When No Child Left Behind was passed, the law contained dozens of references to evidence-based policy or practice.
But NCLB itself was not based on evidence. It was based on a political campaign claim about a “miracle” in Texas. The miracle was spin and hype. It didn’t happen. After ten years of NCLB, the nation has not experienced a miracle. It has experienced cheating, narrowing of the curriculum, gaming the system, and amnesia about the goals of education.
Race to the Top was allegedly evidence-based. But when the National Education Policy Center reviewed its policies, it found no evidence.
What is the evidence for the Common Core standards? Paul Thomas explores that issue here.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Looks like Marc Tucker is not happy with you, Diane!
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/top_performers/
Marc Tucker is wrong:
http://www.dailycensored.com/test-based-accountability-and-international-comparisons-lessons-ignored/
“Diane Ravitch has played a very important role in recent years as an apostate from the camp that has devoted itself to market-driven education reform and the use of tough-minded accountability systems inimical to teacher professionalism.”
Corporate Education reformer Marc Tucker: “Viva la markets!”
Also reposted to address this:
http://atthechalkface.com/2013/03/15/test-based-accountability-international-comparisons-standards-mania-lessons-ignored/
Just looks like conundrum practice to me. How did kindergarten go from Sesame Street, to, ferret out the question, find the givens, and give the solution. Who trys to force a six year old to try to think that way? It won’t work because it is boring mumbo jumbo at that age. This is the exact opposite of the stimulation and excitement about learning that these young people need.
I thought that kids are generally more kinesthetic learners than cerebral learners. I think more recess, free time, and physical activity are the key to increased knowledge absorbtion,
My first grader hates school. I ask why, and she says it’s because all they do is math and reading worksheets. If she finishes early (which she does often), she gets . . . extra worksheets as a reward. seven is too young to be stultified by busy work. In fact, any age is.
my gut feeling supports this notion also-
as a reading specialist i see this drive to make all kids conform and learn to read at the same early age. kids are on their own timeline to learn to walk, talk, loose teeth and learn to read. the school day is chunked into periods of time in which teachrs have to rush to fit it all in. kids get treated like little machines expected to be open to learning all thru the day. and the kids who most need the
consistency of their classroom are pulled out all day long for extra help. their day is like a choppy boat ride with little end in sight.
Diane, the NLCB evidence is in Texas…it was found when the stars all aligned to produce desirable results that was then applied nationally because it got the esteemed evidence based label.
I think an infusion of common sense might help educational reform. The answers are invisibly visible. We should take a lesson from the Japanese. There is an awesome video Children Full of Life on You Tube http://youtu.be/1tLB1lU-H0M. The video shows a teacher who knows the meaning of education, teaching his fourth grade class about happiness and life.
That is a wonderful video. After watching it, you don’t really care if Mr. Kanemori(?) can teach math or language arts. The lessons he was teaching will never be considered “best practices” or graded on some teacher evaluation rubric. You know that those kids will never forget their teacher and the lessons he taught them.
@2old2tch. You are right the kids will remember their teacher, Mr Kanemori, and his lessons more so than any traditional pedagogy(?sp). It’s always amazing to hear little ones express their feelings; they understand more than we give them credit.
We know the beneficial effects of positive school climate and social emotional skills but it does not appear to be part of the debate. Why? Or at least, I don’t see it being discussed much.
I’ve always been curious about one aspect of NCLB. As I understood it, it required that all children in America, in all subgroups, be proficient in reading by 2014. It doesn’t explain how a non-English speaking child, new to this country, was supposed to be able to read (and presumably write and speak) English in less than a year in school in America. I’ve heard it takes children anywhere from four to six years to be proficient in reading English. How then could any school with non-English speaking children meet such standards?
All the terms they use are Orwellian “Wordspeak.” There is no evidence based anything now, just ideology being bought and sold on the open political market.