No Child Left Behind is actually working

McGentrix wrote:

So, you are suggesting a curriculum based on sex, video games and food?

What?

If I am not mistaken, and it has been sometime since I taught, but the state has a curriculum that covers what needs to be taught at each grade level, yes? The teacher has some latitude about how that curriculum is taught, but in general, it acts as a guideline.

One of my favorite topics was the cell. One of the projects I had students do was to diagram a cell. I left it up to them how they wanted to do it. Many simply drew pictures, but the creative ones were wonderful. Some baked cakes and used candies to demonstrate the various organelles. Once, a girl made a sweat shirt with all the organelles on it. Made a nice 3d image.

Creativity and critical thinking skills applied, while meeting the mandated state curriculum. They also learned the various functions and names of cell organelles through homework, quizzes and lecture. Very few were interested in the cell though.

the point here is that the state defines the curriculum. Students are expected to meet minimum requirements (exams) to demonstrate knowledge of the subject area.

No Child Left Behind enables the federal government to examine how students are learning and to pinpoint trouble spots.

No Child Left Behind enables the federal government to examine how students are learning and to pinpoint trouble spots.

Quote:

No Child Left Behind enables the federal government to examine how students are learning and to pinpoint trouble spots.

It is interesting that the traditionally conservative McGentrix is arguing that having the federal government poking its nose into education provided by states, local school districts and even classrooms is both appropriate and helpful.

Meanwhile, the usually left-leaning Ebrown, LittleK etc. are arguing that Federal Government intervention is just hurting something better done locally.

Yes, there are standards, state-defined. They cover content and also indicate how a student should be thinking to some degree (you'll have to pardon me, I have an ear infection and am not as coherent as I want to be). You can look into the standards on state doe websites. There is also a national standard which many state standards have taken as their own.

Many of us here don't think the standards are ALL BAD. I think that something had to be done to equalize the education in various school districts and that this was a fair way to do it. But, I also think it has gone too far and is weighted too heavily. I think we should have taken steps towards an end goal instead of jumping with both feet into the deep end.

Now, more to your point: the standardized testing is one of the reasons why we aren't able to cover the standardized test content. As ebrown noted, teachers spend hours out of the classroom in meetings preping for the tests. Students spend hours taking the tests. All this time is spent NOT LEARNING THE CURRICULUM.

littlek wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

So, you are suggesting a curriculum based on sex, video games and food?

What?

ebrown_p suggests allowing students to learn what they are interested in. Allowing them to explore and be creative, you know, like in the real world.

littlek wrote:

Yes, there are standards, state-defined. They cover content and also indicate how a student should be thinking to some degree (you'll have to pardon me, I have an ear infection and am not as coherent as I want to be). You can look into the standards on state doe websites. There is also a national standard which many state standards have taken as their own.

Many of us here don't think the standards are ALL BAD. I think that something had to be done to equalize the education in various school districts and that this was a fair way to do it. But, I also think it has gone too far and is weighted too heavily. I think we should have taken steps towards an end goal instead of jumping with both feet into the deep end.

Now, more to your point: the standardized testing is one of the reasons why we aren't able to cover the standardized test content. As ebrown noted, teachers spend hours out of the classroom in meetings preping for the tests. Students spend hours taking the tests. All this time is spent NOT LEARNING THE CURRICULUM.

What is on the standardized tests that is different then what is in the curriculum? The ability to read and do math?

McGentrix wrote:

littlek wrote:

Yes, there are standards, state-defined. They cover content and also indicate how a student should be thinking to some degree (you'll have to pardon me, I have an ear infection and am not as coherent as I want to be). You can look into the standards on state doe websites. There is also a national standard which many state standards have taken as their own.

Many of us here don't think the standards are ALL BAD. I think that something had to be done to equalize the education in various school districts and that this was a fair way to do it. But, I also think it has gone too far and is weighted too heavily. I think we should have taken steps towards an end goal instead of jumping with both feet into the deep end.

Now, more to your point: the standardized testing is one of the reasons why we aren't able to cover the standardized test content. As ebrown noted, teachers spend hours out of the classroom in meetings preping for the tests. Students spend hours taking the tests. All this time is spent NOT LEARNING THE CURRICULUM.

What is on the standardized tests that is different then what is in the curriculum? The ability to read and do math?

The test and the curriculum are developed together. So, they pretty much coincide. Why?

McGentrix wrote:

littlek wrote:

Yes, there are standards, state-defined. They cover content and also indicate how a student should be thinking to some degree (you'll have to pardon me, I have an ear infection and am not as coherent as I want to be). You can look into the standards on state doe websites. There is also a national standard which many state standards have taken as their own.

Many of us here don't think the standards are ALL BAD. I think that something had to be done to equalize the education in various school districts and that this was a fair way to do it. But, I also think it has gone too far and is weighted too heavily. I think we should have taken steps towards an end goal instead of jumping with both feet into the deep end.

Now, more to your point: the standardized testing is one of the reasons why we aren't able to cover the standardized test content. As ebrown noted, teachers spend hours out of the classroom in meetings preping for the tests. Students spend hours taking the tests. All this time is spent NOT LEARNING THE CURRICULUM.

What is on the standardized tests that is different then what is in the curriculum? The ability to read and do math?

The test and the curriculum are developed together. So, they pretty much coincide. Why?

So, you are suggesting a curriculum based on sex, video games and food?

McGentrix wrote:

So, you are suggesting a curriculum based on sex, video games and food?

Again... the school is not responsible for teaching your kid values.

DrewDad wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

So, you are suggesting a curriculum based on sex, video games and food?

Again... the school is not responsible for teaching your kid values.

If the schools are not responsible for teaching our kids values then how come you agree with them talking with and discussing homosexuality with students? Isn't that teaching values which you just expressed the schools are not responsible for teaching?

If you don't like what your school is teaching, take it up with them.


Oh, wait, I guess ya'll ought to take it up with the President... since you want him to decide what gets taught.

If the schools are not responsible for teaching our kids values then how come you agree with them talking with and discussing homosexuality with students? Isn't that teaching values which you just expressed the schools are not responsible for teaching?

What is wrong with children reading or writing at or above their grade level?