Quote:
Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
On the substantive issue of how to educate kids, I think Bush has generally prevailed and the rote and test methods are now prevalent. I may disagree, but I don't think the public does. The public as a whole expects this approach to work.
I think there are two problems. Bush made commitments he didn't keep. Section 2 of the Bill lays out the steadily increasing funding amounts - and you may sneeze at a $25 billion commitment for last year, but it's the commitment that was very publicly made.
The second problem is marginal results.
See Here. . If you compare these to the impact of the federal program most derided by many Rs, Head Start, NCLB doesn't look so hot. Is the modest impact related to the program itself or the lack of funding? I don't think that's a question the Rs want to deal with in a campaign season.
|
I have to do a quick answer here, but I'll just say that I think Head Start is one of the most worthy programs for public funding ever set up, and so I can't sit here and argue with the presumption that, because something isn't as good as Head Start, it's a failure.
And, I still think that the results of NCLB are not going to be completely measured until the classes in elementary school when it began start earning wages.
