NYT: Mr. Obama and No Child Left Behind

[tonysam]

Michael Bloomberg or Eli Broad must write the editorials:

President Obama’s blueprint for reworking the No Child Left Behind Education Act of 2002 has good ideas, but it doesn’t have anything close to the rigor that the word “blueprint” would suggest. Whether the president’s plan will strengthen or weaken the program will depend on how the administration fleshes out the missing details — and how Congress rewrites the law.

Teachers’ unions, state governments and other interest groups have long wanted to water down or kill off the provision of the law that requires the states to raise student performance — especially for poor and minority children — in exchange for federal money. They will likely gin up their lobbying. Congress must resist.

President Obama’s blueprint adheres to the principles first set by former President George W. Bush. The new proposal, however, would focus federal sanctions and monitoring heavily on the relatively small number of chronically failing schools and allow better-run schools more flexibility to fix themselves. That makes sense, but only if the latter group is not allowed to shortchange poor and minority children.

NYT

The fact is the "poor" schools will NEVER have the test or so-called "achievement" scores of the rich ones because of the students and their backgrounds outside of school. Teachers can't do a thing about it. Bring the high achievers in the wealthy schools into the poor income schools and watch the test scores go up. Move the kids in the poor schools to the rich schools and watch the test scores go down. Move the teachers from the poor schools to the rich schools and there will be no change in the test scores. Move the teachers from the rich schools to the poor schools and the test scores will still be low.

It's the poverty, stupid, and there's not one damned thing NCLB or any of the other "reforms" pushed by the privatizers can do about it. Poverty is a completely different issue.

[Catshrink]

1. You analysis is right on, tonysam.

[frazzled]

2. Poor schools are no longer required to attain certain achievement scores

If you read the whole editorial, the new policy seeks to give credit to schools for improving achievement. Instead of punishment only, schools that improve in achievement will be given "financial awards and greater flexibility."

The current system designates schools as needing improvement if they miss progress targets. The Obama proposal calls for employing a new model that gives schools credit for improving student performance, even if the schools miss the targets. This, too, makes sense, as long as the improvement being rewarded is significant.

The plan introduces a new element: giving financial rewards and greater flexibility to schools and districts that show large improvements in student learning. This seems sensible, as long as lawmakers understand that both incentives (federal money) and punishments (federal sanctions) are necessary to move school systems forward.

[adnelson60087]

3. Bill Clinton and the DLC gave up on the poverty issues

and all that entails back in the 90's. I still think that is his biggest policy blunder...next to NAFTA that is.

[readmoreoften]

4. Dealing with poverty gets in the way of cutting deals with the "poverty-makers".

[Hannah Bell]

5. +100. "Poverty-makers." I'm going to use that.

[sam kane]

6. this is crazy

what is Obama doing by making NCLB even worse? No Child Left Behind has just ruined the lives of so many children. I recommend the film, "The Race to Nowhere" about how the insane amount of busy work/homework brought on by this has destroyed kids' lives.