Swift & Change Able - Latest comments on NCLB Tea Leaves Part 2 - WWBOD?

In response to: NCLB Tea Leaves Part 2 - WWBOD?

Ronnie kowzic j.r. [Visitor] — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:39:36 +0000

There is another thing thats disturbing to me okay I will try and explan to you ok bare with me here I do read lots of religous books and I do believe in Jesus christ the thing is its about tv its corrupted why because we don't like a lot of different people why its Tv this is why wars broke out too ok bare with me we had mexicans and chinees even africa all kinds of different kinds of people here before all this started out Tv had different country,s here as movie stars before wars broke out wierd is in it how about tv shows like kato or like lone ranger their where mexicans here in that show but mexicans were not allowed in the USA. they where jumping fences why back when no green card can't get in but Tv had these people here made them stars do you see what I am trying to say we Americans had all different people here from why back when'

In response to: NCLB Tea Leaves Part 2 - WWBOD?

Ronnie kowzic j.r. [Visitor] — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:26:59 +0000

Hi I want to add my mom stayed up day and night to work on Obama campaign even answer phone calls and march for him and I was watching Michelle Obama about Education deptment plan just now on tv well I went to college and I was cheated out of mine I had a pell grant and I worked hard but the people at this college treated me bad discrimination against me because I was different they lowered my grade gave me a D and lowered my gpa points but I have a E-mail stateing that I have a C average but I have 2.18 that didn't sound right to me Clinton,Community College..please write me give me some one I can talk to about this because this is my future and now its gone because they believe that my point average is high like 3.18 but they took it in their own to cheat me and lower it why and their is alot of people just not me they gave up because the school made it hard on them the tutors where picking on some calling them names like your too slow you don't belong here they are out of the high school and tranfering to the college but they are special ed students but grad but they still want to go to college but if you get distracted by people actually working there its bad this college clinton,community college..

In response to: NCLB Tea Leaves Part 2 - WWBOD?

John Thompson [Visitor] — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 21:14:35 +0000

I read the national literature from the perspective of an inner city secondary school teacher, so I see NCLB as doing more harm than good. But everyone has a different perspective, so maybe it has done some good but at a very high cost.

I would like investments in the entire child as opposed to wasting big bucks on test prep and other CYA programs. I think our middle management in OKC is pretty similar to their counterparts in other poor districts, but when I visit more affluent systems I'm often thrilled by their talent.

I want more diagnostic testing, but I don't see how that would happen under the NCLB brand. I'm sorta 51% to 49% opposed to performance pay and national standards, but that means I'm as likely to be wrong as to be right. So I'd gladly support plans like Denver's, Toledo's, or Connecticut's in return for restoring collaboration and the professional autonomy of teachers. And I'd love any help in efficiently removing ineffective teachers from the classroom. So would my union.

I want to see whether an Obama Education Dept Turnaround Program for highest poverty schools could help OKC plan and fund an effort to close the Achievement Gap. We're not backward, and if we had the money to do it right, and less pressure to jack up test scores, even OKC could make progress.

I'm for sustained dialogue.

In response to: NCLB Tea Leaves Part 2 - WWBOD?

bigswifty [Member] — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 18:12:32 +0000

You have to be a little more specific about what you see as the problem. To me it seems likely that middle management is more a problem for you than any aspect of federal law per se.

What is it about NCLB to which you object. Do you really think things were better before NCLB? Or did they just seem better?

Do you want states to stop testing? Do you want states and districts to stop working toward closing achievement gaps? Do you want all teachers to be paid the same, regardless of their credentials or the value of their skills on the market? What's stopping the the state of Oklahoma or Oklahoma City from "having a process for evaluating programs"? Certainly not NCLB. Lots of districts are investing money in program that work.

Nobody's in the Presidential campaign has presented a budget, BTW. And let me let you in on a big secret: the Democrats historically have done no better on education funding than President Bush has, especially for high-poverty districts. I'm not defending or attacking either one, not at the moment. But you have to separate the realities here from the illusions.

In response to: NCLB Tea Leaves Part 2 - WWBOD?

John Thompson [Visitor] — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:34:48 +0000

Of course all districts have always applied for funds and still do, and they've always treated them like criminal codes, and of course its the poor who have been unrepresented. (the same could apply to most programs that were spurred by the New Deal.)

I'm proposing a BETTER approach to NCLB II. Its sortofa Back to the Future approach, where we back out of an approach that hasn't worked.

You have a much better understanding of the reality at your end of the system, and I'd be an idiot to deny it or ignore your experience.

But you need to listen to people who have experience in the reality of classrooms.

When I first got involved in the process, and before I listened to their perpectives, I complained that our central office was full of knowledgable people who seemed to always put their talents to saying NO. Now, they are long gone and I wish we had a process for evaluating programs.

Is there a middle ground between the hide-bound bureaucracy and the Power Point Culture that was an unintended result of the creative destruction of the market-driven approaches of the NCLB era?

But what about my questions - the ones where you have much more knowledge? What are the numbers in the various early childhood proposals? Why can't we invest more in programs that we all support? Why can't we shift our attention away from the accountability issues where we won't agree because can't agree?

In response to: NCLB Tea Leaves Part 2 - WWBOD?

bigswifty [Member] — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:01:11 +0000

I got news for you: districts do have to apply for funds, all funds. All federal programs are voluntary. You guys treat them like criminal codes. Anyone who doesn't want to participate doesn't have to. And special ed funds (IDEA) do follow students, at least they're supposed. By law, they can follow kids right to a private school. And the way things are going with the NEA "No we can't" mantra ,Title I funds will someday start flowing exactly the same way. That's not something I endorse. But that's the reality.

In response to: NCLB Tea Leaves Part 2 - WWBOD?

John Thompson [Visitor] — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 14:44:09 +0000

We should start a radio program. This episode would be "'BigSwifty' vs. 'the White Teacher Who Can't Jump' and who wants his progressive teammates to stop trying to play above the rim and play under control;" with Sherman as the adult in the middle.

NCLB mandated testing and progress roles that were so obviously disconnected from reality that they were seen as an effort to shame schools into progress. Just about the only people who were directly effected to the law were administrators and they were being held accountable for something over which they had no control. So, of course, they adopted quick fixes that quickly failed. In education we have a scientific term for the process where administrators are told to meet impossible goals. The crap rolls downhill. I know of no social science that has repudiated that principle.

So let's build on your post. If we want better tests, go back to the old-fashioned imperfect system. Set up incentives and an old RFP process, and create incentives for developing 21st systems.

If you want performance pay along the lines of Denver, why not create incentives for local programs that are within the range of charactersitcs of promising programs like BEST, the Toledo Plan or ProComp?

Why not set up a fund for school turnarounds and have districts apply for the money and a range of programs?

And regarding special ed,I don't know the details but I've never understood why we don't fully fund the law and then require the funds to actually follow the students. Think of the bonus that would provide for a school like mine where 40% of the students are on IEPs.

I know my idea is just a "thought experiment." It would be turning the clock back to the old Great Society liberalism. Bushies would say that its the old "reality-based paradigm," and you young guys are in love with market based solutions.

But, if we could all agree that the most cost-effective expenditures are in early childhood and they aren't amenable to state-of-the-art accounting theories/efforts, then my ideas would be practical. They would be very consistent with the School Improvement approaches that Dean Millot is exploring in EdBizz.

Besides, if districts had to apply for funds, they would have to go through the motions of planning their work, so we would have a chance to work our plans. The old bureacracies were flawed, but NCLB has created a culture of "fire," "ready," and "aim" (at scapegoats.

In response to: NCLB Tea Leaves Part 2 - WWBOD?

bigswifty [Member] — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 03:39:56 +0000

I never said a thing about coercion or mandates. You did. I'm for the feds putting the money out there and letting states and locals decide if they want to apply for and use it for this purpose. Nothing's mandated in any federal program, guys. They're all voluntary.