Oh my god, am I ever sick of hearing about this law. Obama has set his sights on re-vamping the scourge of the Bush administration (according to some educators). The changes are just in talks now, but Obama is calling on Congress to push these through before the start of the 2011-2012 school year.
Here's what Obama and Secretary Duncan want to happen:
1. 100% proficiency in reading and math by 2014 is now changed to a goal of "College and Career Readiness" by 2020.
I like this. Career readiness encompasses taking students to technical/trade/two year colleges as well. Arne Duncan likes to say "Post Secondary Education is Post Secondary Education". It doesn't matter what you get as long as you have it and you can support yourself. The world doesn't need a whole country full of over-educated people and let's face it- sometimes college isn't for everyone. I think as educators, we need to float the idea of college past our students. But if our student's strengths don't lie in that area? Career and technical school is just as good. The idea is to have people off the streets and into jobs.
2. Student's progress will be measured by achievement in the other core subjects, not just reading and math.
Some of the other core subjects listed? Foreign Language, Science, and.....THE ARTS. Yes, you head me right. Obama and Duncan want to have a core competency in place for all students in the arts. My music and other arts teacher friends should be rejoicing at this point. If Congress can get this law through (here's hoping), you might all have federally mandated positions. Part of me says this is a great idea and then the other part of me says where is the money coming from? So many districts are cutting their arts programs because of funding and now he wants to introduce a competency for an under-funded subject? I'd like to see how that plays out. I'm also a little upset that we now have to assign a test or evaluation to a subject in this country to make schools and administrators focus on it.
3. Evaluation will shift to being less punitive and more rewards.
So instead of closing schools that are failing and not giving them any recourse or resources, they're going to help schools get back on track. They want to make sure a school is given the resources they need to start to make gains on their tests again. Obama and Duncan also want to reward schools that consistently make their yearly benchmarks. Again, this is a great idea. Again, I am skeptical as to where the money would be coming from to actually a) help the schools and b) give the monetary rewards their blueprint outlines to the schools.
4. More federal funding would be switched from formula-based allocations to competitive grants
We're finally moving away from arbitrary number federal funding and into real need federal funding. I'm still undecided on the competitive aspect of grants. Schools who adopt the new programs get the funding but what happens to schools who have a huge bureaucracy in place and adopt policies after the grant money runs out? (I'm thinking CPS on this one). I'd like to see an equitable distribution of available federal funds. If what Obama really means to do with this revamp is start to reduce the achievement gap and boost high school graduation rates in cities, the schools with the greatest need need the cash.
5. Schools that miss certain targets would not be required by the federal government to provide students with tutoring or with the option to transfer.
So for as much talk as there's been about the Obama administration being on the side of the families in the great education debate, this doesn't show it. Schools who are failing now don't have to provide tutoring OR give the students an option to go to a better school. I cry foul. Let's keep a kid in a school that's failing, that doesn't have any other resources for them and make their parents spend extra money to take them to outside tutoring or enrichment? Great idea. Way to help the middle class you keep trying to save. The amount of money that parents of a high achieving kid in a failing school spend on enrichment activities and tutoring probably could have paid for the in school tutor in the first place.
So those are just five of the points that the new blueprint raises. I've included the link to the actual plan below, as well as an article that really breaks down the changes quite well. I'm going to monitor this closely, especially for the changes to the standardized tests and student measures of progress.
Links for the interested:
CSM's article on the changes: Overhaul
The actual "blueprint" of changes: Department of Education
No comments:
Post a Comment