Comment back to let me know how funny you thought they were!
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Newest (almost final) Draft for NCLB speech
Senate Speech:
There is a discrimination occurring in America today. A select group of citizens are expected to perform at a certain level and when that level isn’t met; everyone is placed at fault. No Child Left Behind, commonly known as NCLB, holds all schools in America to the same set of standardized criteria when all of the schools and students aren’t standardized. NCLB has the right idea in mind to hold students to a certain criteria, to provide a value to a high school diploma, and most agree with its concept. However, their method off setting these standards has not been as effective as possible. If people took the time to look at the program, we would see that this can’t deliver accurate results and is an unfair treatment and hindrance to students.
George W. Bush started this program in 2001 to create consistent results from schools through proven educational methods. NCLB has three goals that it was supposed to accomplish: Stronger Accountability for Results, More Freedom for States and Communities, and More Choices for Parents.
The first states that NCLB is to “make sure all students, including those who are disadvantaged, achieve academic proficiency.”
Two things we should notice…“Make sure” and “disadvantaged”. The phrase “make sure” implies NCLB will keep schools accountable and give support when needed. However, it later states that schools which don’t make the necessary progress must provide their own supplemental services to improve their status, yet never says the government will help in the improvement process. NCLB is essentially saying that if a school fails to meet this “standard”, they, being the school, has to fix it ASAP or be subjected to government takeover. NCLB created massive consequences for failure, including removing faculty and replacing with those seen as “fit” to teach the standards.
Then there is the word “Disadvantaged”. This means a lacking of the normal necessities and comforts of life i.e. food, shelter, social culture, or educational opportunities. The United Nations published the book Child Poverty in Rich Countries, which proved the fact that “…there is a close correlation between poverty and educational underachievement.” The assumption made by NCLB is that an inner-city school in New York has the same issues as one in rural Arkansas as does a private school in Napa Valley. This program assumes that all students can perform on the same level and does not take in to consideration any outside factors that could bolster or hinder a school’s score. Therefore the student who has both parents, with a PhD, stressing the importance of school at home, with a tutor available anytime the student lags has the same testing abilities and knowledge as the student who has to catch the bus home, pick up their younger sister from school, cook dinner because their single mom is at her third job, then do the homework and studying necessary to pass the test with all these other chores on their plate. This is the assumption of NCLB.
The second goal establishes the possibility “for most school districts to transfer up to 50 percent of the federal formula grant funds they receive for programs such as “Safe and Drug-Free Schools” …without separate approval.”
We hear the same story as before. The school must perform any changes on their own if they didn’t meet the government’s standards. But, to make it seem like the government is helping, they allow schools to freely move federal funds for other programs to create new ones in order help improve those test scores. That doesn’t sound like helping out a school to better their students, but more so a simple exchange to seem like a solution has been provided. This is partially related to why there has been a sharp decline in the arts: the free movement of funds from those insignificant areas to the important ones.
The third goal gives “parents of children in low-performing schools the option to transfer their children to a better-performing public school if their current school does not meet state standards.”
This is not solving the problem. This is forcing sectionalism. The following is a generalization, but by moving the “smart-rich” students to a better-performing school create an entire school of smart, rich kids that make the top scores. As established earlier, the low-performing schools are left with the students who are “disadvantaged” and receiving below average test scores. The catch here is that the better a school does, the more funding it receives. So the majority of money goes to those “smart, rich” kids, and the “disadvantaged” stay “disadvantaged”.
Very few people are objecting to NCLB because all we hear about is how some schools are succeeding while on the program. Very few realize that those few schools are the ones that are receiving the most funding from the district and state to continue the growth. As most teachers agree, “If the government had a magic wand to fix this crisis, they would have used it a long time ago”. Teachers have started “teaching the test” just to meet the standards and to keep the school from experiencing the dire consequences. This is why NCLB appears successful, but the students aren’t learning. How does a test like this [hold up comic of the test] show the improvement of a school other than they were better at choosing between A, B, C, and D?
There is a discrimination occurring in America today. A select group of citizens are expected to perform at a certain level and when that level isn’t met; everyone is placed at fault. No Child Left Behind, commonly known as NCLB, holds all schools in America to the same set of standardized criteria when all of the schools and students aren’t standardized. NCLB has the right idea in mind to hold students to a certain criteria, to provide a value to a high school diploma, and most agree with its concept. However, their method off setting these standards has not been as effective as possible. If people took the time to look at the program, we would see that this can’t deliver accurate results and is an unfair treatment and hindrance to students.
George W. Bush started this program in 2001 to create consistent results from schools through proven educational methods. NCLB has three goals that it was supposed to accomplish: Stronger Accountability for Results, More Freedom for States and Communities, and More Choices for Parents.
The first states that NCLB is to “make sure all students, including those who are disadvantaged, achieve academic proficiency.”
Two things we should notice…“Make sure” and “disadvantaged”. The phrase “make sure” implies NCLB will keep schools accountable and give support when needed. However, it later states that schools which don’t make the necessary progress must provide their own supplemental services to improve their status, yet never says the government will help in the improvement process. NCLB is essentially saying that if a school fails to meet this “standard”, they, being the school, has to fix it ASAP or be subjected to government takeover. NCLB created massive consequences for failure, including removing faculty and replacing with those seen as “fit” to teach the standards.
Then there is the word “Disadvantaged”. This means a lacking of the normal necessities and comforts of life i.e. food, shelter, social culture, or educational opportunities. The United Nations published the book Child Poverty in Rich Countries, which proved the fact that “…there is a close correlation between poverty and educational underachievement.” The assumption made by NCLB is that an inner-city school in New York has the same issues as one in rural Arkansas as does a private school in Napa Valley. This program assumes that all students can perform on the same level and does not take in to consideration any outside factors that could bolster or hinder a school’s score. Therefore the student who has both parents, with a PhD, stressing the importance of school at home, with a tutor available anytime the student lags has the same testing abilities and knowledge as the student who has to catch the bus home, pick up their younger sister from school, cook dinner because their single mom is at her third job, then do the homework and studying necessary to pass the test with all these other chores on their plate. This is the assumption of NCLB.
The second goal establishes the possibility “for most school districts to transfer up to 50 percent of the federal formula grant funds they receive for programs such as “Safe and Drug-Free Schools” …without separate approval.”
We hear the same story as before. The school must perform any changes on their own if they didn’t meet the government’s standards. But, to make it seem like the government is helping, they allow schools to freely move federal funds for other programs to create new ones in order help improve those test scores. That doesn’t sound like helping out a school to better their students, but more so a simple exchange to seem like a solution has been provided. This is partially related to why there has been a sharp decline in the arts: the free movement of funds from those insignificant areas to the important ones.
The third goal gives “parents of children in low-performing schools the option to transfer their children to a better-performing public school if their current school does not meet state standards.”
This is not solving the problem. This is forcing sectionalism. The following is a generalization, but by moving the “smart-rich” students to a better-performing school create an entire school of smart, rich kids that make the top scores. As established earlier, the low-performing schools are left with the students who are “disadvantaged” and receiving below average test scores. The catch here is that the better a school does, the more funding it receives. So the majority of money goes to those “smart, rich” kids, and the “disadvantaged” stay “disadvantaged”.
Very few people are objecting to NCLB because all we hear about is how some schools are succeeding while on the program. Very few realize that those few schools are the ones that are receiving the most funding from the district and state to continue the growth. As most teachers agree, “If the government had a magic wand to fix this crisis, they would have used it a long time ago”. Teachers have started “teaching the test” just to meet the standards and to keep the school from experiencing the dire consequences. This is why NCLB appears successful, but the students aren’t learning. How does a test like this [hold up comic of the test] show the improvement of a school other than they were better at choosing between A, B, C, and D?
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Start of a Speech for this Topic.....
Voila!
In To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, Tom Robinson was on trial for a crime that was impossible for him to commit. He had no use of his right hand, the victim (Mayella Ewell) was beat primarily with a right hand, yet Tom was still convicted. One would say this is unfair or that this was discrimination, which arouses activist feelings in the reader.
There is a similar instance occurring in America today. A select group of citizens are assumed to be able perform at a certain level and when that level isn’t met, everyone is placed as the fault.
No Child Left behind holds all schools in America to the same set of standardized criteria when all schools and students aren’t standardized.
Similar to To Kill a Mockingbird, No Child Left Behind states that all students must meet the guidelines that have been set forth in order to prove our education system is successful. However, any logical thought process would show that this wouldn’t deliver accurate results and is an unfair treatment and hindrance to students. Why aren’t people expressing those same feelings as felt while reading about the trial in To Kill a Mockingbird.
No Child Left Behind was started in 2001 by George W. Bush to create consistent through proven education methods. As seen on the No Child left Behind, their goal/purpose (add incriminating info)……From this program, STAR testing was created
In To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, Tom Robinson was on trial for a crime that was impossible for him to commit. He had no use of his right hand, the victim (Mayella Ewell) was beat primarily with a right hand, yet Tom was still convicted. One would say this is unfair or that this was discrimination, which arouses activist feelings in the reader.
There is a similar instance occurring in America today. A select group of citizens are assumed to be able perform at a certain level and when that level isn’t met, everyone is placed as the fault.
No Child Left behind holds all schools in America to the same set of standardized criteria when all schools and students aren’t standardized.
Similar to To Kill a Mockingbird, No Child Left Behind states that all students must meet the guidelines that have been set forth in order to prove our education system is successful. However, any logical thought process would show that this wouldn’t deliver accurate results and is an unfair treatment and hindrance to students. Why aren’t people expressing those same feelings as felt while reading about the trial in To Kill a Mockingbird.
No Child Left Behind was started in 2001 by George W. Bush to create consistent through proven education methods. As seen on the No Child left Behind, their goal/purpose (add incriminating info)……From this program, STAR testing was created
My Second Start
Woohoo!!!
I have finally figured out how to create a new blog for my thing for Academic Decathlon!!
----Victory----
--Kyle
I have finally figured out how to create a new blog for my thing for Academic Decathlon!!
----Victory----
--Kyle
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
