She was too kind and left out the real problem.
Progressive Democrats and educators need to be blunt about what really drives NCLB and the push for charter schools: corruption.
Testing companies profit when schools test every month instead of twice a year, and the corporations that run for profit charter schools have guaranteed profits when they get a contract as a ''public'' school.
These companies can then recycle some of their profits into campaign donations for the politicians who threw the contracts to them.
Teachers at public schools and even teachers unions can't compete with the private sector--in their ability to bribe amoral politicians that is.
Whatever good Obama has done on other issues and even higher ed is tarnished by having a secretary of education who sells this crap that only succeeds at enriching the already wealthy and lining the pockets of corrupt pols at the expense of teachers and our kids' education.
We need to tell the Democratic leadership to jettison this DLC snake oil or we will replace them.
A new agenda for school reformBy Diane Ravitch
Friday, April 2, 2010; A17
I used to be a strong supporter of school accountability and choice. But in recent years, it became clear to me that these strategies were not working. The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) program enacted in 2002 did not produce large gains in reading and math.
The gains in math were larger before the law was implemented, and the most recent national tests showed that eighth-grade students have made no improvement in reading since 1998. By mandating a utopian goal of 100 percent proficiency, the law encouraged states to lower their standards and make false claims of progress. Worse, the law stigmatized schools that could not meet its unrealistic expectation.
Choice, too, has been disappointing. We now know that choice is no panacea. The districts with the most choice for the longest period -- Cleveland and Milwaukee -- have seen no improvement in their public schools nor in their choice schools.
Charter schools have been compared to regular public schools on the National Assessment of Educational Progress in 2003, 2005, 2007 and 2009, and have never outperformed them. Nationally, only 3 percent of public school students are enrolled in charters, and no one is giving much thought to improving the system that enrolls the other 97 percent.
***
We should stop using the term "failing schools" to describe schools where test scores are low. Usually, a school has low test scores because it enrolls a disproportionately large number of low-performing students. Among its students may be many who do not speak or read English, who live in poverty, who miss school frequently because they must baby-sit while their parents look for work, or who have disabilities that interfere with their learning. These are not excuses for their low scores but facts about their lives.
Instead of closing such schools and firing their staffs, every state should have inspection teams that spend time in every low-performing school and diagnose its problems. Some may be mitigated with extra teachers, extra bilingual staff, an after-school program or other resources. The inspection team may find that the school was turned into a dumping ground by district officials to make other schools look better. It may find a heroic staff that is doing well under adverse circumstances and needs help. Whatever the cause of low performance, the inspection team should create a plan to improve the school.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/01/AR2010040101468.html">FULL TEXT 
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
