Comments on: ‘Too destructive to salvage’

By: JohnKonop

JohnKonop — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 02:06:21 +0000

David

That was the KENNEDY and BUSH deal! BTW HILLARY still supports the bill why?

By: David O'Rear

David O'Rear — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 02:03:56 +0000

Mr Konop,

What you meant to say was,

“No Child is a failed REPUBLICAN’T program that gives money away to REPUBLICAN’T lobbyist! How would giving it more money help?

By: Bill

Bill — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 14:00:03 +0000

My most influential teachers are the ones who went off on wild tangents, and connected everything so we would understand it. Life lessons, things which had nothing to do with the curriculum. Things they wouldn’t have time for if there was too much standardization. They were able to use their own styles of teaching.

By: Bill

Bill — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 13:48:52 +0000

Federal anything is a ham fisted top down non-conservative approach to solving problems. One size doesn’t fit all in this country. It’s just a waste of money.

By: hoads

hoads — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 12:39:36 +0000

Under performing schools are determined by their standardized test scores, drop-out rates, rates of disciplinary action, SAT scores, PTA membership, student/teacher ratios to name a few. Schools that consistently rank low on these parameters year after year without instituting new methods of teaching, addressing parent involvment, illiciting learning behavior from students and instead, fall back on “these are poor students, this is the best we can do”–fail the communities they are supposed to be serving.

These schools always think more money is the answer and yet, a bigger budget rarely changes the fundamentals of the school’s performance. Look at Atlanta City public schools–the biggest budget in the state and one of the poorest performers.

By: JohnKonop

JohnKonop — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 11:57:38 +0000

Why not local control!

By: Bill

Bill — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 11:50:31 +0000

Hoads
How do you define underperforming schools? Are they simply comparing them with other schools? This is overly simplistic and naive. Different schools will be in different areas with different socio-economic needs and concerns. And why are “conservatives” so busy federalizing everything? Why don’t they focus on saving money instead? Let parents and teachers decide what’s best for students at the local level. The one advantage we have over China is we have a small % of highly intelligent people who excel, invent, and innovate. Why hold these people back?

By: JohnKonop

JohnKonop — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 11:03:25 +0000

David

No Child is a failed program that gives money away to lobbyist! How would giving it more money help?

By: David O'Rear

David O'Rear — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 08:24:02 +0000

It sure is a good thing those wonderful Republican’ts didn’t fund this program over the past six years.

Gosh, who’d want to miss the chance to leave some kids behind?

By: captain_menace

captain_menace — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 06:46:34 +0000

“I find it interesting that public schools are placing restrictions on how many days a student can miss.”

Students who don’t attend class fail.