2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Having just finished a class on evaluation and measurement of students, as part of a master's in teaching program, I am newly familiar with NCLB requirements. I feel that the underlying idea behind the law - to produce school accountability - is headed in a positive direction. However, the law has generated so much negative comment, that it obviously needs some fine tuning.

Instead of imposing sanctions upon schools (and in effect upon teachers) for low test scores or failure to meet AYP in 2 consecutive years, perhaps it would make more sense to offer workshops and/or other means of empowerment (which may be used to assist lower performing students) to those schools/teachers that are in need of such additional training. Pointing out problems without offering solutions does not help much. In my opinion, sanctions do not equal solutions.

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context