| THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016). |
|---|
Date: 01/23/01 22:15 WASHINGTON -- President Bush on Tuesday unveiled his first major policy proposal, an education plan that would funnel billions of dollars to failing schools and students in poor neighborhoods. At the heart of the plan are state standards and annual reading and math tests to measure students' achievement, extra money to help schools that fall behind, and financial sanctions if they ultimately don't improve. Bush stuck with the most contentious part of his proposal -- a plan to provide annual vouchers averaging $1,500 to students from low-income families who attend schools deemed a failure for three straight years. Teachers' unions and many Democrats argue that vouchers, which students could spend at private schools, would drain much-needed money from public schools. Kansas and Missouri educators gave Bush's plan mixed reviews. It drew applause for its focus on education, but area superintendents and the Missouri education agency oppose federally funded vouchers. Edward Carlin, principal of St. Pius X High School in Kansas City, North, said giving the money directly to parents should pass constitutional muster. But he said he had mixed feelings about vouchers because of the federal strings that could come attached with them. "It could mean to us losing some degree of freedom we have in running our schools," Carlin said. "Federal money has restrictions." Bush defended the vouchers as the best policy. "When schools do not teach and will not change, parents and students must have other meaningful options," he said. Democratic members of Congress said Bush's proposal was a sound starting point. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, met with Bush and said he was ready to negotiate. Although he opposes vouchers, Kennedy said: "I can't emphasize enough the other areas where the president was reaching out and where there is broad agreement and meaningful agreement and the basis for a legislative agreement." A group of Democrats led by Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut pushed their own proposal, which is much like the one Bush favors. That was no coincidence -- Bush borrowed much of his plan from one Lieberman introduced last year. In his announcement, Bush avoided the word "voucher" and talked instead about options for parents and children. Some members of Congress and Bush supporters suggest he will likely compromise on that proposal. Ari Fleischer, the White House press secretary, insisted Tuesday that although everything that goes to Congress is open to negotiation, Bush was not eager to give up on vouchers. Fleischer said Bush's plan did not call for "full-blown" vouchers available to all students, only to students from low-income families, many of them children of single mothers. "What is that alternative to school choice? Failure?" he asked. "That's not the president's position." Olathe Superintendent Ron Wimmer said he worried that Bush's plan was a ruse to allow richer children the chance to attend private school on the public dollar. He said $1,500 would not go far in paying tuition at most private schools, leaving disadvantaged children to somehow make up the difference. Many might not be able to, he said. Although some Republicans signaled they were open to compromise, Bush might have trouble getting a proposal without vouchers through the House of Representatives. Lieberman said his proposal increases education spending by $35 billion over five years. Bush's budget experts did not provide figures for the cost of his proposal. Lieberman's plan does not call for using vouchers in private schools. Under Bush's plan, students would be tested annually in reading and math from the third through eighth grades. Schools deemed to be failing would have three years to improve before risking the loss of federal money. "We must care enough to ask how our children are doing," Bush said. "We must have the data to know how poor and minority children are doing, to see if we're closing the achievement gap in America. Annual measurement is a special concern of mine." Even before the three-year deadline, Bush's plan would call for action. Principals might be replaced and other, unspecified steps taken to improve student performance. And students from low-income families could use federal money to pay for transportation to other public schools. If the schools don't improve at the end of three years, eligible students could accept vouchers to help pay for other public schools, private schools or after-school tutoring programs. North Kansas City School District Superintendent Tom Cummings said public education must be accountable for student achievement, and he agrees with many of the principles in Bush's plan. "I don't think thoughtful people would say they are bad concepts. It's the way he wants to go about them that is the problem for public schools," he said. Cummings said he was disappointed by the inclusion of vouchers, which he said could lead to the dismantling of public schools. Wimmer and Shawnee Mission Superintendent Marjorie Kaplan agreed that federal vouchers aren't the answer. Kansas City school Superintendent Benjamin Demps Jr. was in Jefferson City meeting with state legislators Tuesday and could not be reached for comment. Wimmer hailed Bush's calls for easing restrictions on the way school districts spend federal money. He hopes that such a move would reduce the paperwork heaped upon school districts, too. Kaplan applauded Bush's emphasis on reading skills in elementary grades. Cummings said it would be "a logistical nightmare" to test every third- through eighth-grader every year. Through the Missouri Assessment Program, the state education agency requires school districts to test students in third, fourth, seventh, eighth, 10th and 11th grades every year in two of four subjects: language arts, math, science and social studies. The tests include written responses that must be graded by individuals rather than multiple-choice questions that are graded by machine, as many states have. Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education spokesman Jim Morris said he questions how Bush's national test would fit in with the state's intensive testing program. "We are not opposed in principle to some expanded federal testing plan," he said. "We do have some potential concerns about how the plan will mesh with the MAP program. I think that's going to be a problem for a number of states." Morris said the Missouri Constitution would make it difficult for the state to pass along public funds for the purpose of private education. The issues facing schools identified as failing often are beyond the control of teachers, administrators or parents, said Sue Dollarhide, a sixth-grade teacher at Regency Place Elementary School in Olathe. Poor performance in school often is "a symptom of not what's wrong with the schools, but how the children need help in their home lives," said Dollarhide, a teacher since 1972. |
wait did they repeal that? |
They are repealing that now. So, you think if a school system fails to pass federal tests 3 years in row, then students should not have any other alternative other then move? |
|
|
|
And also, the last line of the article pisses me off to no end. Blaming parents for the failure of the _entire_ district. I know there are parents who dont give a shit, but there are those that do. I know teachers do not get paid enough. They do need raises, if they can pass a competency exam, that is. Because if we based their raises on what they produced, passing or at least knowledgeable students, then i dont think they would fair that well. |
i think that math and reading tests on an annual basis could help. i worry that classes would be taught with the tests in mind, though. we need to have a clear standard for advancement through the grades. students shouldn't be passed for effort. i almost agree with bush's voucher plan. almost. |
|
|
|
Yeah. how do you punish a public school? The only answer is to keep trying "positive reinforcement," even though you may be throwing money into a black hole. Instead, use some of that extra money to BUILD MORE SCHOOLS and raise teacher salaries. How else can you build more teachers? That's a problem too. I don't want to see people getting into teaching for the money. Yeah. I should go back to school and get a teaching credential. Damn. what a great idea. |
|
|
I heard something on NPR last week about "exam hell week" in Japan. Some were critical about the memorization of obscure dates in Japanese history for the exam, and the heavy toll it takes on students (basically studying more than 12 hours a day, no social life during high school etc.) Both exams weed out students -- those who pass can enroll in university, those who don't can either go to private academies for another year of study towards the exams, or enroll in a vocational school. |
if you don't pass, you have a choice of repeating the grade or entering into a new track -- something vocational. i think class size and parental involvement are our largest problems, though. we need to lift the importance of education in our society. |
Also, I have no idea how essays would be graded. It seems to me that one essay grader's Gettsyburg Address would be another's Homer Simpson's "Good things I like about beer." Certainly, the weeding-out of students into vocational/technical schools would be a good thing for both groups; the students who move onto high school & college wouldn't be bogged down by those can't keep up, and the vocational/technical students would have a head start on learning a trade. |
|
In a class of 450, we had maybe 50 honors students, and 7 IB students, of whom I think 5 passed the tests. They were told that if they did, and got an IB diploma, they could get into just about any school in the US, and that they HAD to have it if they wanted to go to school overseas. |
I've never heard of the IB. Is it a new thing? (I graduated in 1981) Do high schools have to be accredited or something to offer it? How does that work? |
|