Standards-based education and NCLB

もっと見る

Spirit of Institutions

Michael Bischoffにより

EU Funding Mind Map

André Alvesにより

Problem Solving

Thomas Teepeにより

4 Cs SKILLS

Matías Marchantにより

Standards-based education and NCLB

Certified should not be confused with qualified - NCBL makes it difficult for districts to hire attractive, cabaple people who want to teach on a non-traditional route

Standards

NCLB

21st Century Learner

Information Power

NJCCS

Costs to comply (setting standards, testing children, publishing the results and intervening in low-performing schools) are actually modest

Some states have taken NCLB seriously, but majority expect woefuly little of their students and schools, and have developed nebuolous standards.

Standardised testing isn't all bad. If the test is an honest measure of a solid curriculum, then teaching kids the skills and knowledge they need to pass it is honorable work.

Not compulsary - states can forgo federal dollars

Assessment

Tools

Graphic organizers

Rubrics

Standardized testing is rife with cultural bias

Standardized test are only facts based not learning process based

Basic education does not include music, etc.

Cookie cutter education that serves the mean and does not speak to gifted or special need students

Artificial high standards cause many schools to fail insuring education $ are returned to Federal coffers

Erodes state and local control of schools

Sets the stage to privitize/incorporate schools, most districts must increase funding by 11% to cover costs

Because of the lack of freedom students with special needs (ESL and disabilities) are neglected

Schools set lower standards/segregate low performers and encourage weak students to leave the system

Schools must choose from federally mandated publishers and can only use federal funding for those/limits creativity

Testing does not come with $ or plans to remedy shortfalls

Indicators of performance are not accurate

Program not fully funded by Federal Government