|
Apparently it did work
|
|
Topic Started: Dec 17 2008, 03:14 AM (395 Views)
|
|
Minuet
|
Dec 18 2008, 03:10 PM
Post #16
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
- Posts:
- 36,559
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #2
- Joined:
- May 19, 2003
|
- Dandandat
- Dec 18 2008, 09:16 AM
- Minuet
- Dec 17 2008, 01:29 PM
I don't recall seeing the leftwingers on Sistertrek lambasting Bush for this particular program, but I could be wrong. Maybe they could enlighten us instead of everyone jumping on the bandwagon and assuming what they thought.
Why would leftwingers on Sistertrek need to have lambasted Bush for this particular program for a  to be called on the left for this turn of events? NCLB has been a perceivable thorn in the Bush administrations side since its inception. It was a popular attack point from the left from a domestic stand point; mostly due to funding issues and the riggers it placed on teachers. One need only do a Google search to see that. All I can say in response is please read Admiralbill's post.
Could you link to some of the proof that you have that the left has attacked this program? My experience here tells a different story but I would be more then happy to review any proof you might have.
|
|
|
| |
|
Minuet
|
Dec 18 2008, 03:15 PM
Post #17
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
- Posts:
- 36,559
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #2
- Joined:
- May 19, 2003
|
- Dandandat
- Dec 18 2008, 02:46 PM
DS9 if you gave every one $50 million and tell them to provide for their own health care and education; they'll be able to do a good job of it. The question really comes down to is that the most efficient and best approach to the problem.
I doubt any sane person form the left or right would deign that the more money you put into a problem the better the results will be. However some might believe that simply improving the tactics themselves will yield a better return than simply increasing in funds.
Also I wouldn't over state the role of technology in education; education is an exercising of the mind, which sure can be had through technology, but it need not be. A good education can come from the lost levels of technology. That’s where we got the technology we take for granted in the first place.
I disagree.
In this day and age technology is an integral part of a good education system.
Could you just imagine any graduate from either high school or university trying to get a job without at least some ability to use a computer. Heck, just to work as a waiter these days you need to be able to imput information into a computer.
|
|
|
| |
|
STC
|
Dec 18 2008, 03:23 PM
Post #18
|
Commodore
- Posts:
- 4,421
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #1,245
- Joined:
- April 16, 2007
|
I'd normally get into this debate, for obvious reasons, but you'll have to excuse me, we've just broken up for end of term and my brain is knackered, I'm really not up to an education debate right now .... maybe later
|
|
|
| |
|
Dandandat
|
Dec 18 2008, 05:51 PM
Post #19
|
Time to put something here
- Posts:
- 17,948
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- August 30, 2003
|
- Minuet
- Dec 18 2008, 03:10 PM
- Dandandat
- Dec 18 2008, 09:16 AM
- Minuet
- Dec 17 2008, 01:29 PM
I don't recall seeing the leftwingers on Sistertrek lambasting Bush for this particular program, but I could be wrong. Maybe they could enlighten us instead of everyone jumping on the bandwagon and assuming what they thought.
Why would leftwingers on Sistertrek need to have lambasted Bush for this particular program for a  to be called on the left for this turn of events? NCLB has been a perceivable thorn in the Bush administrations side since its inception. It was a popular attack point from the left from a domestic stand point; mostly due to funding issues and the riggers it placed on teachers. One need only do a Google search to see that.
All I can say in response is please read Admiralbill's post. Could you link to some of the proof that you have that the left has attacked this program? My experience here tells a different story but I would be more then happy to review any proof you might have. What proof does Admiralbill's post give us? that he doesn't like NCLB? Since I never said that he does like NCLB I can't see how your comment is relevant.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/us/politics/23child.html?fta=y
- Quote:
-
WASHINGTON — Teachers cheered Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton when she stepped before them last month at an elementary school in Waterloo, Iowa, and said she would “end” the No Child Left Behind Act because it was “just not working.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/09/washington/09child.html
- Quote:
-
WASHINGTON, Jan. 8 — Democratic Congressional leaders on Monday called President Bush’s signature education law too punitive in its sanctions on public schools and pledged to increase educational spending, signaling the stance they will take this year in negotiations over the law’s renewal.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/02/21/dems.radio.reut/index.html
- Quote:
-
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Democrats charged Saturday that President Bush's "No Child Left Behind" law is wreaking havoc in U.S. schools by imposing new educational burdens without paying for them.
http://www.mariondaily.com/news/education/x560275986/Democrats-explore-possibility-of-eliminating-No-Child-Left-Behind
- Quote:
-
Democrats explore possibility of eliminating No Child Left Behind
Emphasize arts and physical education, and if need be, ditch No Child Left Behind.
Those were suggestions forwarded to the Barack Obama presidential campaign in late July at a grassroots meeting where local Democrats suggested ideas for party platform's election bid.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=leaving_nclb_behind
- Quote:
-
The next president has a unique opportunity to start from scratch in education policy, without the deadweight of a failed, inherited No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law. The new president and Congress can recapture the "small d" democratic mantle by restoring local control of education, while initiating policies for which the federal government is uniquely suited -- providing better achievement data and equalizing the states' fiscal capacity to provide for all children.
*The American Prospect was founded in 1990 as an authoritative magazine of liberal ideas, committed to a just society, an enriched democracy, and effective liberal politics.
http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/10/no_credibility.php
- Quote:
-
No Credibility Left Behind: The Bush Administration’s Record Of Failed Policies October 19, 2006 President Bush will make remarks today in Greensboro, North Carolina, on one of his most well-known policy failures, the No Child Left Behind Act. Less than three weeks before Election Day, the President’s poll numbers remain low and his Administration’s misleading statements about its record on education and a host of other issues do nothing to repair his lost credibility. From the economy to the war in Iraq to education, the Bush White House is floundering after years of broken promises and failed initiatives.
“After underfunding his signature education initiative by $40 billion, President Bush has no credibility left in North Carolina or anywhere else,” said Democratic National Committee Press Secretary Stacie Paxton.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/01/06/democrats_broaden_attack_on_school_law/
- Quote:
-
Democrats broaden attack on school law By Mary Leonard, Globe Staff | January 6, 2004
WASHINGTON -- Democratic presidential candidates, encouraged by teachers' unions and growing public doubts about a bipartisan education law, are widening their attacks on what President Bush has touted as a major domestic accomplishment and calling for fundamental changes in its provisions.
http://www.democraticmajority.com/content/how_to_fix_no_child
- Quote:
-
Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved With renewal of the No Child Left Behind Act high on the agenda for the new session of Congress, it’s no surprise that the 2002 law—the Bush administration’s signature domestic initiative—has become a political football in this intense campaign season. The administration continues to speak glowingly of the law while Democratic candidates blast it.
*Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) founded the Fund for a Democratic Majority in 1981 after the election of President Ronald Reagan in 1980, and it was renamed the Committee for a Democratic Majority in 1995.
http://www.votelouise.com/blog/372/no-child-left-behind-op-ed
- Quote:
-
By Rep. Louise Slaughter *(D) New York's 28th district Guest essayist
(July 29, 2007) — Six years after the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act, the president is once again calling upon Congress to reauthorize his flagship domestic legislation.
“We made a historic commitment,” he recently declared, “and I believe we have a moral obligation to keep it.”
Yet, the president’s track record on education is a history of broken promises and failed obligations. No Child Left Behind’s sweeping reforms remain underfunded and ineffective, and it is our nation’s children who continue to bear the burden.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/politics/2008/01/novick_merkley_blast_no_child.html
- Quote:
-
Novick, Merkley blast No Child Left Behind Posted by The Oregonian January 08, 2008 16:31PM Categories: Senate race Both Democrats seeking to unseat Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith sounded a pro-education, anti-No Child Left Behind theme Tuesday, the sixth anniversary of the landmark federal education law.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0109-09.htm
- Quote:
-
The NCLB (I can't use the whole, silly slogan again, I'm sorry) celebration is an especially ironic affair, and not just for the president. Bush is trying to collect the political capital from NCLB just as many states and school systems are rebelling because they don't have the real capital (or the desire) to comply with the burdensome law. And the Democratic candidates who were in Congress when NCLB was passed are busy attacking this program they all voted for.
http://p8.hostingprod.com/@www.principalspolicyblog.org/blog/2007/02/democrats_express_outrage_to_a.html
- Quote:
-
Democrats Express Outrage to Administration’s Voucher Proposal School leaders fearful that a national voucher program could take vital funding away from our nation’s public schools have reason to be optimistic: Democratic leaders in Congress don’t like the idea either. Shortly after the Department of Education released Building on Results: A Blueprint for Strengthening the No Child Left Behind Act, the chairmen of the Senate, Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee and the House Education and Labor Committee issued their response.
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) voiced his disappointment that the administration “has once again proposed siphoning crucial resources from our public schools” who are “already reeling from increased requirements and budget cuts.” Calling the proposal “not reasonable and not acceptable,” Rep. George Miller (D-CA) pointed out that Congress has already rejected private school vouchers in the past: “They are the same bad idea they have always been, regardless of what they are labeled.”
http://www.lewiscountydemocrats.net/young-democrats.htm
- Quote:
-
January 8, 2002 was a sad day in American history. That was the day when President George W. Bush signed away the future of the country's youth. It was on this day that No Child Left Behind (NCLB), really the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), joined the ranks of Bush's continually growing legacy. According to the administration, ESEA will create "stronger accountability for results," "more choices for parents," "more freedom for states and committees," and "encourage proven education methods." Here are the reasons ESEA won't work.
http://www.komu.com/satellite/SatelliteRender/KOMU.com/ba8a4513-c0a8-2f11-0063-9bd94c70b769/d287739d-80ce-0971-01f0-8c17ec37d1c7
- Quote:
-
They also hope to reduce the cost of college tuition through tax credits "for every family, for every child, for every year to help afford going to college," Clinton said. At the K-12 level Clinton hopes to eliminate the current No Child Left Behind Plan. Obama, on the other hand, wants to reform the No Child Left Behind plan rather than get rid of it completely. He hopes to do this by increasing funding of the law and improving assessments. In higher education, Obama's $4,000 proposed tax credit for off setting college costs is slightly higher than Clinton's $3,500 proposed tax credit.
A simple google surch will get you there every time.
I hope these are enough proof for your review.
|
|
|
| |
|
Minuet
|
Dec 18 2008, 06:24 PM
Post #20
|
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
- Posts:
- 36,559
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #2
- Joined:
- May 19, 2003
|
So Democrats don't like the act.
What a suprise - the main opposition party doesn't agree. I still don't think a blanket statement about "leftists" applies here because the program itself is leftist.
|
|
|
| |
|
Swidden
|
Dec 18 2008, 09:36 PM
Post #21
|
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
- Posts:
- 12,243
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #31
- Joined:
- August 30, 2003
|
- Admiralbill_gomec
- Dec 18 2008, 07:22 AM
I think "No Child Left Behind" means "All Children Become Mediocre."
People have this "Lake Woebegon" view of their children that is reflected in (and supported through) misguided policies such as this one.
We could have done far better. I agree that we could have done better. I also don't think that some in Congress would ever really go for crafting a better act, unless, of course, it cedes total educational control to the Federal government.
The way I viewed this act was that it set a measuring bar. If one wants their kids to surpass that bar then they need to be behind their kids pushing (postively, mind you) to exceed those set minimums. That's one thing I got from my folks. It was all well and good if i had done my best, but they also reminded me that I should always try to do better yet the next time around. They set their own standard for me, and it was usually a good deal higher than what the school expected. Even for those years in parroquial school.
|
|
|
| |
|
Franko
|
Dec 18 2008, 10:23 PM
Post #22
|
Shower Moderator
- Posts:
- 7,303
- Group:
- Cadet
- Member
- #299
- Joined:
- January 9, 2005
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Dandandat
|
Dec 19 2008, 09:22 AM
Post #23
|
Time to put something here
- Posts:
- 17,948
- Group:
- Flag Officer
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- August 30, 2003
|
- Minuet
- Dec 18 2008, 06:24 PM
So Democrats don't like the act.
What a suprise - the main opposition party doesn't agree. I still don't think a blanket statement about "leftists" applies here because the program itself is leftist. Exactly, I don't know why it was such a surprise to you; it should have been a no brainier.
So the biggest representation of the left in the US is not enough to gauge the sentiments of the left? That's irrational.
|
|
|
| |
|
Dwayne
|
Dec 19 2008, 02:30 PM
Post #24
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
- Posts:
- 5,951
- Group:
- Senior Officer
- Member
- #153
- Joined:
- March 24, 2004
|
^^^ It's a surprise to her, because she identifies herself as being more leftward leaning than otherwise, so psychologically she has a predisposition to defend those on the left, especially on things that make those on the left appear shallowly partisan.
And yes, people on the right do the same.
|
|
|
| |
|
RTW
|
Dec 19 2008, 09:26 PM
Post #25
|
Vice Admiral
- Posts:
- 7,678
- Group:
- Senior Officer
- Member
- #543
- Joined:
- February 12, 2006
|
- Dandandat
- Dec 18 2008, 02:46 PM
DS9 if you gave every one $50 million and tell them to provide for their own health care and education; they'll be able to do a good job of it. The question really comes down to is that the most efficient and best approach to the problem. $50,000,000 per student? Except for the foolishness about "efficiency", you'd be a good candidate for Secretary of Education. Who needs efficiency when the tax payers are a bottomless source of revenue.
DS9 - the problem over here is that more money oftens means new programs with more bureacrats to oversee them. The bureacracy absorbs way too much of the funding.
More discipline combined with raising expectations and requirements would improve American public education as much as any amount of money.
|
|
|
| |