My bad
I wrote the final paragraph of my last post under a wrong assumption. I mistakenly said that all federal aid would be withdrawn if things progressed as they are. Actually, only nine states are failing badly enough to have their $ cut off.
(This was aptly brought to my attention by alert reader Isaac T when he asked in the comments section, "How does everyone fail?". Thanks, Isaac T.)
No state is meeting the federal standard set, but this doesn't mean their federal aid is being cut. Only nine states are far enough behind that they're going to feel it in the wallet.
What I was saying was that the best case scenario would be that no state could meet the federal standards and that all aid is withdrawn. The article is basically saying that due to the amount of aid being withdrawn, something will have to be done about NCLB. I'm saying that it would be great if NCLB was the vehicle by which federal aid for schools disappeared.
Isaac says, "Now, to play a bit of devil's advocate, although I do agree with what you said, aren't we in effect, then robbing Peter to pay Paul? So federal government puckers up and the money is gone. Doesn't that just encourage our beloved Springfield and Des Moines to "pass the load" onto us? Aren't we going to be paying it one way or another through higher taxes?"
Realistically, yes. Our state and local taxes would probably rise to meet the rest of the burden. But our federal burden would (hopefully) be equally reduced. So in theory it would be a wash.
Well, we know it doesn't that work that way. They'd just spend it elsewhere.
Isaac makes another great point: "Maybe believers coming together and educating their children is where it's at?"
Absolutely. That's the only real solution in my eyes. I don't trust the public education system anymore. And it has nothing to do with NCLB.
(This was aptly brought to my attention by alert reader Isaac T when he asked in the comments section, "How does everyone fail?". Thanks, Isaac T.)
No state is meeting the federal standard set, but this doesn't mean their federal aid is being cut. Only nine states are far enough behind that they're going to feel it in the wallet.
What I was saying was that the best case scenario would be that no state could meet the federal standards and that all aid is withdrawn. The article is basically saying that due to the amount of aid being withdrawn, something will have to be done about NCLB. I'm saying that it would be great if NCLB was the vehicle by which federal aid for schools disappeared.
Isaac says, "Now, to play a bit of devil's advocate, although I do agree with what you said, aren't we in effect, then robbing Peter to pay Paul? So federal government puckers up and the money is gone. Doesn't that just encourage our beloved Springfield and Des Moines to "pass the load" onto us? Aren't we going to be paying it one way or another through higher taxes?"
Realistically, yes. Our state and local taxes would probably rise to meet the rest of the burden. But our federal burden would (hopefully) be equally reduced. So in theory it would be a wash.
Well, we know it doesn't that work that way. They'd just spend it elsewhere.
Isaac makes another great point: "Maybe believers coming together and educating their children is where it's at?"
Absolutely. That's the only real solution in my eyes. I don't trust the public education system anymore. And it has nothing to do with NCLB.
posted by M1Thumb at 1:12 PM
3 Comments:
No child will be left behind at Pleasant Valley High School! Here's why: the school district, in all its wisdom, decided that class rank is a barrier to kids getting into good, Iowa schools (and elsewhere). So rather than encourage the kids to work their tails off and move up to improve their chances, we coddle them and say, "it's okay, we'll chance the rules to help your little psyche." How ridiculous is that? I love how wealthy, successful people take it upon themselves to give their children easy breaks, rather than having their children "get it" the same way they did...WITH HARD WORK! Can you see this happening at Davenport Central or Rocky? No way, we like class rank there. But at PV, where everyone is supposedly above average, rich, and smart, we run from competition. What a crock. Your thoughts are welcomed. PS- this coming from a kid that graduated in the upper....... 50% of his class, that still thought class rank a good thing (for those needing it to get into better schools, scholarships, etc).
Leave it to my wife to be the voice of reason, maturity, and foresight. After posting my response about Pleasant Valley's recent decision to do away with class rank, she thought that maybe not the best, most wise way for a pastor to voice his opinion. Maybe I shouldn't have been so harsh, as it did paint with a broad brush, I still think it has much to do with coddling kids and not challenging them to strive for excellence, and to know that not everytime in this world does a person get to be number 1. The comment about socio-economic statis in the decision may have been misguided (a bit), but the point still being made that from the top -down we have narrow-sidedness (thinking only of what's good for MY kid and not good for the whole) and do our kids a dis-service by not fully preparing them for the world into which they live and will operate one day. Sorry if my harshness offended, I was trying to make a point- and sometimes vocabulary gets in the way.
I don't think you have to worry too much about anyone reading this and having a lower opinion of what you said. I say that for two reasons. One: no one reads this blog. Two: What you said wasn't offensive, and it made sense. Feel-good mind-numbing crap like what you just described is one of the many reasons my kids will be homeschooled.
Post a Comment
<< Home