Chicago school districts just say no to "No Child Left Behind"

[greatauntoftriplets]

2 school districts reject funds
`No Child' grants seen as a hassle

By Jodi S. Cohen
Tribune staff reporter
Published August 15, 2004

Two Chicago-area school districts have rejected more than $100,000 each in poverty grants, saying the money connected to a sweeping federal education reform law comes with too many strings attached.

In declining about $136,000 in federal assistance for the upcoming school year, Consolidated High School District 230 in Orland Park took an unusually public stance against No Child Left Behind, the controversial law that educators frequently grumble about but rarely ignore.

The decision means the district, along with Township High School District 211 in Palatine, won't have to abide by some of the law's more stringent provisions, including the requirement to offer private tutoring and transfers to better-performing schools if they don't meet state academic goals.

"We believe in our schools, and we believe we are doing the right things in our schools for kids," said Brenda Reynolds, District 230 assistant superintendent. "To be in a position to say that we have to offer choice sends a different message, not one we believe in, but one we are held to because of the law

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0408150385aug15,1,7819205.story?coll=chi-newslocal-hed

[iconoclastic cat]

1. Wow! Good for them. That's impressive.

Of course, don't hold your breath for the Chicago Public Schools to do the same thing. We have a mayor who is the biggest DINO ever, and he has publicly stated lately that he plans to farm out 100 "failing" schools to private management firms and charter groups.

on edit: Good morning, neighbor! You missed a really annoying, crowded night at the 'Moon, by the way.
:hi:

[greatauntoftriplets]

2. The article says the CPS can't possibly give up that money.

It is too much of their budget. Daley the DINO irritates me.

[iconoclastic cat]

3. That's true; the CPS is addicted to wasting funds.

Just take a look at the administrative salaries in this district. How can some of these people possibly deserve 200G for running a school into the ground? Daley also shares some blame: every year, he makes new demands with no plausible plan for achieving his own stated goal. The whole mess is doomed to failure.

[greatauntoftriplets]

5. I am happy the Moon was crowded,

sounds like a great opening night.

Hello yourself, neighbor. :hi:

[iconoclastic cat]

8. Totally OT: It was very cool! I realized, however, that I'm getting old.

I found myself dragging by about 1AM, and I ended up leaving right as the crowd was reaching its fever pitch. One very interesting note: a lot of young college kids were there, and for many of them, this was the first time they had been to see a jazz/fusion jam session; I ended up being corned by a group of 21-year-olds from Loyola who were determined to extract the entire history of modern American music from me, despite the fact that I really don't know all that much. I really wished that my wife had come with me; she's very good at getting me out of annoying conversations.

You should come by one of these evenings, GAofT! The music starts at 9:30, but the place is pretty empty until 11 or so (except for the musicians, myself included). At midnight, though, beware the drunken undergrads...

[greatauntoftriplets]

11. If you were dragging only at 1 a.m.

you must be far younger than I am. At that wee hour, I had been asleep for about 2 hours, LOL.

[CRK7376]

4. Good luck

Chicago! I really hate NCLB.

[ulysses]

6. GOOD FOR THEM

NCLB is a complete joke and waste.

[LWolf]

7. This is dangerous.

While part of me wants to applaud them for rejecting the travesty of high-stakes testing, illogical standards, and corrupt agenda of NCLB, there is more to consider:

The first politicians (that I know of) to consider rejecting federal funds were Republicans, in Nebraska. That was a couple of years ago. They were debating states' rights. I don't believe they ended up "saying no," but there were articles in ed journals discussing the issue. I didn't keep a two-year-old link, but that's where I read about it.

Why would Republicans oppose GWB's baby? If the federal legislation is draconian enough, and enough states "say no," does that impede the ultimate agenda or further it? If states are "saying no," does that increase the opportunity to call for abolishing the DOE?

Ronald Reagan made abolishing the DOE part of his '80 campaign.

The 1996 GOP Presidential platform included:

Our formula is as simple as it is sweeping: the federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the work place. That is why we will abolish the Department of Education, end federal meddling in our schools, and promote family choice at all levels of learning.

I don't think the agenda has really changed. What better way to achieve that goal than to make federal involvement so destructive that districts and states will voluntarily drop out of federally funded programs and mandates?

[iconoclastic cat]

9. Interesting! They could be poisoning the teat, I suppose...

That is a compelling idea.

[LWolf]

10. It seems to fit with the way they operate.

Say one thing, mean another. Look at the way they manipulate everything they do.

Instead of "saying no" to federal funds, we need to say no to the destructive policies. They have inserted "tests," "high standards" "failing schools" etc. into the public consciousness and vocabulary. The objectionable portions of NCLB are also working at the state level; in many states they were there before NCLB. George simply took the "standards and accountability" movement to Washington with him, and made it federal. Saying no to NCLB will not remove the policies; they will just put state politicians in charge of administering them, rather than the feds. Those states that already had programs in place now run 2 separate sets of scores, based on the same test but different formulas. In California, we have the "API" and the "AYP." In Florida, we hear about schools who are getting good marks under the state formula, but failing under the federal formula.

To really address the current destruction, we need to address destructive policies all the way down to the state level. No district is going to "say no" to state funds.