There are, of course, constructive roles the federal government can play. Welcome, for example, would be actions encouraging broad dialog to clarify the institution’s overarching aim, policies promoting more equitable and stable funding, measures increasing support for research and innovation, and, of course, comprehensive programs addressing poverty, cultural deprivation, environmental degradation, and other problems directly affecting student performance.You can electronically sign the letter if you like.
But attempts to manipulate what teachers and students actually do must be entirely abandoned. The inherent complexity of the task, its dynamic, constantly changing nature, the importance to its success of imagination, flexibility and creativity, and the gross inadequacy of presently available standardized measures of performance, make centralized control of the classroom dangerously counterproductive.
I found it to be good on points, but short on real plans on how to fix America's schools.
1 comment:
The Stanford University School of Education will not be getting my money
Quote from paragraph 7 of 10: 'We urge you, in short, to reject the superficial "standards and accountability" approach to education reform and the reactionary policies to which it has led.'
''In short,'' what were they thinking when they put the point of writing 3/4ths the way down the page?
This letter stinks. It couldn't be published as a Letter to the Editor.
Post a Comment