Government Run Indoctrination Day Camps aka Public Schools

     In the No Child Left Behind program the benchmarks are mandated by the federal No Child Left Behind Act, which has been called one of the most sweeping changes to public education since the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.      A campaign promise of President George W. Bush later espoused by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, NCLB requires schools to show "adequate yearly progress," or AYP, each year toward a 2014 deadline for 100 percent of U.S. students to score "proficient" in math and reading on state tests. The law has its name because, not only must more of each school's students score proficient every year, but schools must show gains among groups that have historically fallen behind, including minority, low-income and special education students.
     Schools that fail to make those yearly marks could face stiff penalties, including forced firings or building closures and the potential loss of federal or state funding. Local educators said the law changed the way schools operated, putting more focus on data and teacher training, and intensified existing efforts to get students to perform.
     The law turns 10 years old in January and, as the 100 percent deadline nears, President Barack Obama has called on Congress to update its provisions, sparking a nationwide debate about the good, the bad and the ugly of the law and what should come from a rewrite.
     Michigan has sought a 10-year waiver from the law's 100 percent mandate as it raises the scores students must hit to be deemed proficient. Some school officials and others said the mission of the law was admirable, but the implementation was sometimes tragic, piling layers of expensive red tape onto schools, minimizing the impact of increases in federal education spending. School officials also said the law was too punitive, slapping students such with the discouraging label of failure without offering support to foster change. Though it's brought schools nationwide under a common mission, it's also anchored public perception of schools and teachers to tests and standards many said don't tell the full story of a child's education.
     Under No Child Left Behind, public education has become "an emotional roller coaster." By holding schools more accountable, forcing them to look at every student and making scores public, lawmakers hoped to spur schools to increase student performance and close the "achievement gap" between white and minority students and between low-income and more affluent students. But, looking at the numbers, it's hard to show that's happened. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, student scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress increased as much as 4 percent in reading and 5 percent in math between 1999 and 2008, depending on age group. But scores have been increasing at about the same pace since 1973, long before NCLB was enacted.
     On that test, the gap between white students' scores and minority students' scores has shrunk in most areas under NCLB, but some gaps in 2008 actually were larger than in the past. If No Child Left Behind were this magic bullet it was supposed to be, we'd have a lot more schools a lot closer to that target. It's also difficult to prove growth comparing old tests to new tests because curriculum changes so frequently. This is another problem. Why must the cirriculum change every year? Has anyone tried the "new" math? 2 + 2 doesn't equal 4 anymore. I understand that students need to be proficient with computers, but, in one school district here, the students are required to have an iPad. That is an $500.00 expsesnse, tell me, with an unemployment rate of 9.2%, how many parents can afford this. Then there is the fact that handwritting is being dropped across the country. WTH? Are we becoming a society where nothing is going to be written down. How will history be preserved?

     It is clear that federal spending grew under NCLB, but officials said that wasn't always effective.Title I funding, the federal money meant to help at-risk students, grew from about $8.8 billion in fiscal 2001 to $14.5 billion in current-year funding. The share of federal money grew tenfold over the last decade, to $1.7 billion in the current fiscal year. But officials said funding hasn't kept up with the needs -- there are still old textbooks and too few supplies -- and the layers of red tape schools must cut through to get that money is a costly endeavor. School districts are spending at least $75,000 a year in man-hours on an obscene amount of paperwork.
     While it's difficult to prove NCLB has impacted student achievement, school leaders have said it has positively impacted public education.
     For one, it's forced schools to pay closer attention to every student, something local leaders said was done in some schools but not everywhere. Schools were forced to make better use of data, tracking on a sometimes daily basis the growth or lag of each student. NCLB asked schools to look more closely at best practices backed up by research. It improved teacher training and evaluations, some said, and inspired teachers to work more closely together.
     But the public test scores also created a high-stakes competition between schools without clear winners. In the spirit of capitalism, that competition was meant to drive schools to succeed, but  the law is too harsh on failure without rewarding success. For schools that end up on sanctions lists, the punishment can be demoralizing for teachers, parents and students, adding to the struggles.

     I honestly believe 100 percent proficiency was always the goal. But that was not used as a carrot; it was used as a stick. Not everyone agrees. Some have said the 100 percent mandate, even with the fear of punishment, was inspiring. If that's what it took to get people to collaborate and do what's best for kids, then that's an upside that can't be ignored. NCLB doesn't fully address the home-life struggles that affect students' performance, just mandating people to do something doesn't mean they can do it. But educating every student is doable if schools enact proven programs and stay focused on results. If you do those things with fidelity, you can expect you're going to see improvement.

     The high stakes set in the law was blamed for state test cheating scandals currently under investigation in Georgia, Pennsylvania and Washington, D.C. At least three states, Idaho, Montana and South Dakota, are seeking to opt out of NCLB, forgoing federal school funding, because of punitive aspects of the law. Unlike previous legislation, NCLB clearly has teeth. The penalties are a serious concern. Schools also lament the way they're held accountable. AYP status shows up in newspaper headlines, comparing schools based on only a snapshot of a student's learning. State tests given over a few days or weeks once a year don't paint a full enough picture of how much that student learned. Context is important when discussing AYP scores. For example, the state's listing did not meet AYP requirements in that category. However, an Alternative High School was included in that score with a traditional High School, which did meet AYP requirements on its own.

     A plan has been developed where students' test scores will now be reflected on the district they come from. Students in special education programs sometimes come into an Alternative school from outside districts about four credits behind other students.

     Not least of all, the law sets lofty but likely unrealistic goals. No school has ever had each one of its students proficient in every subject area, and officials have said that's because not every student learns in the same way or at the same pace. But, it has been said, teachers using research-backed teaching methods can sway even the most struggling students. Some have said research suggests schools can hit the 95 percent to 98 percent proficient mark. Many educators cite the model of "90/90/90" schools identified in a mid-1990s study of schools that were 90 percent minority, 90 percent low-income and still obtained 90 percent proficiency.
     That's not quite 100 though, and stress outside of school can hamper student performance.The Public Schools have struggled with academic achievement, due to several factors. Primarly are the transient population that comes and goes with job availablity. The kids that move around with parents looking for work can be educated, but that takes more work. But why are we educating these people who are illegally here in the first place. All the kids don't come from identical environments, some of them are more ready to be successful academically than others, so there's some challenges and some barriers that we need to overcome. We need to overcome the mindset that an education means nothing anymore, as the government will support you. Just let them know you are a minority and life has been too tough on you growing up. The government owes me attitude that is taught in the housing districts throughout the larger cities throughout America. That, of course, will take time. Unfortunately, I don't see time being on the side of educators. All kids come from different backgrounds and expecting all of them to achieve in 2014 is a little unrealistic.
     The average student doesn't know about No Child Left Behind and, unless his or her school is on a
sanctions list and forced changes are under way, that student rarely sees the behind-the-scenes frenzy that goes into making AYP. What students said they do recognize is that more is asked of them than was asked of their parents. My generation didn't have all this, we didn't have all this technology, we didn't have all the types of jobs that today's students have. There are more ways of doing things and school's harder because of it., or so they say. Students say the politics of education rarely trickles down to the classroom and say their academic success or failure depends more on their teacher, and themselves, than any federal law. Parents, meanwhile, say AYP status is a helpful tool they use to track their school's success and say it is good that educators are held more accountable. I think schools should be self-governing; they should know where they stand and communicate that to their stakeholders, it take AYP to do that. But if they can't do that for themselves, this kind of forces the issue.

     However, parents have raised concerns about what the law didn't cover. The law focuses too much of schools' attention on struggling students, leaving higher-achieving students unchallenged. It is bad to expect every district in every community to perform the same. Let the schools know how to teach their population, you can't have a blanket across the nation.
     Though Congress has yet to act on an NCLB rewrite, there are signs of reform about which local educators are hesitantly optimistic.

     At least 44 states, have moved to a "Common Core" curriculum, a unified set of standards for basic subjects. Educators say that it will make interstate test comparison fairer and help all schools keep every student on the same pace, no matter where they came from. Though the new education reform proposal doesn't include a specific relaxation of the 100 percent proficiency mark, it does include things educators support, such as more rigorous curriculum and a focus on early childhood education, which helps students throughout school. Pre-K has shown itself to be a good thing, but, you have to be lucky enough to be in an area that has pre-k or you are just shit out of luck.

     Educators called those promising signs, but said, as with NCLB, they still were leery of how those reforms would be implemented. Cautious and mindful, wary and hopeful. As well, the rise of better and cheaper technology, partnerships with the private sector and better collaboration among schools are paving the way for reform efforts that promise better student performance. A rise in the number of online high schools and a "whole child" focus on the mental, physical, social and economic well-being of children are signs of that.
     But what about educating the children of illegal immigrants? How much does this cost us each year? Most are receiving the free lunch programs, because the parents employment can not be checked on. Then, they can't speak English because the parents only speak Spanish, special teachers have to be hired to teach the English language. Extra books have to be purchased by the schools to teach English. A good many of these students are constantly moving as the parents follow the work in the crops. This has the student changing schools at least once a year, which doesn't give the student a stable learning environment. What do we do, as a country, about this tremendous expense?
    I don't know, after all, I am just a weirdo.