The "Blueprint" incorporates untried turnaround plans for the bottom 5 percent of public schools. The Obama proposal requires extremely punitive interventions for 5 percent of public schools that have been unable over time to raise their test scores. These are the schools that have, under NCLB, been commonly called "failing" schools. Because these schools are located primarily in highly segregated, big-city districts, the children most affected by these radical plans will be primarily very poor urban children, many of them children of color. These "Challenge Schools" will be required to implement one of four prescribed turnaround plans, none of which is supported by research, as a way to improve public education. This proposal is, therefore, the latest in a long series of experiments on our nation's most vulnerable children and their schools. Very few parents who have the political power to affect what happens in their children's schools would accept this sort of radical experimentation.(emphasis added)
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Good summary
The United Church of Christ (yes, that UCC) has a summary here of the pros and cons of the president's plan to reauthorize ESEA. Back to my main point (last time today, I promise!):
Labels:
Duncan,
ESEA,
Obama,
turnaround
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment