Back to Leave No Child Behind

Mills, My point is the same; there must exist some level of similarities to look at end product quality.

"Leave no child alive"

A part of the LNCB legislation includes the mandate that for schools to get money, they must allow military recruiters into the schools.

You guys may have mentioned that here, but I didn't know of it until today.

Spendius turns snide when the curtain is pulled away

I am in favour,as you should know,of the voucher system because it accepts that principle.Idealism is naive.Give them a here and now interest which they understand and there is a chance.I also understand the difficulties of going from here to there.That is the method used for driving tests and look how fast people learn to type when they go on the internet.Employers will soon let it be known what they require in recruits and people who want those jobs will go to it.It is a Gordian knot and the sword is needed for that.

I should like to say that I do not find Timberlake in the least boring. And if his critics are teachers and teach with same degree of incivility and lack of understanding used in their postings, God help our children.

I'm a little surprised that no one has brought up a recent study that was highlighted in The Christian Science Monitor and The New York Times in the last two or three weeks. In comparing standardized test performance of public school children to private school children, they found that public school students actually did marginally better when controlling for socio-economic background. Statistically, the difference between public school students' test scores and those of their private school counterparts wasn't enough to suggest that public schools are doing a better job, but it certainly sheds very serious doubt on the conventional wisdom that private schools do a better job at educating students.

Many "private" schools are dumping grounds for kids that get kicked out of public school.

Quote:

Spendius turns snide when the curtain is pulled away

.

Not at all.I have explained it somewhere else.

You have roughly 4 million at every age.You have a school life of,say,14 years.Thus 56 million students.How many teachers required?You will know.Given the relatively poor salaries of teachers you can hardly expect teachers to be much above average in intelligence or application.


And there is no curtain at this end.I know "Control Talk" when I see it.That's the curtain and it is transparent to those who have trained eyes.

Spendius writes

Quote:

I am in favour,as you should know,of the voucher system because it accepts that principle.Idealism is naive.Give them a here and now interest which they understand and there is a chance.I also understand the difficulties of going from here to there.That is the method used for driving tests and look how fast people learn to type when they go on the internet.Employers will soon let it be known what they require in recruits and people who want those jobs will go to it.It is a Gordian knot and the sword is needed for that.

I think one can oppose vouchers only if they a) believe the existing public education system is adequate and should not be compromised or b) parents are too stupid to choose better education and/or opportunities for their children. The free market has and always will tailor itself to what the customer wants, and I think Spendius is right on target that the employer is a key factor in that.

With vouchers, those schools that currently can ignore the market because their funding is guaranteed will either have to mend their ways and satisfy the market demands, or they close their doors. I still maintain that most parents given the choice of turning in their voucher to an excellent private school along with with a hefty additional tuition bill, will opt for a comparable public school where their voucher buys the education they want for their kids and they don't have to pay anything additional.

I agree with Spendius that the transition will be difficult, but not impossible. It will require reining in the teachers' unions or demanding they adopt practical goals that may or may not be politically correct. It will require alternative vocational schools for kids who for whatever reason will not participate in mainstream education and rules that allow the teachers to bounce them out of the mainstream classrooms.. And then if the seniors are scoring well on the SATs and/or getting lucrative job offers, NCLB may no longer be necessary.

For now NCLB, with all its flaws, is still better than the status quo.

Then since this is a school district in which the kids score above the Massachusetts' average on the SAT which is above the national average, can we acknowledge the teachers here do a good job?

Furthermore, there has been plenty of wordage here about getting rid of older teachers, and it is the older teachers who have patience, extensive knowledge of their subject and the skill that the raw new teachers often lack.