Opinion of No Child Left Behind

[ElectionsGuy]

This Act was meant to improve education through setting high standards through standardized testing. What is your opinion on this law, signed by Pres Bush in 2001? (we can move this to IP if more appropriate)

[Frodo]

Common Core would have fared better in the court of public opinion had it not been for No Child Left Behind. 

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

Obviously a freedom act.

[AggregateDemand]

It is based on a very successful set of reforms used in Texas to improve the school system. Unfortunately, it holds the teachers accountable to certain standards, while also allowing teachers to administrate the tests, which is like letting employees fill out their own performance evaluations.

The reason schools put so much emphasis on SAT, GMAT, GRE, MCAT and LSAT is because they are administered by outside parties who are obsessed with integrity. 

[TDAS04]

Obviously a freedomhorrible act.

[IceSpear]

Terrible, of course.

[Bigby]

Just as bad as Common Core. I think the only reason liberals hate this act but not Common Core is because this act was signed by Bush.

[Maxwell]

I think I get the idea. It's just not a very good one.

[IceSpear]

Just as bad as Common Core. I think the only reason liberals hate this act but not Common Core is because this act was signed by Bush.

We already know NCLB is a failure. The jury is still out on Common Core.

[KCDem]

Horrible like the administration that came up with it.

[Free Bird]

Just as bad as Common Core. I think the only reason liberals hate this act but not Common Core is because this act was signed by Bush.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Proof that politicians don't give a shyt about education.

[ElectionsGuy]

So guys, what's the HUGE difference between NCLB and Common Core?

[IceSpear]

So guys, what's the HUGE difference between NCLB and Common Core?

NCLB has completely unrealistic goals and "accountability measures", for one thing. It goes far beyond just setting standards.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Worse than Common Core (which is pretty bad).

[Free Bird]

So guys, what's the HUGE difference between NCLB and Common Core?

NCLB has completely unrealistic goals and "accountability measures", for one thing. It goes far beyond just setting standards.

Common Core does much more.

[DemPGH]

Very horrible. Not only is the philosophy behind it not useful or helpful in the 21st century, not only does it hold the wrong people accountable, and not only are its objectives unrealistic, but high school students are perfectly free to blow it off.

[Cory]

Very horrible. Not only is the philosophy behind it not useful or helpful in the 21st century, not only does it hold the wrong people accountable, and not only are its objectives unrealistic, but high school students are perfectly free to blow it off.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'm yet to figure out why common core is so terrible?

But NCLB basically set up the worst performing schools (compounded by terrible social problems) for failure.

[Free Bird]

I'm yet to figure out why common core is so terrible?

But NCLB basically set up the worst performing schools (compounded by terrible social problems) for failure.

CC is a different brand of crap. It assumes kids in Texas learn the same as in New York, and creates this soulless, almost industrially manufactured youth to provide "services." It doesn't teach kids HOW to think, it teaches them WHAT to think.

[Mordecai]

So guys, what's the HUGE difference between NCLB and Common Core?

Well for one thing NCLB sets up a system that exacerbates the gap between high-performing schools and low-performing schools.

Instead of looking at methods to improve teaching and education, it simply relies on comparing the results of sh**tty standardized tests (ugh) between schools. Those schools that under-perform get their funding cut off, setting into motion a downward spiral for them. The better schools get better and the worst-performing schools continue to perform poorly. Business as usual.

It's probably the best example of sh**tty top-down conservative social policy. It doesn't look at needs or methods, it only looks at results. Which of course leads to fraud and forgery.

It also fails to identify the cause of poorly-performing schools, which is of course the method of funding and the socioeconomic status of the students' families. The kids in the rich suburbs aren't any smarter, they simply have the best teachers, the best funded schools, parents who themselves are more likely to be highly educated and encouraging of education, and they don't have to worry about when they're going to have their next meal or if they'll get killed by gangs or beaten by their parents.

[Cory]

I'm yet to figure out why common core is so terrible?

Because it's a step towards a modern 21st Century education system, a potential death knell for the right.

[Deus Naturae]

I'm yet to figure out why common core is so terrible?

Because it's a step towards a modern 21st Century education system, a potential death knell for the right.

This statement is meaningless.

[Del Tachi]

Freedom Act

[Indy Texas]

I'm yet to figure out why common core is so terrible?

But NCLB basically set up the worst performing schools (compounded by terrible social problems) for failure.

CC is a different brand of crap. It assumes kids in Texas learn the same as in New York, and creates this soulless, almost industrially manufactured youth to provide "services." It doesn't teach kids HOW to think, it teaches them WHAT to think.

It's no more logical to assume all kids in Texas learn the same way than that all kids in the entire country learn the same way.

"Them New York kids is differ'nt! Down here, our kids like real 'Murican stuff like gun-shootin' and truck-drivin' and baby-makin' after football games! They don't need no humanistic education or postmodern literary criticism! Yee haw! Pew pew pew!"