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

["LaMontagne, Bob" <RLAMONT@providence.edu>]

I certainly agree with the concept of leaving education to the local governments to tailor to the needs and resources of individual communities. The "null hypothesis" is the route of choice - I totally agree with that sentiment and I am glad that you see that as reasonable.

My comment about having something else in place was in response to the hodge-podge patchwork that the current administration is employing. Districts that cannot meet NCLB standards are being given wholesale dispensations from the requirements - whereas moderately and strongly performing schools are still having their feet held to the fire. 

Bob at PC
________________________________________
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu [phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] on behalf of John Denker [jsd@av8n.com]
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 2:07 PM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] NCLB: End It, Don't Mend It

On 10/30/2011 05:03 PM, LaMontagne, Bob wrote:
> People have to realize that there are school systems in certain
> parts of this country that are so bad that "crisis" does not suffice
> to describe them.  [A]

> NCLB may be the wrong way to affect accountability in schools, but
> something should be ready to be put in it's place if the plug is
> pulled.

It is not self-evident that we need any such  "something".  Also,
asking for "something" is a bit vague.

1) Why should we reject the null hypotheses?

2a) Why should anyone think that NCLB (also known as ECLBE) or
 anything like it will help the schools mentioned in item [A] above?
 I see not the slightest evidence of this.

2b) Even if, hypothetically, it might help those schools, it is
 very hard to believe that it will come anywhere near outweighing
 the harm that it is obviously doing to all the other schools.


Right now the only proposals I know of are
 *) Continue ECLBE ("every child left behind equally)" as-is.
 *) Reauthorize it with minor modifications and not-very-helpful
  "waivers".
 *) Just get rid of it entirely.  This is the null hypothesis.
  This would leave all decisions about testing, accountability,
  etc. up to the individual states and local districts.

Of these, getting rid of it entirely is clearly the best option.
If you have another option, please fill us in on the specifics.
A lot of people would be very very eagerly interested.

I particularly ask all the "libertarians" and "conservatives"
why the ideas of decentralization, elimination of federal
regulation, states' rights, don't-tread-on-me, et cetera should
not apply to this issue.
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l