Friends of Education!
Congress debating the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which is the basic legal framework for federal aid to education. In 2001, in response to the proposal by the new President George W. Bush, Congress added high-stakes testing as a requirement for federal aid. Congress wrongly believed that high-stakes testing had produced a miracle in Texas. We have had a dozen years of NCLB, and it has failed to improve education or to increase equality of educational opportunity.
NCLB has been a disaster for children, who are subjected to endless hours of testing; to teachers and principals, who are scapegoated for low scores; for schools, which are cruelly closed if their students don’t reach an unrealistic goal of 100% proficiency, and for communities, which are losing their beloved neighborhood schools.
TELL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS: STOP HIGH-STAKES TESTING NOW!
Here is a message from the Network for Public Education. Please join us!
Call Your Representatives About ESEA
A bill on NCLB is coming to the floor and we can impact its destiny
Call your representatives about the new NCLB proposal
For the first time in 12 years, a bill is expected to come to the floor of Congress to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), currently known as NCLB. The Student Success Act, introduced by Rep. Kline, may be voted on in the House as soon as this week. All parents, teachers and concerned citizens need to weigh in and call their House member as soon as possible. Try calling Monday or Tuesday; detailed instructions and a script is below. Two thirds of the House weren’t even in office when the last ESEA vote occurred; they need to hear from you about what your priorities are for the federal role in public education.
This is what we suggest: please tell your House member that the bill should de-emphasize high-stakes testing — by eliminating the NCLB requirement that states must test students annually in every grade from 3-8th. The federal government should also get out of the oppressive business of mandating how teachers are evaluated; and stop the linking teacher evaluation to test scores, which is unreliable, unfair and damaging to the quality of education.
Instead, they should refocus on the historic role of the federal government to increase equity in our public schools. How? First, Congress should require that states submit plans on how they will improve equitable funding of their schools. Second, they must remove the unconscionable provision in the Kline bill that limits to only 10% the amount of Title II funds that districts can spend on class size reduction.
Title II funds are primarily used to provide teacher training and lower class size. Districts spend about 40% of these funds currently on reducing class size. Ensuring that all kids have access to reasonable class sizes – especially poor kids in urban districts who are often disadvantaged with the largest classes — is one of the best ways to ensure equity and narrow the opportunity gap.
A script is below; a handy chart comparing the provisions of the version of the ESEA bill submitted by Senator Harkin and Representative Klineis here. (The Senate bill hasn’t yet reached the floor; we’ll let you know when it does; but you’re welcome to call your Senators after you call your House member.)
Call the DC office of your Representatives, (you can find their contact info here) and ask to speak to their education staffer or legislative director.
Then say: I am a (parent, teacher, concerned constituent).
I want Rep. ____ to push to eliminate the federal requirement for yearly standardized testing in the ESEA bill; and eliminate the federal role in prescribing how teachers should be evaluated.
Instead, the bill should focus on equity: by requiring that states submit plans showing how they will improve equitable funding in their schools, and by omitting ANY restriction on the amount of Title II funds that can be spent on class size reduction. Smaller classes are a proven strategy to increase equity, and there is no better way to give all children a better chance to learn.
Thanks!
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Reblogged this on thewordpressghost and commented:
Friends,
Call your Congressman, your Senator, and tell them you want education spending cut to 1970 levels. When there is less money, less money is wasted, that is true.
But, the real reason is simple. 1970’s education worked better than current spending levels.
Maybe it is because we spend too much money?
On everything, not just education.
Ghost.
Ghost,
You’ve got a duende of an idea there. Know you no history of education? So you would like to regress to that mythical golden era of education when the fairer sex got less than its fair share of public education resources, when minorities were still battling to have the 1954 Supreme Court decision enforced, when children with disabilities were shuttered away and not allowed to participate in the everyday life of their peers, when men were men and women knew their place-bare foot and pregnant. Count me out!
“Maybe it is because we spend too much money?”
Very true if you are talking about the War Department and “Homeland” (how naziesque) security. But the amount of dollars the federal government spends on education is but a spit in the ocean of the War Dept/HSA’s funding.
No, “Fantasma”, your ideas have a ring of the randian me, mine, I, myself and only myself avaricious thinking (it certainly isn’t a philosophy of life, one of death but not life.)
I went to de-segregated schools then. Women competed along side me. And 50% of our children were not fatherless ….
So, it sounds like you are just another misguided progressive who would rather break than fix.
Ghost.
Let’s see, you went to desegregated schools, and women competed along side you, albeit with the practices and rules in a male’s favor and 50% of the children were not fatherless, and your conclusion is that I’m “just another misguided progressive who would rather break than fix”.
Don’t know how to respond to that particular logic except that the public schools must have been failing back then as you don’t seem to have learned any bit of logical thinking skills or you have since been infected by the Faux News brand of “illogical thought and truth” virus that can only be wiped out with major anti-virals that usually brings about the death of the host.
Wow. Your only logical ability is protracted ad hominem …. with brilliance like that, you are the 1% and I am not. Lucky me.
Being that our ad hominems abilities appear to be quite well developed. How about this. Please explain how cutting education spending back to 70s levels will lead to enhanced educational opportunities for ALL students.
And please explain how “1970′s education worked better than current spending levels” as “1970’s education” implies the teaching and learning processes of the year 1970 (and I was in high school that year) compared to “current spending levels”. How does one compare spending levels with the teaching and learning process?
Equity again, as the fundamental assumption of value. I say get the Federal government out of funding local education. It’s redistribution again, and unethical, as all theft is, from theft of life through abortion to theft of work through excessive taxes. When the society as a whole recognizes that one is only entitled to what your daddy can pay for, the sooner will fathers improve their responsibility.
I sometimes wonder what planet you live on….. given that there are countless fathers who abandon “their responsibility” as soon as the pregnancy test comes back positive, I’m pretty sure that this scenario will only occur in the space between your ears.
HU,
Allow me to add to your thought:
:. . . as all theft is, from theft of life through abortion to theft of work through excessive taxes, and to the theft of excess labor value by the capitalists in the form of profit-in other words theft off the backs of the laborers.”
I like your revision very much because it puts us on common ground to debate. If what you say is true, then I would have to accept your conclusion, but I don’t know how to calculate the relative value of the contribution of labor and of capital. It strikes me that the contribution of labor these days is fairly negligible and that’s why industrial unions exist, to multiply the real value of the labor into a living wage. Capital accepts the falsification because their success depends on consumer demand. But that’s as far as I can go. Maybe teaching economist can help me out. Labor needs to let capital prosper or it will invest in jobs overseas, which don’t do workers here much good. Excellent, Duane. I wonder if there is a ratio that will tell us what multiple of say the minimum wage, or average wage, profit should be to enable all to prosper.
Yes, let’s punish children for the acts of their fathers, mothers etc. and not provide an equitable education because they chose poorly when they played the genetic lottery. The selfishness and punitive feelings of my fellow Americans is beyond comprehension.
Didn’t RTTT absolve States from following NCLB? Does this bill simply strengthen the testing requirement?
Shawn If you can, call our Fed represenatives today, they are voting to reauthorize NCLB. It says “call you representatives” and I’m never sure if that means Senators AND Reps or just Reps. Quigley= 773.267.5926 Guittierez (773.342.0774 (when do we switch to him?) Sen Durbin 312.353.4952 Sen Kirk 312-886-3506 Script “I want Rep. ____ to push to eliminate the federal requirement for yearly standardized testing in the ESEA bill; and eliminate the federal role in prescribing how teachers should be evaluated.”
XOXO Jeff
Called my rep. Kathy Castor, this morning. Here”s a site for looking up one’s representative, for those who need it:
http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/
Enter your address. Then call your Representative’s number.
Here is how to find them……
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
Done x 7 CT reps! 🙂
Thank you!!!!
I emailed my Representative this morning; I prefer to put my thought in writing. Also, in the past when I’ve called, the staffers who answer the phone can’t always keep up with me. LOL
I covered the talking points (including mentioning PAR – Montgomery County, MD’s teacher evaluation system, which is pretty much the Gold Standard of teacher evaluation plans but is on the chopping block due to our State superintendent’s policy, even though MCPS opted out of RttT funds; Montgomery County, MD is in our Representative’s District) and also urged him to speak directly with teachers in schools before voting to pass legislation that was crafted by non-educators.
Fingers crossed; I think the BATs are mobilizing on this too. 🙂
Thank you !
Debbie Rice I called, emailed and called another number… the person on the phone both times asked that I email.. geeesh… Hopefully she passes our voices on… didn’t sound like it. But did it- did you? I covered the talking points and added my own 20 year teaching experience in both- I hope they listen to the teachers. C’mon Lace to the Toppers, Bats and Teachers/educators /parents this is so important. We have momentum we need to use it.
Done! Interestingly, my representative is a former public school teacher. I hope that will help him to see the problems. I appealed to his experience, although he’s been more anti-public education in the past than I would like. I’ll be curious what his (or really, his staffer’s) response is.
I just sent an E-mail to my rep. I’m excited there is an opportunity to stop NCLB testing!