Qutoes That Don't Want You To See @ On The Border Line . Net
FA Hayek on US Public Education
"It is important to recognize that general education is not solely and perhaps not even mainly, a matter of communicating knowledge. There is a need for certain common standards of values, and, though too great emphasis on this need may lead to very illiberal consequences, peaceful common existence would be clearly impossible without any such standards. If in long-settled communities with a predominantly indigenous population, this is not likely to be a serious problem, there are instances, such as the United States during the period of large immigration, where it may well be one. That the United States would not have become such an effective "melting pot" and would probably faced extremely difficult problems if it had not been for a deliberate policy of "Americanization" through the public school system seems fairly certain."
-- FA Hayek
JPN Note: Hayek is one of the chief economists who pushed the free market economic theory that is held so dearly by the bloggers at www.ontheborderline.net. It's doubtful that you will find the above quote on their site. Below are two links that might provide you with more info on Hayek. The first link is to an OTBL post. The second is to the Wikipedia Hayek bio.
1. Diamond In The Rough
2. Wikipedia profile
2 comments:
Here's something to ponder:
From the "EDUCATION PRESIDENT"
"In announcing his candidacy, Bush promised that education reform would be his Number One domestic policy priority."
Source: http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_3_education_pres.html
Excuse me I have to catch my breath from laughing too hard.
EducationNews.org
"A Partner in Insight and Commentary"
Ranked #1 on the Internet for EducationNews
Friday, July 29, 2005
Daily EducationNews Free On-Line Subscription Bulletin Board Home
7 Day News Archive - Previous Commentaries & Reports
The Problems with No Child Left Behind
Monday, April 5, 2004
By M arty Solomon
In a misguided attempt to strengthen public education, the No Child Left Behind legislation will actually damage our schools.
Under NCLB, all children are required to reach academic proficiency, or acceptable academic levels established by each state. While states have defined minimum acceptable standards for regular students, they never envisioned that disabled children would also be able to attain those levels. But the NCLB law makes no exceptions---disabled children, which now make up 13% of all school kids, must pass the same tests as regular students.
The impact of this requirement will result in states needing to lower standards for all children because states are not allowed to have a different standard for disabled youngsters. Yet those lower standards will still be too high for most disabled kids. So the unintended consequence of a mistaken attempt to “raise the bar” will actually result of a lowering of that same minimum level of accomplishment for most students while being still too high for the learning disabled.
In addition, under NCLB, if any subgroup of children within a school does not demonstrate proficiency for two years in a row, that school is labeled a “failing” school. Research shows that throughout the nation, poor and minority children, on average, score lower than more affluent, white and Asian children. Significant additional support and tutoring can help non-achievers, but it would cost billions more to provide this level of intensive supplementary instruction. For example, KIPP schools in New York and Texas seem to do amazing things with poor and minority children. But teachers and students attend school from 7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, spend four more hours in the classroom on Saturdays, have two hours of homework every night and spend one month of each summer in class. Further, parents must sign a contract to work almost as hard as the children.
While such a program might be possible in public schools, there is not even a fraction of the resources provided by the NCLB to fund such a massive new initiative. Thus, the public schools are mandated to do something which is virtually impossible and the teachers and children have been condemned to failure.
Finally, under NCLB, if children attend a failing school, they are eligible to transfer to another school with transportation provided, if space is available. The implication of this is astounding. The best schools in any town are generally those in the highest priced neighborhoods. Why? Because the most educated people, on average, have the best jobs and the most money. They buy in upscale neighborhoods. Their children are “learning ready” when they start school. Those neighborhoods have the best schools because they have the best students.
“Failing” schools will generally be those with the poorest and minority students and those are the kids that will be bused to the best schools. Does this sound familiar? It should because it is deja vous. The same busing plan destroyed our inner cities in the 60’s and 70’s because poor children were bused to more affluent neighborhoods where those homeowners fled to the suburbs. This provision of NCLB will result in busing all over again. But the untold “gotcha” is that when there is not enough room in other public schools to accommodate all students who want to transfer, the next version of NCLB will mandate vouchers to private schools. That seems to be the real, underlying rationale for NCLB in the first place.
In summary, the No Child Left Behind legislation, makes it difficult, if not impossible, for the most disadvantaged and most deprived children to be successful, it ignores high achievers by requiring only minimal proficiency, it insures failure by not providing nearly enough money for the needed one-on-one supplementary tutoring and it will result in the destruction of entire neighborhoods through a new round of busing.
If Asama Bin Laden wanted to destroy our public school system, he couldn’t have designed a better plan.
-------------------------------------------------
Martin B. Solomon
Post a Comment