmanageable.
"There's no way given the resources, the personnel available, to do what would be required, that they'd be able to do it," Manna said.
___
Associated Press writer Dorie Turner contributed to this report.
Damned teachers' unions.
A stunning indictment of the American parent and educational culture in general.
I guess they should have consulted Tim, before passing the law. Or not based in on a school district in Texas that was perpetrating a fraud.
Quote from: Neil on March 10, 2011, 09:23:29 AM
A stunning indictment of the American parent and educational culture in general.
Quotetargets aimed at having all students proficient in math and reading
That's an unobtainable goal in any culture.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 10, 2011, 07:31:32 AM
Damned teachers' unions.
Yep, we should preserve a system that pays teachers based upon how long they've been employed instead of how effective they are. Also we need to dump even more money into the public education system. That will magically fix everything.
Quote from: derspiess on March 10, 2011, 10:25:28 AM
Yep, we should preserve a system that pays teachers based upon how long they've been employed instead of how effective they are. Also we need to dump even more money into the public education system. That will magically fix everything.
Yes, we should shift to a system that measures performance based on slogans, bullshit, and black magic so that we can say we are 'reforming" schools. That will magically fix everything.
It is funny how many people expect raises themselves without having to pass tests to see "how effective they are" but want everyone else to pass such tests before getting their raises. Paying more experienced people more money without testing them for effectiveness is somehow mysteriously okay when they are cops, firemen, factory workers, lawyers, soldiers,computer dweebs, civil servants...
Quote from: grumbler on March 10, 2011, 10:49:09 AM
Yes, we should shift to a system that measures performance based on slogans, bullshit, and black magic so that we can say we are 'reforming" schools. That will magically fix everything.
Is that my position? :unsure:
QuoteIt is funny how many people expect raises themselves without having to pass tests to see "how effective they are" but want everyone else to pass such tests before getting their raises. Paying more experienced people more money without testing them for effectiveness is somehow mysteriously okay when they are cops, firemen, factory workers, lawyers, soldiers,computer dweebs, civil servants...
I'm not wedded to the idea of testing if there is another, more reliable, way of judging effectiveness. I'm evaluated every year on my performance in my job, and my raise (or whether I even get one) is tied to that evaluation.
Most professional middle-aged Americans are overpaid for what they do in any field.
Quote from: derspiess on March 10, 2011, 11:02:03 AM
Quote from: grumbler on March 10, 2011, 10:49:09 AM
Yes, we should shift to a system that measures performance based on slogans, bullshit, and black magic so that we can say we are 'reforming" schools. That will magically fix everything.
Is that my position? :unsure:
Did I say that was your position? :hmm:
QuoteI'm evaluated every year on my performance in my job, and my raise (or whether I even get one) is tied to that evaluation.
What tests determine your personal effectiveness year-by-year?
Everywhere I've worked my salary has been negotiated directly between me and my employer. I've never encountered any encumbering "system" that messes up the proceedings.
Quote from: grumbler on March 10, 2011, 11:15:07 AM
Did I say that was your position? :hmm:
Seems like you implied it. Either that or you posted your response to the wrong person.
QuoteWhat tests determine your personal effectiveness year-by-year?
Tests are not a part of my evaluation criteria.
Since no one is going to mention the elephant as usual, I'm going to go ahead and say it:
This is what you get when you integrate the Negro Community into your schools.
Quote from: The Brain on March 10, 2011, 11:37:15 AM
Everywhere I've worked my salary has been negotiated directly between me and my employer. I've never encountered any encumbering "system" that messes up the proceedings.
Ideally, this is how it would be everywhere (that certainly is the way I have established my salary since leaving the navy). In the navy, as well as other places in bureaucracies, though, pay increases with seniority even leaving out promotions.
Quote from: derspiess on March 10, 2011, 11:54:31 AM
Tests are not a part of my evaluation criteria.
There must be some means to test your value, if you are "evaluated every year on my performance in my job." Using "test" in this case in the larger sense.
Quote from: Slargos on March 10, 2011, 11:55:58 AM
Since no one is going to mention the elephant as usual, I'm going to go ahead and say it:
This is what you get when you integrate the Negro Community into your schools.
:huh: Uh, okay, Crunchy. Whatever you say. You are seeing elephants of what color?
Quote from: grumbler on March 10, 2011, 02:25:46 PM
Quote from: Slargos on March 10, 2011, 11:55:58 AM
Since no one is going to mention the elephant as usual, I'm going to go ahead and say it:
This is what you get when you integrate the Negro Community into your schools.
:huh: Uh, okay, Crunchy. Whatever you say. You are seeing elephants of what color?
It's a figure of speech. You will be unfamiliar with this concept, and I doubt it is possible to possess the eloquence to explain it to you. Go back to your den, you freak of nature.
Quote from: derspiess on March 10, 2011, 11:54:31 AM
Seems like you implied it. Either that or you posted your response to the wrong person.
No, I didn't imply that this was your position, but I may have mocked your simplistic approach to a complex problem.
Quote from: Slargos on March 10, 2011, 02:36:02 PM
It's a figure of speech. You will be unfamiliar with this concept, and I doubt it is possible to possess the eloquence to explain it to you. Go back to your den, you freak of nature.
Which is the figure of speech: the "elephant", the "Negro community," or "you"?
I am aware that you lack the both the wits and the language skills to explain yourself. My questions to you are to mock your positions, not to try to extract a series of grunts that is somehow actually intelligible to the rest of us.
In other words, I know it is a schtick, so am playing along.
There is no elephant in the room. Believe me I have looked for it.
Quote from: The Brain on March 10, 2011, 03:06:57 PM
There is no elephant in the room. Believe me I have looked for it.
They often hide under couch cushions, looking for loose change... sneaky critters.
Quote from: Slargos on March 10, 2011, 11:55:58 AM
Since no one is going to mention the elephant as usual, I'm going to go ahead and say it:
This is what you get when you integrate the Negro Community into your schools.
When do you think schools were integrated? The 2000s? :tinfoil:
Quote from: grumbler on March 10, 2011, 03:00:26 PM
Quote from: derspiess on March 10, 2011, 11:54:31 AM
Seems like you implied it. Either that or you posted your response to the wrong person.
No, I didn't imply that this was your position, but I may have mocked your simplistic approach to a complex problem.
What do you want-- a position paper?
Quote from: grumbler on March 10, 2011, 03:03:59 PM
Quote from: Slargos on March 10, 2011, 02:36:02 PM
It's a figure of speech. You will be unfamiliar with this concept, and I doubt it is possible to possess the eloquence to explain it to you. Go back to your den, you freak of nature.
Which is the figure of speech: the "elephant", the "Negro community," or "you"?
I am aware that you lack the both the wits and the language skills to explain yourself. My questions to you are to mock your positions, not to try to extract a series of grunts that is somehow actually intelligible to the rest of us.
In other words, I know it is a schtick, so am playing along.
The only way to win is not to play.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.cryhavok.org%2Fd%2F2557-2%2FNegro%2BCommunity%2BFrowns.jpg&hash=ab84fb8e046fc8ce5742738d36204fb14602617f)
Hey, Statistics don't lie. At least not more than 38% of the time.
If 82% of American schools are labelled as failing, the other 18% must be mis-labelled.
OK, that's not literally true, but I suspect that less than 18% of our schools are truly doing a good job educating their students. OTOH, I think that for the most part, the reason many students fail to learn what the schools are supposed to be teaching them is that the students don't want to learn, and their parents don't care enough to make sure that they do.
Quote from: dps on March 10, 2011, 07:15:16 PM
If 82% of American schools are labelled as failing, the other 18% must be mis-labelled.
OK, that's not literally true, but I suspect that less than 18% of our schools are truly doing a good job educating their students. OTOH, I think that for the most part, the reason many students fail to learn what the schools are supposed to be teaching them is that the students don't want to learn, and their parents don't care enough to make sure that they do.
I think it just means that 18% of schools have 100% of their students meeting the No Child Left Behind standards. I.e., not necessarily Mensa material.
Quote from: Slargos on March 10, 2011, 11:55:58 AM
Since no one is going to mention the elephant as usual, I'm going to go ahead and say it:
This is what you get when you integrate the Negro Community into your schools.
Yes, but we only have so many Negroes. It's not practical to bus smart African American students all the way to cousin fucking towns in Alaska or Montana. They are already carrying 18% of the schools (despite being only 10% of the public). I don't think it's fair to ask that much more from them.
Could we just pick a number for the % of kids we're okay with being left behind? Schools in my local district are hitting about 95% proficiency overall, and I think that is about as good as you're gonna get without cooking the books somehow.
Education is one case where I seriously wish we were more like Europe.
Quote from: derspiess on March 10, 2011, 04:08:35 PM
Quote from: grumbler on March 10, 2011, 03:00:26 PM
No, I didn't imply that this was your position, but I may have mocked your simplistic approach to a complex problem.
What do you want-- a position paper?
Is that the false dilemma you are trying to sell today? The choice between a simplistic approach to a complex problems and "a position paper?" Sorry, but no sale.
Quote from: derspiess on March 11, 2011, 10:23:44 AM
Education is one case where I seriously wish we were more like Europe.
Elaborate.
Quote from: The Brain on March 11, 2011, 10:28:55 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 11, 2011, 10:23:44 AM
Education is one case where I seriously wish we were more like Europe.
Elaborate.
On a high level, it would be nice to spend less than what we spend now & get better results. IIRC the US spends more $ per student than any Euro country besides Luxembourg, and we're way below Europe in terms of academic performance.
A little more specifically (though I'm still sort of generalizing), from what I have gathered European educational systems tend to more proactively identify kids' abilities & aptitude, and route kids through the type of education that is better tailored to their abilities. Seems to be a lot less political correctness built into the system than what we have in ours.
Over here in our public school system (and again I'm generalizing-- some states/districts are a lot better than others), people seem to be overly concerned with "inclusiveness" & self-esteem. People screech in horror over testing kids early on and segmenting kids based upon aptitude because it "limits their potential", ignoring the facts that less intelligent kids' academic potential is already limited & that you're limiting the brighter kids' potential by lumping them & the less-bright kids into the same classes.
You're also limiting the less-bright kids that way, too. If they goal is to get every child the best possible education, then you need to identify each child's needs and aptitude, not try to push them all into the same mold.
Quote from: dps on March 11, 2011, 12:35:22 PM
You're also limiting the less-bright kids that way, too. If they goal is to get every child the best possible education, then you need to identify each child's needs and aptitude, not try to push them all into the same mold.
Yep. The pressue kids who have neither the desire nor aptitude to go to college get to go to college is ridiculous. So many schools rank their success solely on percentage who go on to college as if that is the only path for success in life.
Quote from: dps on March 11, 2011, 12:35:22 PM
You're also limiting the less-bright kids that way, too. If they goal is to get every child the best possible education, then you need to identify each child's needs and aptitude, not try to push them all into the same mold.
Exactly.
Quote from: derspiess on March 11, 2011, 11:11:26 AM
Quote from: The Brain on March 11, 2011, 10:28:55 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 11, 2011, 10:23:44 AM
Education is one case where I seriously wish we were more like Europe.
Elaborate.
On a high level, it would be nice to spend less than what we spend now & get better results. IIRC the US spends more $ per student than any Euro country besides Luxembourg, and we're way below Europe in terms of academic performance.
A little more specifically (though I'm still sort of generalizing), from what I have gathered European educational systems tend to more proactively identify kids' abilities & aptitude, and route kids through the type of education that is better tailored to their abilities. Seems to be a lot less political correctness built into the system than what we have in ours.
Over here in our public school system (and again I'm generalizing-- some states/districts are a lot better than others), people seem to be overly concerned with "inclusiveness" & self-esteem. People screech in horror over testing kids early on and segmenting kids based upon aptitude because it "limits their potential", ignoring the facts that less intelligent kids' academic potential is already limited & that you're limiting the brighter kids' potential by lumping them & the less-bright kids into the same classes.
Just don't become more like Sweden then.
Except maybe that school vouchers (like we have in Sweden) seem to work reasonably well.
Quote from: The Brain on March 11, 2011, 01:54:23 PM
Just don't become more like Sweden then.
What's wrong with the Swedish system? Hard to imagine it being worse than ours.
QuoteExcept maybe that school vouchers (like we have in Sweden) seem to work reasonably well.
The mere mention of the word "vouchers" draws screams from the left. The Dems & teachers unions have managed to stamp them out in many (most?) places they've been used-- even the ones intended to help poor urban black kids who are stuck in some of the country's worst public schools.
Quote from: derspiess on March 11, 2011, 03:31:45 PM
Quote from: The Brain on March 11, 2011, 01:54:23 PM
Just don't become more like Sweden then.
What's wrong with the Swedish system? Hard to imagine it being worse than ours.
There is a very strong tradition (since the 70s) of wanting to make all students suck equally hard. Since, you know, anything else is elitism. The left with its strange and tragic combination of anti-intellectualism and negative attitude towards practical skills dominates the education establishment. The current rightish government is trying to make things better but it's a difficult task.
Student results are in freefall. When I started uni in 94 we were significantly less prepared than previous generations, and these days the situation is a LOT worse.
The vouchers seem to work though, let parents who give a fuck find schools that produce results. The left hates them, which can only mean they're great.
Quote from: The Brain on March 11, 2011, 10:28:55 AM
Quote from: derspiess on March 11, 2011, 10:23:44 AM
Education is one case where I seriously wish we were more like Europe.
Elaborate.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fenglishrussia.com%2Fimages%2Fanti_usa%2F10.jpg&hash=7df20ee278e4811b6b6ef49d51f2050aead71732)
Quote from: The Brain on March 11, 2011, 04:11:34 PM
There is a very strong tradition (since the 70s) of wanting to make all students suck equally hard. Since, you know, anything else is elitism. The left with its strange and tragic combination of anti-intellectualism and negative attitude towards practical skills dominates the education establishment. The current rightish government is trying to make things better but it's a difficult task.
Student results are in freefall. When I started uni in 94 we were significantly less prepared than previous generations, and these days the situation is a LOT worse.
The vouchers seem to work though, let parents who give a fuck find schools that produce results. The left hates them, which can only mean they're great.
The advantage of voucher systems (and charter schools, which the left seems to find more acceptable) is that schools can be created that cater to the needs of those left behind in the regular school system. The factory model of education is a huge problem.
Having said that, I think it is equally an error to type students into a track. Kids change, and a good education system needs to allow students to change tracks as they mature and their interests change. A student/school mismatch is as big a problem when the school is under-demanding as it is when it is over-demanding. Vouchers allow parents to have a much grater voice (but that's still an issue when parents don't give a shit or don't want to make the effort even when they do care, which is a lot of the time).
Nice to see they're thinking of revising the standards. I want to know more about that Race for the Top program. Anyone know any good nonpartisan groups that have evaluated its effectiveness?
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0314/No-Child-Left-Behind-Why-Congress-will-struggle-to-hit-Obama-s-deadline
QuoteNo Child Left Behind: Why Congress will struggle to hit Obama's deadline
President Obama wants No Child Left Behind revised by the fall. The Senate is working toward a bipartisan compromise, but House Republicans want to shrink the federal role in education.
By Gail Russell Chaddock, Staff writer / March 14, 2011
Washington
President Obama's call to Congress to significantly revise the nation's top education law, No Child Left Behind, by the first day of the new school year faces tough headwinds on Capitol Hill, despite broad agreement on needed fixes.
Both Republicans and Democrats agree that NCLB's achievement standards are too rigid. The Department of Education estimates that, according to those standards, more than 80 percent of the national K-12 schools may be labeled as failing this year – up from 37 percent last year.
But Mr. Obama's plans to reform NCLB come to a Congress preoccupied by budget matters and to House Republicans eager to reduce federal influence in education. With the current year's budget still living week to week on stopgap funding measures – followed by battles over the fiscal year 2012 budget and a highly controversial measure to raise the national debt ceiling – an education deal on the president's timetable looks unlikely.
The Obama administration's proposed fixes include: improving standards and assessments, giving high-performing schools more flexibility and the lowest-performing schools more help, and recruiting better teachers and rewarding them for how effectively they improve student performance.
Senate vs. House
The Senate has been working toward a bipartisan agreement on education reform for more than a year and hopes to complete work on the reauthorization of NCLB this spring. But the House is just getting started – and the mantra of the new majority House Republicans is: We're broke, so we can't afford it. They aim to scale back education spending and the federal role in local schools.
"Although we have our different approaches, everyone agrees current law is broken and in need of repair," said US House Education and the Workforce Committee chairman John Kline (R) of Minnesota and subcommittee chair Duncan Hunter (R) of California in a statement on Monday. "The status quo is failing both students and tax payers; it is time we reconsidered the role of the federal government in our schools."
On Monday, Obama rebuked this suggestion. "Let me make it plain: We cannot cut education," he said.
A telling sticking point is whether to renew funding for President Obama's signature Race to the Top grants. In an unprecedented move, the Democrat-controlled Congress gave the Education Secretary Arne Duncan a $4 billion fund to use at his discretion to leverage education reform. The Obama administration calls Race to the Top the most effective program in the department's history and is proposing $1.4 billion to fund the program for the balance of the fiscal year.
But the Republican-controlled House last month voted to zero out funding for the program. "The federal role in education is a history of underperformance, hype, and false promises," said Rep. Peter Roscam (R) of Illinois, the chief deputy whip, at a press briefing on Feb. 28.
The move to involve the federal government in standards-based reform has been a priority of the last four presidents. Despite opposition from GOP conservatives, President George H. W. Bush launched the concept with the support of top business groups. President Clinton, who campaigned to become "the education president," won legislation that used federal aid to leverage more accountability for results.
With the support of then-Sen. Edward Kennedy (D) of Massachusetts and Rep. John Boehner (R) of Ohio, President George W. Bush passed NCLB, which gave Washington a heightened role in the nation's classrooms. It set up rules to measure whether schools were demonstrating "adequate yearly progress" in reading and math, including a goal that all children should reach proficiency in these fields by 2014.
Republican conservatives went along during the NCLB debates. But with the federal deficit at $1.6 trillion, House conservatives – especially many in the 87-member GOP freshmen class – are now pushing back.
"There's a strong element in the Republican caucus that wants to do away with a federal role in education," says Jack Jennings, president of the Center on Education Policy. "The prospects of getting reauthorization are improving because of the president and Senate leadership, but the main obstacle will be the tea party in the House."
Sharp cuts in federal education funding could threaten implementation of several reforms, such as common core standards in English and math already adopted by 43 states. Another possible casualty would be systems to measure the effectiveness of teachers – a key to the reform goal of rewarding teachers according to their ability to raise student achievement.
Says Mr. Jennings: "The reforms may be stillborn because there won't be the money to put them in place.
Britain is introducing "free schools" that are based on the Swedish experience.
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools
The Left hates them of course, people should never be allowed input into how their tax money is spent, Big Brother knows best.