Ran across this in Red State and it seems that some GOP lawmakers are unhappy about the progress being made by NCLB. This is the case, even though most states are reporting improvement in scores, and particuarly improvements made by those subgroups, poor, rural, inner-city, and minority children, who benefit most from this policy. This is shameful, as is the history in recent years concerning the method which public schools are financed, and the way that children are effected.
First of all I want to keep this brief, so maybe a regular segment about public education is needed, however, what the law states is important. Every child is entitled by statute to a tuition free, education that is borne at the taxpayer’s expense. That is the law, and its precedent dates to 1647 in the Americas. So, those of you don’t like the concept, too bad. Over 350 years of precedent and public policy have an invalidating effect upon your opining
While there are needs to address NCLB, issues which have not been adequately addressed by the state of local authorities for many years, which deal with equity and student achievement are at least broached by NCLB. One of the worst practices currently left in place by Title I because, in most urban districts a systematic bias is built into district allocation legislation. This bias supports disproportionate funding for schools in the more affluent neighborhoods. NCLB is justly attempting to remedy this bias. In candor, NCLB probably doesn’t go far enough, towards the goal of improved student achievement and equity which are both laudable goals from any side of the political perspective.
Many would say that NCLB is a series of unfunded mandates. A countering argument can be made, that the federal government stepped into an area that should have been addressed and funded by the states a long time ago. Consider that if the problems associated with the education of inner-city poor and minority children were typical of the affluent, predominately white suburbs, one can only imagine how quickly the issues regarding equity in education would have been addressed. The inferred message that American policies sent was, as long as the white, affluent, and middle class children of the suburbs are performing well, education is fine. Poor children, particularly those of color, do not count in the evaluation of school performance. Those that would refute this supposition should take a look at the lack of a coherent and cohesive policy prior to NCLB to address equity in education; look hard, none existed.
More to follow in the future. NCLB is a combination of ethics, social equity, and a legitimate interest of the Federal Government, when the state either would not or could not handle the ball.