Posted on 07/12/2008 5:49:29 AM PDT by shrinkermd
Yeah, it is...as far as I’m concerned, so is lowering the difficulty of the test so that more students pass, but that’s “legal” under NCLB and more than one state has done it.
Non-compliance is actually worse than a failure
Thanks a lot. I’ve learned a lot in this thread today.
I talked to a friend of mine who is an educational researcher. He said that NCLB has a noble goal and is a law that could be effective if implemented well. The implemented well is the catch. According to him whether or not it does what it is supposed to do comes down largely to how well designed the tests are. Each state gets to set their own tests and some are apparently much better than others. The bad ones don’t do a good enough job of determining which schools are doing well and which are doing poorly and greatly increase how likely it is that a school will get mislabeled.
A bad test can actually hurt students in many ways according to him. Say it doesn’t cover a broad enough amount of content. Teachers might focus so much on preparing for the test that they miss other very useful content.
He also said that a lot of states have found tricky ways to fudge numbers to mask failing schools so that you can’t fully trust the figures on a lot of schools.
“
Surely such a situation would be an exercise in complete frustration for the semi-literate child. The better prepared students must be bored out of their minds waiting for these kids to catch up with the class. And”
I’ve heard some complaints from a couple friends of mine who are parents of bright students that the teachers aren’t paying as much attention to them because they are trying to bring the dummies up to speed. I don’t know how prevalent that is.
“Children with 3rd grade reading skills in 9th grade classes???? Huh?”
I have been a volunteer tutor in poor schools for many years. I tutored a kid who passed civics but failed the state civics test. He passed a high school civics class and couldn’t name one of the three branches of government. Not one! In his defense I don’t think it was him being lazy. I think he was mildly retarded. Still is it fair to him to keep passing him up to harder grades? It sure isn’t fair to society to let a kid graduate who hasn’t mastered content.
Fair? That is far too mild a term.
I call it **child abuse**!
I call it **lying**!
It is emotional torture to subject child to material that is far beyond their ability to gasp. Yet, teachers and principals do this to children every day.
It is **LYING** to tell parents that their child is 9th grade when in reality he is 2nd or 3rd. Yet, teachers and principals do this every day.
I don't know what state you are in, but I strongly doubt that student will earn a regular diploma. He may earn an "IEP diploma" or a "Modified diploma" or even a "Certificate of Attendance" but a regular diploma? No, sadly it won't happen. Now that doesn't mean the parents won't have a graduation party, and he won't walk with his friends, and they won't say he has a diploma. But if he fails to meet the state standards, the diploma sent to employers, military, or colleges should reflect his accomplishments
If the school district has been doing the documentation required of them, the parents should know exactly where the student is academically and know his diploma status. It is required by federal law that this discussion start no later than 16 and as early as 14 in cases of MR or ED.
Is it "FAIR" to pass him? Maybe - it depends on what his IEP says. What would be better - putting him in the boiler room with the rest of the dummies and just letting him rot? That's what was done prior to IDEA in the mid 70's. I'm hoping education has evolved past that
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.