Little-known requirement of Leave no Child Behind law

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I was shocked to learn, while watching a CNN broadcast by Arron Brown today, something I had not known was part of Bush's Leave no Child Behind education law.

Apparently, for a high school to qualify for the federal funds, the school must agree to allow military recruiters to have contact with students inside the school's halls to try to recruit them into the military services after graduation. The school must also provide student names, addresses and telephone numbers to these recruiters.

Apparently, many parents were outraged when they discovered these contacts with their children and demanded the recruiters stay away from their children.

I wonder how many of you knew of this condition for receiving federal funds?

BBB

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,638 • Replies: 57

No top replies

I knew, have known for quite some time. Students can request that their personal data be witheld from recruiters, but the default is that the recruiters get the information.

0 Replies

That one doesn't sit very well with me...

0 Replies

Quote:

Apparently, for a high school to qualify for the federal funds, the school must agree to allow military recruiters to have contact with students inside the school's halls to try to recruit them into the military services after graduation. The school must also provide student names, addresses and telephone numbers to these recruiters.

The operative word is TRY. As they say, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. No one is forcing a student to join the military.

The more people clamor for government goodies, the more that they need to understand that it always comes with a "hook".

0 Replies

No one is forcing kids to drink Coke/Pepsi either, but there are an awful lot of people who are up in arms about companies "try"ing to get the kids to buy their products within the school.

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Quote:
Apparently, for a high school to qualify for the federal funds, the school must agree to allow military recruiters to have contact with students inside the school's halls to try to recruit them into the military services after graduation. The school must also provide student names, addresses and telephone numbers to these recruiters.

The operative word is TRY. As they say, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. No one is forcing a student to join the military.

The more people clamor for government goodies, the more that they need to understand that it always comes with a "hook".

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

The operative word is TRY. As they say, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. No one is forcing a student to join the military.

Might be that try is the operative word.

But must is the one that disturbs me most:

Quote:

The school must also provide student names, addresses and telephone numbers to these recruiters.

I really can't imagine that any school in Germany would give any private data without consent to anybody.

0 Replies

I have known about it and posted about it in the past.

We have requested no info be given, but that also means you can't be in the student directory. Otherwise all the recruiter has to do is stop by the office and pick up a directory to get the names and addresses of those not wanting info given directly to them.

0 Replies

Did you know that those policies have been in place at many schools for years? It is not just "part" of the no child left behind program. Names and addresses of students have always been available.

One thing that has not been available in some cases is on career day the schools not letting military recruiters participate in the Career days and now they can.

It is a viable career, and something I feel should be included in HS career days. Under the recruiting program for the military they have the Hometown Recruiting Program. That is where a hometown student who is now a soldier comes back and talks about what the military has to offer in his own hometown.

For those families that cannot afford a higher education, the military is a nice option. Why depend on the news media and political agendas that are put forth to the kids on TV, Radio and Newspapers, and by people that are pretty clueless about the military when you can provide information that isnt tainted by the media.

I do Support the No Child Left behind program because it now holds people accountable for the lack of education in this country.

0 Replies

For those families that cannot afford a higher education, the military is a nice option.

So it's correct to say the military is disproportionately comprised of the poor?

0 Replies

squinney wrote:

So it's correct to say the military is disproportionately comprised of the poor?

I don't know the figures, but I would suspect that the military is predominantly staffed by people from the working classes, as well as the poor. The military is a place where a young person could learn some very marketable skills, and possibly achieve opportunities that would be difficult in private life.

0 Replies

So, why the fuss over Michael Moore saying that in his film? That's what I was getting at. It seemed logical to me that that would be the case.

0 Replies

I haven't seen Moore's film, so I can't really comment on what was said in it.

0 Replies

squinney, more than one conservative has rebuked me for saying that the vast majority of young people who enlist do so for economic reasons. I thought I was just stating the obvious but it's apparently a sore spot for them. So I wasn't surprised at their reaction to Moore's representation of it.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

... more than one conservative has rebuked me for saying that the vast majority of young people who enlist do so for economic reasons

I am really interested in what your conservative friends think are the reasons young people are enlisting.

0 Replies

squinney wrote:

For those families that cannot afford a higher education, the military is a nice option.

So it's correct to say the military is disproportionately comprised of the poor?

Not just the poor squinney, those whose families lack the means to send them to school (Not the same as poor)

My family was white middle class. My family just couldn't afford to send me to school for that amount of time.

My family made too much money to qualify for scholarship, yet not enough to send me (Like MANY young people)

I played sports (But like most athletes, I wasn't good enough to qualify for a sports scholarship)

I didn't apply myself enough to get the grades needed for an academic scholarship (This was MY fault, I was overly interested in girls, sports and friends at the time)

During my time in the military, the majority of the soldiers around me were of the middle class.

Just my 2 cents... pre tax.

0 Replies

I can't vouch for the veracity of this website, but their conclusions make sense to me:

http://www.ijoa.org/imta96/paper28.html

Seems that the main reasons for increased interest in the military, according to this study, is:

Money for college 22%
Training 17%
employment 10%

World events 1%

Recruiting advertising garnered only 3% of the reasons for interest.

So it appears from this study, that young people are joining the military for very personal reasons, other that patriotism.

When the study tried to determine why some young people showed a decreased interest in the military, the biggest reasons were:

Going to school 17%
Other career opps. 17%

0 Replies

Pheonix - I have a cousin who enlisted in the Marines. He's had a strong fascination with military history since grade school, at least. Went through college ROTC, graduated with honors and made Captain at a very young age. He is considering law school.

Another cousin enlisted in the Navy and is a S.E.A.L He's earned both his undergraduate degree and Master's while serving.

Another enlisted in the Army and is a paratrooper.

None enlisted for economic reasons, but simply wanted to serve, although I realize they are probably the exception and the majority do most likely enlist for economic reasons.

0 Replies

JustWonders- I never suggested that the military did not attract people who wanted to serve. In fact, in the study that I quoted, 5% of the people were interested in a military career because "it was the right thing to do".

I do suspect though that your relatives are not the usual enlistees. Apparently the people of which you spoke are doing very well, and have achieved a lot. I would suspect that those folks would have done well in civilian life too!

0 Replies

Phoenix - Oh, I know you weren't implying that. I was only offering some of my own family's experiences.

Yes, I think they'd have done well in the private sector as well. The Marine captain has had offers by way of head-hunters that are mind-boggling considering his age.

Should any of them retire anytime soon, I've no doubts their military service will stand them in good stead in seeking employment.

We're very proud of them.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

I am really interested in what your conservative friends think are the reasons young people are enlisting.

Me too. They don't really give reasons but they suggest that I don't know anything about the military. One is a relative who was an officer in the military, and I think his opinion is based on his experiences as an officer. It may well be that people who join as officers do so for different reasons.

I grew up near a base and knew many many soldiers (my sister worked on the base and we all made use of the bowling alley). A lot of my high school friends enlisted as well, all of them because they felt it was the only future they had access to. I even strongly considered it myself but chose otherwise due to personal freedom issues. My opinion was based solely on the people I knew/know and I thought it was just common knowledge.

That was really good information you posted.

0 Replies

Little-known requirement of Leave no Child Behind law

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know