Heilig: NCLB Failed, What Next?

14 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

1. Nino deProphetis says:

   June 1, 2014 at 7:06 pm

   Plus
   Plus ca change, plus la meme chose

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. Dr. Ed Fuller says:

   June 1, 2014 at 7:17 pm

   The problem with community-based accountability is that some kids get left out of such an approach. I know communities in Texas and PA in which black kids would be relegated to the sports teams and a slew of worthless classes–just as was the case prior to NCLB accountability. Yes, acct can be primarily be located at the local level, but there must be transparent reporting of inputs and outcomes to ensure that every child has equal opportunity to learn and that some groups of kids are not ignored by the community.Some measures–like the opportunity and achievement gaps–should NOT be excluded through the democratic process unless there is some part of the democratic process in which the minority can overrule the majority. To think that the majority in every single community will adopt equitable plans is simply wishful thinking.

   Further, after reading Jean Anyon’s work, how would one ensure that working class communities adopted outcomes that promoted the type of learning as in more affluent communities. In some cases they may, but research has consistently proven that often they won’t.

   While this is a good idea, the details of how this would work out in reality is simply not described in great enough detail to see how such issues would play out.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Bob Shepherd says:

     June 1, 2014 at 11:35 pm

     We have far, far, far too many people who think that they know better than the locals do; far, far, far too many social engineers.

     Site-based management is messy and imperfect. But it is far better than is the alternative

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • Bob Shepherd says:

     June 1, 2014 at 11:36 pm

     I am sick to death of people who think that THEY know best for everyone else.

     LikeLiked by 1 person

     Reply
     • Michael Fiorillo says:

       June 4, 2014 at 3:05 pm

       Indeed, and it’s particularly galling to have know-nothing billionaires impose their ignorance on other people’s children, especially when their recommendations correspond so closely with their economic interests.

       LikeLike

3. Joanna Best says:

   June 1, 2014 at 8:14 pm

   I am so very excited to see some ideas being generated and discussed for what to do now.
   I say it all the time: now what?
   This is good thinking.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Joanna Best says:

     June 1, 2014 at 8:16 pm

     and the focus should be on communities supporting their schools, instead of whining and rolling eyes, etc. (albeit humans just do that. . .everyone plays victim even if just for the sake of small talk., which is really annoying).
     Anyway. . .this is healthy talk. Communities.

     LikeLike

     Reply
4. Bob Shepherd says:

   June 1, 2014 at 9:05 pm

   site-based management

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. Bob Shepherd says:

   June 1, 2014 at 9:29 pm

   Education deformers love asking, “What’s your alternative?” But they expect stone-cold silence in response. Sorry to disappoint. Here’s an alternative to top-down, invariant, inflexible, mandatory, amateurish “standards,” tests, and evaluation schemes that have been foisted on the country with no vetting whatsoever:

   local autonomy and site-managed schools

   taking advantage of crowd sourcing of alternative, innovative ideas.

   In other words, we could have

   –Competing, voluntary standards, frameworks, learning progressions, curriculum outlines, reading lists, pedagogical approaches, lesson templates, etc.,
   for particular domains,

   –posted by scholars, curriculum developers, and teachers to an open national portal or wiki, and

   –subjected to ongoing, vigorous, public debate and refinement

   –based on results in the classroom and ongoing research and development,

   –freely adopted by autonomous local schools and districts

   –and subjected to continual critique by teachers who are given the time in their schedules to subject them all, and their own practice, to ongoing critique via something like Japanese Lesson Study.

   If we insist on having rules for everyone, then those should be a few very well-vetted, general, broad guidelines that provide the degrees of freedom within which real pedagogical and curricula innovation and real continuous improvement can occur–guidelines like

   –meet the student where he or she is

   –provide alternative paths appropriate to students with differing propensities and goals

   –use varied diagnostic, formative, and performance assessment, and when possible, offer students alternatives among types of assessments

   –nurture intrinsic motivation and independent, creative thinking, and deemphasize extrinsic punishment and reward

   –suit pedagogy and curricula to the student; to the type of learning and/or acquisition; and to the subject matter, recognizing that these differ

   –treat both world knowledge (knowledge of what) and specific procedural knowledge (knowledge of how)

   –aim for substance and variety in curricula with the goal of providing students with enriching, valuable, significant experiences in the arts (including but not limited to the literary arts), science, mathematics and related fields, history, and technical and practical applications

   –create learning communities

   LikeLike

   Reply
6. Bob Shepherd says:

   June 1, 2014 at 11:26 pm

   Wouldn’t it be amazing to pick up an education weekly or to go to an education news site and to find articles on teaching Mary Shelley to 10th graders and interesting ideas from deep history to share in social studies instead of

   the junk eduspeak that has flowed like toxic waste over the entire discourse about teaching and learning in the United States since the onset of Son of NCLB: The Nightmare Is Nationalized?

   Enough of the rule of the educrats and politicians.

   It’s time to put teachers back in charge of teaching.

   LikeLike

   Reply
7. Bob Shepherd says:

   June 1, 2014 at 11:28 pm

   It’s always really wonderful when teachers get together to talk about how they approach teaching this or that. So many great ideas! So much learning!

   In contrast, what was your great take-away from your last professional development?

   Exactly.

   LikeLike

   Reply
8. Bob Shepherd says:

   June 1, 2014 at 11:31 pm

   We have moved so far away from teachers having any part in discussions about their own activity that now, all around the country, it has become STANDARD for people to begin professional development sessions or teacher training sessions with some sort of statement letting people know that any critique of what is about to be presented will not be acceptable or appreciated.

   LikeLike

   Reply
9. Bob Shepherd says:

   June 2, 2014 at 1:44 am

   Of course, the U.S. Department of Education, Achieve, Students First, the Chiefs for Change, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation looked at the failure of NCLB and said

   WE NEED TO DO A LOT MORE OF THAT

   OK. We did that crap for a decade. More than a decade.

   These people are VERY slow learners!

   LikeLike

   Reply
10. Joseph says:

    June 13, 2014 at 7:29 pm

    I am hopeful that local accountability will drive the effectiveness of education forward. I think that the DOE is a better information disseminator, than a policy regulator. Let the centralized government collect and report data at the macro and the micro level. Let the local communities use that data for discussion with local school boards and superintendents about the effectiveness of education within their community. The closer the decision-makers are to the voters, the more likely the electorate will be informed and involved.

    LikeLike

    Reply