Re: [Phys-l] NCLB: End It, Don't Mend It

[John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>]

On 10/30/2011 01:36 PM, Bernard Cleyet wrote:
> NCLB: End It, Don't Mend It

Works for me.

To borrow a phrase:
   I'm not opposed to all testing.  I'm opposed to dumb testing.

=======================

Suppose you are on a jury.  The defendant is testifying:

  Q:  During the robbery, did you point a gun at the victim?
  A:  Yes.
  Q:  Did you pull the trigger?
  A:  Yes.
  Q:  Did you intend to kill him?
  A:  No.

In real life, it doesn't work that way.  The jury is expected to
conclude that the defendant /intended/ the entirely-foreseeable
consequences of his actions.

> http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2011/10/dear_deborah_have_you_been.html

Diane Ravitch asks:   "When, if ever, will policymakers realize that 
  they should find ways to support teachers, not to demoralize them?

  "By 2014, on the NCLB timetable of destruction, close to 100 percent 
  of public schools will have 'failed' ...."

That misses the point.  We simply must assume that many members of 
congress fully /intend/ to destroy the public school system, and some
other members are willing to go along with them.  This is, and always 
has been, the entirely-foreseeable consequence of NCLB.

Motive is not the same as intent.  I am not for the moment saying 
/why/ they want to destroy the public school system (although I do
have some theories).

For more on this, see
  http://www.av8n.com/physics/eclbe-testing.htm

====================

Call your Representative.  Call your Senators.