Thread: No Child Left Behind Is NOT Good.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I went to a private school, and I know first hand that everybody in the private school community knows the heirarchy. That knowledge has to do with PSAT and ACT scores, plus how the graduates turn out in the work world. When a school relatively sucks, it becomes the butt of jokes. When a school kicks the most ass, that school charges the most tuition and the richest people send their kids there. So the better a school does, the more money they make. That knowledge has the administrators and/or shareholders working hard to make sure the schools are run as well as they can be run.

PSAT and ACT scores do not measure the learning taking place, only how well the teacher taught the test itself. There's a lot more useful ways to learn than just memorizing facts.

And half/dreaming, here's the best way to fund schools: Have all schools funded by their community's local taxes. That way each community is responsible for its own school. Oh yeah and private schools can't be allowed for this to work.

Originally Posted by DoomedOne

PSAT and ACT scores do not measure the learning taking place, only how well the teacher taught the test itself. There's a lot more useful ways to learn than just memorizing facts.

Why do you think that? There is a ton of stuff you have to know to do well on those standarsized tests. It's not something that can be taught in a few weeks. It takes years of being in school to do well on them. The prep courses are mainly for learning test taking strategies and getting a helpful but not comprehensive overview of what students have already covered. There is a very high correlation between a school's ranking and the career successes of its graduates. Jackson Academy (private) does not have better standardized test turnout than Murrah High School (public) because they teach a better prep course. It's a much better school. That is known by the Northeast Jackson public.

Just because it takes time to prepare doesn't mean it's an adequate comparitive between schools. You're judging their prep courses, basically, when there is so much more to learning, and not only that but individual differences with a student's ability to demonstrate what they know vary as well.

Originally Posted by DoomedOne

Just because it takes time to prepare doesn't mean it's an adequate comparitive between schools. You're judging their prep courses, basically, when there is so much more to learning, and not only that but individual differences with a student's ability to demonstrate what they know vary as well.

I'm saying that standardized test scores reflect way more than differences in prep courses. Murrah (public) students could take Jackson Academy's prep course and vice-versa and Jackson Academy's scores will still be far better than Murrah's. It's because of the differences in years and years of learning. And like I said, career success is another indicator. There are reasons people who could send their kids to Murrah or whatever public school is in their region for free will pay $12,000 a year to send their kids to Jackson Academy or Jackson Prep or less money to send them to another private school in the area. It is knowable what schools are better than others. Do you really not have a sense of what schools are better than others in your area? Do you think there is no way to know?

That sounds a little judgmental to be honest. When I look at the schools in my area when I was in High School, I have to say that it's really only the teacher that makes the difference. As far as the schools go, it was really a matter of money and how well spent it is that made general differences. Like Marin Academy had the most money per student, and spent the most time preparing students for Standardized Tests so they looked much better on paper, thus driving up their tuition rates.

it really doesnt make much sense putting severley mentally handicapped people on the same level as normal students. there are a lot of tax dollars being spent on them and i dont mean to be offensive but, what kind of future do they really have ahead of them?

From what I see of the No Child left behind Act and its implementation in the local public school district, all it is is a method of dumbing down the people, and holding back those who do have the ability to achieve more.

It seems to be tied to money, I dont know for sure as the district refuses to provide firm answers. Seems after it was passed there were several learnig programs added to after school and summer time for students who were falling behind. My opinion( due to lack of answers) is that the school gets funding based on the numbers of students in thses programs. I note that recruitment efforts to put kids into these programs is contunually rising.
Another notation is that kids do not fail in school anymore. They might get D's and F's all through the year but at the end they always mysteriously just barely pass ( whether they know anything or not) .
Furthermore, I know of one family that was told that of ther child di not go to these auxillary classes their child would not pass. This went on for 3- 4 years, Finally they just said no to putting their kid in these programs. They didnt fail the kid, they just skated him on to the next grade with a mysteriously just passing grade in the last quarter of the school year.

All evidence here suggests the act is just a racket with no real basis in concern for education.