SunSpot's got a fairly balanced discussion of the impact of NCLB and the tests that have followed in its wake. While the usual frustration and opposition from the educational establishment is duly noted, the reporter concludes that this opposition may not be the real problem - and notes that the public supports standardization of both the testing and the curriculum:
...most educators think the NCLB has replaced what President Bush -- its leading proponent -- called the "bigotry of low expectations" with the chaos of too-high expectations. Its basic mandates, they say, are unrealistic: for example, that 100 percent of students achieve proficiency in 12 years, that children with disabilities meet the same high standards as non-disabled students and that every teacher be "highly qualified" by 2006...
The greatest problem with the NCLB is that its regulatory structure is neither federal fish nor local fowl. Political compromises made to secure bipartisan passage resulted in a bill of more than 1,000 pages and mixed messages. Some provisions wound up too rigid -- for example, that all students must meet the standards, and the arbitrary date when all teachers must be fully qualified. But the law allows each state to specify its own standards, tests and schedule of annual yearly progress...
What should be done to quiet the storm? In the short run, the NCLB requires fine-tuning in many areas cited by critics, and it needs more federal money. At the same time, the education establishment must do more than complain...
...The public is way ahead of educators on the obsolete logic of local control. In a national poll last year, more than two-thirds of the respondents favored a single national standardized test and -- here's a shocker -- a standardized national curriculum. The original bipartisan support for the enlarged federal role under the NCLB reflects this shift in public opinion...
Posted by kswygert at October 6, 2003 03:01 PM