Who benefited from the No Child Left Behind?

[epchick]

Originally Posted by PM_Mama00

How are they the community's fault? They can't control a parent who doesn't care about their child's schooling. And live we've all seen, many times when a parent doesn't care, the kid isn't going to care.

The community (like in terms of enforcing laws) can most definitely control a parent up until the child is around 16, so why can't it continue until the child is 18? True, there are kids that aren't gonna care if their parents don't care, but that isn't always the case. But if a child has parents who don't place any emphasis on getting a diploma, it's harder for them to continue. That is where the community should come in. I'm not saying that the community is to blame, but if you HAD to place the blame somewhere, IMO it would be the community.

ETA:

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

With respect to the certification issue, that really has not actually improved the quality of the teachers that are being hired. Point blank, until the government get its act together and starts offering teachers compensation that is really and truly in proportion to what they are worth, they will have a very difficult time finding quality teachers. The low pay and stringent requirements of NCLB are a deterrent for many, many people who would be excellent teachers.

And where is your proof that the more stringent requirements for certification don't improve the quality? That's true that not every teacher is a quality teacher, but NCLB didn't lower the bar, the less-than-quality teachers have been around waaaaay longer than NCLB. The federal government sets up guidelines for what a "highly qualified" teacher is, and each state then sets their own standards for a "highly qualified" teacher. So really, it depends on the state if you have "lower" quality teachers.

[PM_Mama00]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Im 20 miles away from downtown DC if that matters. And yes where I live, having a car DOES matter although here in THIS county we have decent Metro access. ANd I am lucky that I live near the end of the subway line. My MIL and my best friend live 5 miles away and have to drive to MY area to get metro access but that's not considered rural...heh.

But that is beside the main idea of what Kevin was trying to impart.

The main idea really is kids with any kind of access has a better chance to make do with the school system than those who don't

I didn't know that there were different 'versions' of suburbs.

I don't think there's different versions, just different visions. I've never been in the DC area so I have no clue what that looks like. I guess maybe we'd be considered somewhere between rural and suburb? Not sure. Dee can answer that.

Originally Posted by epchick

The community (like in terms of enforcing laws) can most definitely control a parent up until the child is around 16, so why can't it continue until the child is 18? True, there are kids that aren't gonna care if their parents don't care, but that isn't always the case. But if a child has parents who don't place any emphasis on getting a diploma, it's harder for them to continue. That is where the community should come in. I'm not saying that the community is to blame, but if you HAD to place the blame somewhere, IMO it would be the community....

I agree. Teenagers become adults at 18. That's when they are legally allowed to make life changing decisions so it makes sense. That would take away the option of dropping out of school. I still blame parents though. It's our duty as parents (well when I actually have kids) to raise our children and teach them wrong from right. It's not the teachers duty to raise our children. It's their duty to TEACH them reading, writing, arithmetics, etc. It's not the community's duty to raise our children, it's their duty to provide activities and recreation to enhance our children's senses and involve them in things other than the TV. It's not the law enforcers duty to raise our children. It's their duty to serve and protect.

When it comes to a student who's parents just don't care, then perhaps others can step in. I don't know what the real solution is. I was raised that if I failed a grade or class, my parents would be seriously disappointed and I'd be grounded. My friends who's (am I using that right? lol the irony) parents didn't care about their schooling excelled on their own.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by PM_Mama00

I
I agree. Teenagers become adults at 18. That's when they are legally allowed to make life changing decisions so it makes sense. That would take away the option of dropping out of school. I still blame parents though. It's our duty as parents (well when I actually have kids) to raise our children and teach them wrong from right. It's not the teachers duty to raise our children. It's their duty to TEACH them reading, writing, arithmetics, etc. It's not the community's duty to raise our children, it's their duty to provide activities and recreation to enhance our children's senses and involve them in things other than the TV. It's not the law enforcers duty to raise our children. It's their duty to serve and protect.

When it comes to a student who's parents just don't care, then perhaps others can step in. I don't know what the real solution is. I was raised that if I failed a grade or class, my parents would be seriously disappointed and I'd be grounded. My friends who's (am I using that right? lol the irony) parents didn't care about their schooling excelled on their own.

oh yeah, I completely agree with you. I guess I just see how it is here in my community. A kid is allowed to miss 9 days of school a semester, and after the 9th day, the parent can be taken to court for truancy. Yet once a kid turns 16, they are allowed to drop out and no one cares anymore. I don't think it's right. The parent of the 16 year old should be taken to court just as much as the parent of the 1st child. But that happens soo many times here. In fact, there is an initiative here (forgot what its called) where the MAYOR goes to the houses of kids who have dropped out and encourages them to go back. Does it help? Ehhh, maybe when the news station goes out to cover it, but IDK if it helps that much.

The biggest thing that our community could do here is to change our mentality. A lot of parents are stuck in the "old way" and its hard to convince them otherwise. As long as you reach the kids, that is all that matters.

But my whole thing is that the teachers shouldn't be held responsible for drop outs. But with NCLB, they are.

[PM_Mama00]

Originally Posted by epchick

oh yeah, I completely agree with you. I guess I just see how it is here in my community. A kid is allowed to miss 9 days of school a semester, and after the 9th day, the parent can be taken to court for truancy. Yet once a kid turns 16, they are allowed to drop out and no one cares anymore. I don't think it's right. The parent of the 16 year old should be taken to court just as much as the parent of the 1st child. But that happens soo many times here. In fact, there is an initiative here (forgot what its called) where the MAYOR goes to the houses of kids who have dropped out and encourages them to go back. Does it help? Ehhh, maybe when the news station goes out to cover it, but IDK if it helps that much.

The biggest thing that our community could do here is to change our mentality. A lot of parents are stuck in the "old way" and its hard to convince them otherwise. As long as you reach the kids, that is all that matters.

But my whole thing is that the teachers shouldn't be held responsible for drop outs. But with NCLB, they are.

Lol then we're agreeing completely on this. I think that's awesome that the Mayor is doing that. Things at your school were pretty similar to mine. I think we started out in 95 with 160some students. By graduation in 99, we graduated about 120ish. I'm sure the school system would cringe if that were now.

There was a girl whom I had known since kindergarten. Bright student, but then started hanging out with the wrong crowd. In high school, our Spanish teacher made a deal that if she came to class every day for a week, we'd have a pizza party the next week. She didn't make it. Eventually she dropped out. Her sister who was a year younger than her, although the biggest pothead I know, graduated in the top 5 of her class.

[ASUADPi]

NCLB, AYP and AZ Learns are the reason I'm getting out of education. NCLB is a crock of "bleep". It is an unfunded and retarded mandate. I'm sorry, even if the stupid thing was funded, it would still be a crock. There are some amazing teachers out there (and there are some who just need to get out of the profession all together), but it doesn't matter how great the teacher is, some kids WILL NEVER be at grade level!!! To expect a special needs child with an IQ of 75 to take and PASS a test at GRADE LEVEL is asinine. Right now the kids aren't 'required" to pass but to take and have a score, but that will eventually go the way of the dinosaur as the whole point of NCLB is to have "all kids to grade level by 2013, which is a another crock of crap in itself).

There are lawsuits going on in AZ right now because our stupid superintendent of public instruction (who has never set foot in a classroom in his life!) is wanting to change the "law" so that those kids who do have an IEP and don't "pass" AIMS (our state high stakes testing needed for graduation), it will "say so" on their frickin diploma!! Talk about truly labeling a child!

I got so tired of the crap associated with everything. I spent more time "teaching" for some stupid district assessment or state assessment that I rarely did anything interesting or even remotely fun with my students. No wonder kids hate school now! Plus, how does it really show how "smart" my kids are in the first place? Prior to my kids taking the 3rd grade AIMS (in 2008), I spent like a month doing practice AIMS (which had the same standards and essentially very similiar questions).

I "taught" them how to "take" the stupid test. You know why I did this? Because whether I'm considered a "good" teacher or "not" is based on those stupid scores! They don't care about their work in class, their grades in class, their progress monitoring or DIBELS scores, all they (the district, state, government) care about is AIMS (or any other high stakes test). Yes, most "good" teachers actually have their students do well, but I worked in a low income district, where I would say 80% of the students were hispanic and of that 80%, 60% were monolingual English and of that 60% I would say 40-50% were illegal. You do the math on how well most of the kids in this district do on state high stakes tests!

Education has become more and more political due to NCLB and quite honestly it has taken the fun out of teaching and I think out of learning. Yes, there were problems in education when I was a kid, but I graduated from high school, went to college, got a Bachelors and even a masters degree. I have owned two homes, own my car, I'm pretty sure I turned out okay based on the education I got as a child. My parents are highly educated (mom has two masters, going for her 3rd, dad is working on his masters), I'm sure they turned out okay and education was so much more different when they were kids.

Okay, I'm totally rambling now and I'm not sure I'm making any sense so I'm going to "shut up". LOL.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

Yes, most "good" teachers actually have their students do well, but I worked in a low income district, where I would say 80% of the students were hispanic and of that 80%, 60% were monolingual English and of that 60% I would say 40-50% were illegal. You do the math on how well most of the kids in this district do on state high stakes tests!

Welcome to my whole city And they wonder why El Paso doesn't perform as well as other cities in Texas. Well shiiit, if my HS didn't have enough money to buy protractors for every student in every geometry class (my school only had 1000 kids in it anyways) BEFORE NCLB, why would they have enough money after NCLB? Especially when making AYP determines whether you get federal funding or not.



Something to consider....abiding by NCLB and all that comes with it is NOT mandatory. You don't have to follow what the federal government (or even the state government) says, but if you schools/school districts choose not to follow them, then they get NO funding whatsoever. If every school district in the nation decided to stop following NCLB, and teach the way teachers are suppose to think, (so essentially it's a boycott) do you think that would be enough of a clue for our administration to reconsider NCLB?


ETA: Why are you all still engaging gamma/MM? Just ignore him, and let him rot.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

Okay, I'm totally rambling now and I'm not sure I'm making any sense so I'm going to "shut up". LOL.

Maybe if you'd spent all summer on a lesson plan . . . oh, the lament.

I get where you're saying, but the kids we're using as the "problem" are a niche. Maybe there are quite a few in your school (or El Paso), but that's not a massive, overwhelming issue - so why do teachers, on a massive, overwhelming level, hate the program? There's a disconnect between the anger and the rationale, and I find it very interesting.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Maybe if you'd spent all summer on a lesson plan . . . oh, the lament.

I get where you're saying, but the kids we're using as the "problem" are a niche. Maybe there are quite a few in your school (or El Paso), but that's not a massive, overwhelming issue - so why do teachers, on a massive, overwhelming level, hate the program? There's a disconnect between the anger and the rationale, and I find it very interesting.

I'm not a teacher, but I'll hazard a guess that the teachers feel threatened that they are being assessed on the children's performances on one test when, no matter how good a teacher they may be, there are many other factors that determine how successful a child is on said test, including all the other teachers that have ever taught that child! Should an 8th grade math teacher be judged on how their students do on this test when, in reality, the child has been behind in their math skills since 1st grade?

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by epchick

And where is your proof that the more stringent requirements for certification don't improve the quality? That's true that not every teacher is a quality teacher, but NCLB didn't lower the bar, the less-than-quality teachers have been around waaaaay longer than NCLB. The federal government sets up guidelines for what a "highly qualified" teacher is, and each state then sets their own standards for a "highly qualified" teacher. So really, it depends on the state if you have "lower" quality teachers.

My proof? Just look around at the school systems. I can speak from experience in my own state, and I'm sure people in other states can attest to the same thing. What the federal government says is a high quality teacher is someone who has the right credentials on paper. Anyone can go through certification requirements if they pay the money and enroll in the classes. That is NOT what makes someone a good teacher. It takes years of dedication and working to hone skills before someone really becomes a quality teacher.

I know teachers who have the proper certification and can't teach worth a d@#$. They don't know how to do proper lesson plans. They don't know anything about pacing guides. They stand up and lecture for the entire class period with little involvement or interaction from the students. I could go on.

And it is interesting to me that despite the NCLB laws, they STILL push TFA.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

My proof? Just look around at the school systems. I can speak from experience in my own state, and I'm sure people in other states can attest to the same thing. What the federal government says is a high quality teacher is someone who has the right credentials on paper. Anyone can go through certification requirements if they pay the money and enroll in the classes. That is NOT what makes someone a good teacher. It takes years of dedication and working to hone skills before someone really becomes a quality teacher.

I know teachers who have the proper certification and can't teach worth a d@#$. They don't know how to do proper lesson plans. They don't know anything about pacing guides. They stand up and lecture for the entire class period with little involvement or interaction from the students. I could go on.

And it is interesting to me that despite the NCLB laws, they STILL push TFA.

This is all true. Anecdotally speaking, watching my wife attend education classes, it was truly befuddling how easy this profession was to enter. Really -- there were classes on how to do things like operate copy machines and overhead projectors.

If the teaching profession wants to survive as a viable profession rather than a simple vocation which anyone qualified in whatever subject matter can enter, it probably needs to reinvent itself, both in terms of training and maintaining good teachers and in terms of rewarding success in the classroom.

I know some universities are looking at reinventing their training processes into something more resembling apprenticeships. (I want to say I heard about NCSU doing this) I'm interested to see how that turns out.

[PM_Mama00]

Originally Posted by Kevin

This is all true. Anecdotally speaking, watching my wife attend education classes, it was truly befuddling how easy this profession was to enter. Really -- there were classes on how to do things like operate copy machines and overhead projectors.

If the teaching profession wants to survive as a viable profession rather than a simple vocation which anyone qualified in whatever subject matter can enter, it probably needs to reinvent itself, both in terms of training and maintaining good teachers and in terms of rewarding success in the classroom.

I know some universities are looking at reinventing their training processes into something more resembling apprenticeships. (I want to say I heard about NCSU doing this) I'm interested to see how that turns out.

Wouldn't student teaching be considered an apprenticeship?

I'm shocked by some of the people I went to high school with who are now teachers. But then again, they might be able to teach the material better than they were at doing the material 10 or so years ago.

I just remembered my junior year of high school we got a teacher in trouble for her teaching habits. No one understood her and when we'd ask questions she would get frustrated. Students who had the other teacher the first semester and then her were really confused. We had her students from 9-12 sign a petition and one by one got called down to our principals office. (our Vice Principal is the one who always dealt with problems, so you knew it was serious if you were going to the principal). We had to give our reasoning for signing the petition. It was kind of scary, but with the amount of students who signed, they actually took it seriously. I'm not sure if she's teaching somewhere else now, but possibly the same evaluations the students take in college classes could help in high school?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by PM_Mama00

Wouldn't student teaching be considered an apprenticeship?

Yes, but some of these new programs are focusing on getting these teacher candidates into the classroom much faster and for a much longer period of time before they're off on their own.

I just remembered my junior year of high school we got a teacher in trouble for her teaching habits.

That is awesome. And it is even more awesome that your administration paid attention. My experience has always been that those situations were unwinnable, thus were battles not worth fighting. Did you by any chance go to a school where teachers weren't tenured? I do think tenure is a blight on our education system (at least in the K-12 context) and needs to go. Before we can even talk about holding administrators accountable, we have to let them be able to hire and fire so that they can get the people they want so that they can implement their strategies for success. It's all about making education more focused on the students than on the employees and institutions which deliver it.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by Kevin

That is awesome. And it is even more awesome that your administration paid attention. My experience has always been that those situations were unwinnable, thus were battles not worth fighting. Did you by any chance go to a school where teachers weren't tenured? I do think tenure is a blight on our education system (at least in the K-12 context) and needs to go. Before we can even talk about holding administrators accountable, we have to let them be able to hire and fire so that they can get the people they want so that they can implement their strategies for success. It's all about making education more focused on the students than on the employees and institutions which deliver it.

YEESSS! I was thinking the SAME thing.

Honestly back in the day in my school system, issues like this were addressed.

Now? Even if the students were diligent about how they approached poor teaching, they would still be "ignored." Allowing teachers to attain career (tenure) status in the public school system can be helpful, but when teachers are attaining career status in spite of their obviously poor performance in the classroom, then there will continue to be a problem.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by PM_Mama00

Wouldn't student teaching be considered an apprenticeship?

Student teaching is an apprenticeship, but it really isn't always adequate. If the student teacher gets paired with a piss-poor teacher, the cycle will just continue.

And Kevin is right... many of these "training" programs? Yeah right.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by gamma

How about when the teacher gets paired with piss-poor students and piss-poor parents?

They're talking about training for student teachers - not regular teachers.