What Is Americas Biggest Problem?

[overtone]

But even 'W' Bush did some good work with education initiatives. - - -

Its time liberals started backing good Republican policy and Conservatives started backing good Democrat policy.

Enough divisiveness already.

W gave us No Child Left Behind - a uniquely intrusive expansion of the Federal government into local schools, contrary to almost all supposed conservative or traditional Republican principles, and unpopular with everybody as soon as they had any experience with it.

 

John Kline's partial reform of the No Child Left Behind boondoggle just passed.

 

John Kline is a Republican, a Representative from a district in Minnesota, and he has been trying to do something about the problems with NCLB for years now. In this effort he has had almost complete popular support - basically everybody wanted that law changed in one way or another, many wanted it completely scrapped.

 

If you are curious about how such a popular effort could have been so difficult to bring to resolution, how his several earlier efforts could have failed in Congress, consider the following:

 

He is retiring - this is his last year in office, and he does not have to get Party support for anything or raise money from the normal sources. So he paid no personal campaign penalty for his strategy of collaborating with Democratic politicians and compromising with their concerns (even the White House!) in the final bill, as other Republican Congressmen have in the recent past (the Senate is more insulated, elected for six year terms).

 

And this: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/261889-house-passes-no-child-left-behind-rewrite

 

The final bicameral, bipartisan product is less conservative than the version the House originally passed in July on a narrow vote that nearly derailed on the floor. The razor-thin passage came months after House GOP leaders had to pull the bill from the floor schedule due to the lack of support from conservatives.

All of the 64 votes on Wednesday against the final negotiated measure were from Republicans.

 

And this: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/paul-ryan-congress-no-child-left-behind-216696- Notice that the Presidential candidates in the Senate were heavily represented in the otherwise quite short no vote and voting "no" column. They can't afford to alienate their base, or their money.

So that's what setting aside "divisiveness" looks like in the US Federal government: isolating the worst of the wingnut Republicans, finding a Republican who can defy the campaign financiers and the threat of being primaried by his Party, and finessing the enormous power of the rightwing Republican corporate cash "speech". Then you can get something done - after years of struggle, over what is basically a no-brainer.

Edited December 12, 2015 by overtone

[tar]

Overtone,

 

There are elements of the core curriculum mandates that I find insulting and oppressive. If I were to vote on a bill that was meant to mandate how my children should learn, I might vote against it myself.

 

How is that, MigL?

 

Regards, TAR

Edited December 12, 2015 by tar

[overtone]

 

 

There are elements of the core curriculum mandates that I find insulting and oppressive.

I'll go out on a limb here: I bet no such "elements" of any "mandates" exist in the Core Curriculum.

 

Try it. Name a couple.

[John Cuthber]

I'll go out on a limb here: I bet no such "elements" of any "mandates" exist in the Core Curriculum.

 

Try it. Name a couple.

 

That's a dangerous bet to make. He can claim to be offended by anything he chooses, and it is impossible to prove that he's not.

On an unrelated note

http://winningdemocrats.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/liars.jpg

[tar]

Overtone,

 

All children should learn these concepts, in this order, use these books that your local schoolboard will pay for, and the children will be tested, using school time, school buildings, and salaried employees as to whether or not they have learned the concepts, according to an imposed criteria and good teachers who have not taught to the test, or teachers with below average students, will be penalized and districts will lose federal money unless they comply.

 

Regards, TAR

 

Why are local school boards inept, and some unelected group of federal geniuses given the power to set some one size fits all policy? Any simpleton knows that each child is different, and each region of the country and each town is different in what they know, and what they need to know to survive.

we have created great universities, and made wonderful advances and lead a good life, with wonderful technology and medicine at our disposal, without core curriculum

 

How do you figure we did that, if we learned our concepts the wrong way?

How did the geniuses get to be so smart if they didn't learn their concepts in the right order?

why should "they" set policy for how and what my children learn? Shouldn't I, along with my neighbors decide such things, according to what we can afford?

What if the kid's parents don't teach their kids anything?

[John Cuthber]

Overtone,

 

All children should learn these concepts, in this order, use these books that your local schoolboard will pay for, and the children will be tested, using school time, school buildings, and salaried employees as to whether or not they have learned the concepts, according to an imposed criteria and good teachers who have not taught to the test, or teachers with below average students, will be penalized and districts will lose federal money unless they comply.

 

Regards, TAR

 

 

Can you post a link to the bit of the core curriculum that actually says that please?

[iNow]

Tar seems to prefer narratives to facts and appears simultaneously unaware of the updates also pushed through just last week.

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-arne-duncan-lost-the-common-core-and-his-legacy/

On Thursday, President Obama is expected to sign the first new comprehensive education bill since President George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind law — a bill that will undo many of Duncan’s signature policy changes and scale back the role that the Education Department plays in overseeing schools. It will specifically prevent the secretary of education from attempting to “influence, incentivize or coerce” states to adopt standards such as the Common Core.

<snip>

As the chorus of complaints grew louder, Duncan’s administration backed off some of its proposed changes — most notably delaying the requirement that teacher evaluations be pegged to the results of state tests linked to the Common Core.

 

The Obama administration and Duncan also called for a reduction in standardized testing — acknowledging that their policies were partially to blame for an increase in the amount of class time taken up preparing for and taking standardized tests, which had led a growing number of parents to have their children opt out of state tests.

 

The new federal education law will go even further, preventing the federal government from requiring teacher evaluations linked to test scores and from providing any incentive to states to adopt the Common Core or any other particular set of standards — a direct rejection of two of the signature policies of Duncan’s Education Department.

 

For those curious though, here is a nice overview that separates facts from frictions on how this worked prior to recent changes:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/04/02/will-schools-lose-federal-funds-if-kids-dont-take-mandated-tests-fact-vs-threat/

Defenders of excessive and high-stakes testing rely on two major arguments: frequent testing is good for children and schools, and too many refusals will lead to a loss of federal funds for the students’ district.

 

The first claim is increasingly ineffective. Growing numbers of parents recognize that standardized exam overkill does not improve educational quality or equity. On the contrary, it pushes schools into incessant test prep mode and emotionally damages many children. Each week, more and more parents choose to protect their children and schools by refusing the tests. They don’t buy the argument that a small reduction in testing volume will solve the problem. Instead, they demand a fundamental overhaul of federal, state and district policies.

 

With the testing-is-good-for-you argument failing, authorities are turning to threats and bullying, often using the claim that schools will lose federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Title I funds. That threat is not based on any legal language in NCLB or in waivers states have received to avoid sanctions under the federal law. To understand why, consider the following.

 

The original text of NCLB, under its section on state plans, says that to make “adequate yearly progress” (AYP) a school must test 95 percent of its students. In the improvement section, the law establishes sanctions for not making AYP. The penalties apply only to schools receiving Title I funds. Nothing in the law authorizes withholding of federal aid, though up to 20 percent may be required to be diverted to other uses, including tutoring or transporting students to different schools.

 

However, AYP requirements are now irrelevant. More than 40 states have been given waivers by the Obama administration from the most onerous NCLB sanctions. While AYP reporting requirements remain, waivers remove NCLB punishments from all but the lowest-scoring (“priority”) schools in a state. Thus, schools in waiver states no longer must transport or tutor. As a result, the only federal funding penalties specified in the original NCLB law have been suspended.

[neutrinosalad]

On an unrelated note

http://winningdemocrats.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/liars.jpg

 

What data did they use to create that chart?

 

What constitutes a lie and what constitutes a truth?

[John Cuthber]

I think the chart is from the New York Times, and I imagine they cite their sources.

If you don't know what's true and what isn't, then you have a problem.

if you are concerned that not all things are black and white then that's why the chart has 5 categories.

 

Found it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/opinion/campaign-stops/all-politicians-lie-some-lie-more-than-others.html?_r=0

 

You can click the links and find out what they lied about.

Of course, if you think theyare wrong, you can simply cite evidence.

[neutrinosalad]

I think the chart is from the New York Times, and I imagine they cite their sources.

If you don't know what's true and what isn't, then you have a problem.

if you are concerned that not all things are black and white then that's why the chart has 5 categories.

 

Found it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/opinion/campaign-stops/all-politicians-lie-some-lie-more-than-others.html?_r=0

 

You can click the links and find out what they lied about.

Of course, if you think theyare wrong, you can simply cite evidence.

 

Thank you for posting the link to the article. I just wanted to see how the conclusion that the graph was displaying was sourced.

[MigL]

Found it interesting that even the best of them are only about 50% truthful.

 

Here in Ontario we have a government legislated core curriculum and standardized testing ( in some grades ).

The basics like math, science/technology, and language/communication are not subjective or open to interpretation in different parts of the country.

And the testing, while stressful for the students, is needed to gauge student's progress as well as teacher/board performance.

So I don't understand the objections.

[neutrinosalad]

Here in Ontario we have a government legislated core curriculum and standardized testing ( in some grades ).

The basics like math, science/technology, and language/communication are not subjective or open to interpretation in different parts of the country.

And the testing, while stressful for the students, is needed to gauge student's progress as well as teacher/board performance.

So I don't understand the objections.

 

John Oliver summed it up pretty well:

 

It is a pretty one-sided representation of the problem, but he did highlight a key issue behind it.

 

Private corporations hijacked standardized testing and warped it to reap loads of money. If standardized testing was not warped by the private companies behind it, it probably would be a pretty useful school program.

[MigL]

Did the private corporations hijack the STs, or did the states allow them to do so ?

Why does the state government and school boards allow private corporations this kind of control and ability to manipulate without oversight ?

Maybe state governments and school boards should be subject to some accountability also, not just students and teachers.

[iNow]

Why does the state government and school boards allow private corporations this kind of control and ability to manipulate without oversight ?

Money trumps.

[Phi for All]

Did the private corporations hijack the STs, or did the states allow them to do so ?

Why does the state government and school boards allow private corporations this kind of control and ability to manipulate without oversight ?

Maybe state governments and school boards should be subject to some accountability also, not just students and teachers.

 

Like many things in US politics, it's a combination of big business using the People's legislative representation to line their pockets. Since he was barred from the banking industry after the S&L travesty, this is what the youngest Bush son, Neil Bush, has been doing. He and several Bush cronies have been angling for NCLB dollars through their own testing companies, and for some reason they've been pretty successful. It's almost like they had some kind of inside track on how to get that money.

[Ten oz]

John Oliver summed it up pretty well:

 

It is a pretty one-sided representation of the problem, but he did highlight a key issue behind it.

 

Private corporations hijacked standardized testing and warped it to reap loads of money. If standardized testing was not warped by the private companies behind it, it probably would be a pretty useful school program.

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/91001-academic-testing/

[John Cuthber]

Can you post a link to the bit of the core curriculum that actually says that please?

Has the reply to that got lost?

[tar]

John Cuthber,

 

I don't have to say anything. Core curriculum and standardized tests crumble under their own weight.

 

Regards, TAR

and I believe the correct English tense to use is "gotten lost"

[John Cuthber]

John Cuthber,

 

I don't have to say anything. Core curriculum and standardized tests crumble under their own weight.

 

Regards, TAR

and I believe the correct English tense to use is "gotten lost"

It's unfortunate that you seem to have nothing to say.

The site rules say that you should support your assertions with evidence (or admit that you were wrong).

 

And, not, it's not. If you want to be pedantic it should be "been lost", but got lost is perfectly acceptable..

"Gotten" is an Americanism.

[Phi for All]

and I believe the correct English tense to use is "gotten lost"

http://grammarist.com/usage/got-gotten/

In the main varieties of English from outside North America, the past participle of get in all its senses is usually got. Gotten appears occasionally, and it is standard in a few set phrases such as ill-gotten gains, but the shorter form prevails by a large margin.

[iNow]

All children should learn these concepts, in this order, use these books that your local schoolboard will pay for, and the children will be tested, using school time, school buildings, and salaried employees as to whether or not they have learned the concepts, according to an imposed criteria and good teachers who have not taught to the test, or teachers with below average students, will be penalized and districts will lose federal money unless they comply.

Can you post a link to the bit of the core curriculum that actually says that please?

Has the reply to that got lost?

I don't have to say anything. Core curriculum and standardized tests crumble under their own weight.

dafuq?

[tar]

From just the video posted, I thought my objections were found to have a basis in fact.

 

I took that as enough.

My other evidence is anecdotal and obtained from conversations with a 2nd grade teacher. I will not name this source. But he/she is aware of the order in which concepts are supposed to be taught, and the punitive nature of the response to having your class not showing they have learned the concepts required. And this system does not take properly into consideration the lower quality of students that come from uneducated households, without books, nor students with behavioral issues, nor students with English as a second language.

Besides, the point of my argument, in reference to the thread, is that such a thing as education is not a Democrats are right, Republicans are obstructionist, type of area of interest. Democrats could find fault with common core and standardized testing, same as a Republican could. And a Republican does not have to object because they are obstructionist, but can object because they object.

[iNow]

Besides, the point of my argument, in reference to the thread, is that such a thing as education is not a Democrats are right, Republicans are obstructionist, type of area of interest. Democrats could find fault with common core and standardized testing, same as a Republican could.

Sure, I suppose they "could," but they largely "don't."

 

http://www.newsweek.com/2015/10/09/how-republicans-turned-common-core-377346.html

Opponents of Common Core like to say opposition to the law arose organically, from parents frustrated by ever-proliferating homework assignments. The truth is that the stunningly swift reversal by Republican politicians didn’t happen by accident. It was the result of an organized effort by Tea Party-affiliated groups anxious to make a mark after a series of legislative losses. Although the Tea Party had struck fear in the GOP establishment with the landslide elections of 2010, it had little to show for it despite antics like the government shutdown. The debt limit was raised again. Spending continued to rise. Obamacare was never repealed.

 

With Common Core, Tea Partiers spotted a chance to rebrand their image, from the tightfisted guardians of budgetary matters to the protectors of kids. FreedomWorks, the Heritage Institute, the American Principles Project, the Heartland Institute and a whole network of conservative advocacy groups and think tanks began alerting their members through emails, conference calls, emails and local organizing to oppose Common Core.

 

Whitney Neal, then the director of grass-roots organizing at FreedomWorks, estimated that she did around 100 town hall meetings in 2013 on the subject, speaking to school board forums, groups of state legislators, PTAs, county GOP organizations and student groups. A 44-page presentation that the group delivered around the country (and obtained by Newsweek ) claimed Common Core would “eliminate local control, limit parental involvement, open the door to invasive data collection, provide little options for reform, and cater to special interest influence in individual classrooms.” They distributed a menacing video of Jeffrey Immelt, CEO of General Electric and a major backer of Common Core, saying, “State-run communism may not be your cup of tea, but their government works, you know.”

 

“It became this thing where saying ‘I want to stop Common Core’ became basically saying ‘I want the federal government out of my classroom,’” says Neal.

And here's the best quote, really:

 

For the right, Common Core had become the educational equivalent of Obamacare at a time when conservative anger about executive branch overreach was off the charts.

 

“We entered into a policy environment where, thanks to the IRS scandals, the EPA, Obamacare, other issues...there was a real suspicion in my state and others about government overreach,” says John White, the state superintendent of education in Louisiana, who was appointed by Jindal but still supports Common Core.

 

Now more levelheaded conservatives are exasperated. “This thing just reached a crescendo of idiocy, where you have Republican presidential candidates in favor of Common Core until the moment they became presidential candidates,” says Chester Finn, president of the Fordham Institute, who served as an assistant secretary of education under the first President Bush. “It is so transparently craven as to be almost laughable.”

 

Along similar lines, study after study show that islamophobia and fear of muslims does NOT go up after terrorist attacks, but instead DOES go up during presidential election cycles, specifically among republican voters since the GOP uses it to whip up fear in the voter base. Merca!! http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/are-politics-of-fear-driving-anti-muslim-sentiment/

 

Oh, and there's this:

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-plan-supported-party-widely-opposed-gop-poll/story?id=35759694

Edited December 15, 2015 by iNow

[tar]

iNow,

 

"The law’s backers on both sides of the aisle say that the Obama administration made a crucial error by coupling Common Core with Race to the Top, a Department of Education program that created a competition among states to adopt a series of education reforms. It brought back more bad memories of No Child Left Behind and its heavy hand. For the right, Common Core had become the educational equivalent of Obamacare at a time when conservative anger about executive branch overreach was off the charts."

 

Why is concern about executive branch overreach not an allowable concern?

 

Regards, TAR

[iNow]

Nice try at moving the goal posts, but I have no interest in chasing your red herring or defending myself against an obvious strawman.