We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
I have mixed feelings about this general topic, but I conclude, at the end, that the federal government has no business in local education. Not in their job description. It always seems to me that, the more jobs they take on, the more costly failures occur.
What is the source of this impulse to believe the federal government can do things better than local government? I honestly don't understand the genesis, even though its the constant refrain across all of life's problems.
Well, believe it or not, but there are places in America that do not revere Progressive policies. Plus, if done locally, those Ivy Leaguers would have to actually go to places outside NY, Boston, San Fran, LA, etc.
I'm sure if you took the trouble to plot it, the correlation between extent of federal involvement in public education and the decline in achievement, measured any way you want to measure them, would be closer to perfect that any other variable, with the possible exception of disintegration of the two parent family.
Here in my suburban CT town we hired two "coaches" to help the staff prepare for Common core. This helped the schools justify a budget increase despite a declining student population. I always thought our esteemed Union teachers, certified by the state with mandated Masters degrees should be capable of implementing any curriculum on their own. I guess I missed the Memo.
Well, we have so many with Ph.D.s in Education these days. And Ph.Ds must do research. They are not a success unless their ideas are implemented.
Remember, Education Ph.Ds experiment on children. They damage the child's instruction then track them to see how f'd up the child's life is as an adult. They then discover the child had a free thought on a Tuesday in January which explains why they should be excluded from the experiment's results.
The federal government believes there are 'backwater' places that must still use a slate and chalk to teach their children. Therefore, the federal government must dictate to these typically 'redneck' areas like Alabama or Wyoming or what have you because they are just too dumb to teach their own children.
I think, if the federal government is going to get involved at all, it should be for an overall standard. For example, dictate that all 8th graders must complete algebra before they move on to high school. But let the state decide how algebra is going to be taught. I don't have a problem creating an overall standard, the problem I have is creating a curriculum that must be used nationwide, down to the handouts you use and how you teach the kids the subject. I also don't believe in a nationalized 'test' approach.
Follow the money. The people that brought you the SAT, PSAT, AP, GMAT, etc. (i.e. your entry into advanced education) are now the publishers of the books, handouts and other instructional materials that feed into the tests, therefore the necessity to "teach to the test". So now they test all year long in every grade, but to do so efficiently, they must have a standardized test that can be scored by computer (no more "blue books" or essay tests). Therefore, all these publishing/testing companies are now affiliated with a computer company and the curricula are dependent on each student having a computer and on-line access.
Then, of course, identifying children at risk becomes a new market, so these corporate invaders are developing computer programs for pre-schoolers that allow the social worker, psychologist, teacher and, supposedly, parent to test and evaluate the child as soon as possible to assess for special needs and make certain the child is "learning ready".
It helps the bottom line if the Feds are on board running contests to award the schools/states most innovative in using these new methods. The fact that it takes dozens of administrators, testers, evaluators, specialists, budget analysts, report generators, accountants, social workers, psychologists and other such personnel for EVERY CLASSROOM TEACHER is merely a collateral expense for having the least well-educated students in the history of our country.
You have failed to make the connection: the same people who promise that Obamacare insurance customers will have their personal information protected, are also the people who will promise to protect your child's personal information--you ready for that one?