*all children* will be proficient at reading and math by spring, 2014.

[ulysses]

If you want to clear the way for progress on merit pay, then let's have the political will to admit what every sentient being on the planet knows - that the goal in the subject line above is an impossibility.

[sandnsea]

1. Why? n/t

[ulysses]

3. because *all children* includes a child I taught a few years ago,

who is considered to have a mild intellectual disability, even though her measured IQ is below 50 (functional skills are high, so IDEA requires that she not be deemed to have a moderate intellectual disability). At the time (7th & 8th grades), she couldn't reliably tell a 6 from a 9.

Georgia's middle school standards for "proficient in 7th grade math" are beyond her reach. Simply put.

[sandnsea]

6. LD kids are measured separately

So tell me why every kid who is able can't be proficient in reading and math.

[ulysses]

8. they're measured as a separate subgroup if there are enough in a school.

Their scores still apply to a school's adequate yearly progress, as do those of children with mild intellectual disabilities, emotional/behavior disorders, etc.

And NCLB doesn't say "every child who is able". Of course every child who is able to be proficient is able to be proficient, by definition.

[sandnsea]

9. No. You said every kid.

Why can't every kid who is able become proficient in math and reading?

[ulysses]

11. jesus god.

Why can't every kid who is able become proficient in math and reading? (Your quote, emphasis added by me)

I just said that they could, by definition.

The phrase "who is able" is not part of No Child Left Behind, however.

[sandnsea]

12. Good.

And then why shouldn't we measure that progress in meaningful ways decided by the teacher, department, school, district, and union. And why shouldn't there be money that goes in on the front end when teachers are implementing new strategies - and on the back end when they succeed.

This has nothing to do with NCLB either. Distortion.

[ulysses]

13. nifty rose-colored glasses you have there.

Sorry, but as long as the folks judging my performance are themselves being judged by whether or not their school makes progress toward an unrealistic goal, it has everything to do with NCLB.

[sandnsea]

17. You better get open to some kind of change

Or you're going to have change thrust on you. You can't keep blaming parents for the failure of your students - and then blame those same parents when they have criticisms of the school too.

Rich parents aren't treated that way.

And THAT is why elite private schools work and poor ones don't.

[ulysses]

18. I'm open to lots of kinds of change.

Just not the kinds that make no sense in the real world.

Rich parents aren't treated that way.

They should be if they're not helping the child succeed.

And THAT is why elite private schools work and poor ones don't.

No. Elite private schools "work" because they don't have to admit all comers.

[sandnsea]

22. Measuring progress makes sense

in any world. Especially progress in reaching objectives that you help write.

And there you go again, blaming parents, always the first response.

[ulysses]

19. btw, I'm amused at being told what I "better" do.

I'm off to bed. Feel free to rail away about what I've got coming to me, though. :D

[pnwmom]

26. Elite private schools can choose their students and only take the ones they think

they can handle. Elite schools usually have small classes. There are lots of reasons why elite schools appear to work better than poor schools.

[sandnsea]

27. And they DON'T disrespect the parents n/t

[EOTE]

107. Give me a break. No one is disrespecting parents.

But to pretend that some parents aren't part of the problem is incredibly silly. And it's no surprise why elite school perform better. Money, small class sizes, limited eligibility. Kind of like asking why a new BMW performs better than a 15 year old Escort. Doesn't take too much thought to figure that out.

[ulysses]

16. so that I can find it later, even if you're not interested.

http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf
pages 23-24 of the pdf...

‘‘(F) TIMELINE.—Each State shall establish a timeline
for adequate yearly progress. The timeline shall ensure
that not later than 12 years after the end of the 2001–
2002 school year, all students in each group described
in subparagraph (C)(v) will meet or exceed the State’s
proficient level of academic achievement on the State
assessments under paragraph (3).

[sandnsea]

20. And?

This has what to do with merit pay? Nothing.

And don't treat me like an idiot. I know what is in NCLB. Treat your own parents better too.

[pnwmom]

32. Come on. That clearly says that all subgroups, including LD kids,

must be proficient by the deadline.

Which is impossible.

I'm not a teacher -- just a parent who has seen what teachers have to deal with in the classroom. 25 or even 30 kids, including "average" kids, "gifted," ESL kids, kids with behavioral issues, kids with LD, kids on the autism spectrum, and kids from poverty. And, of course, many kids with more than one issue.

I don't know how teachers do it. Over the 15 years my three were in elementary school, I could see the job was getting harder and harder. I can't imagine how merit pay would work, under the circumstances.

[sandnsea]

39. Not equally proficient

I know better so just stop it. I do not know why people love to pretend reality is something different than what it is, just for the sake of an argument. It's stupid. Especially when our kids are at stake.

[pnwmom]

43. Yes, equally proficient. There is a grade-level standard set that ALL students in ALL

subgroups are supposed to meet or achieve.

[sandnsea]

47. All Subgroups

meet the standard set for the subgroup. It is NOT all equal. Every kid does not have to be equally proficient by 2014. That's a lie.

[pnwmom]

49. Do you have a link for that? Or are you just going to keep repeating it? n/t

[sandnsea]

51. Well, let's deduce

The LD kids in my school district have not met the NCLB requirements, but the rest of the kids have.

Gee. What could that possibly mean. The standards are harder for the LD kids? No, that's probably not right.

Ooooh, they have different standards.

Now do you really want me to spend a half an hour digging through the requirements to get the actual quotes?

Good christ already. I have work to do.

[pnwmom]

52. Your logic is faulty. And your facts are wrong.

OF COURSE it's harder for LD kids to meet the NCLB requirements. They are trying to meet the SAME standards as the rest of the class, but they are learning disabled. So achieving at that same high level of proficiency that the NCLB requires is much harder and maybe impossible for many of them.

Washington State recognized this problem as soon as NCLB was enacted. NCLB puts schools and teachers of LD students in an impossible CATCH-22. Special ed students are expected, like other students, to achieve 100% proficiency. However, they wouldn't be special ed students if they were capable of 100% proficiency.

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:YdHn3PyeJmcJ:www.k12.wa.us/ESEA/pubdocs/WashingtonStateNCLBChanges11-03.doc+state+of+washington+NCLB&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

This is from a document produced by the State of Washington Department of Education:

B. Inclusion of Students with Disabilities in State Assessments:

NCLB requires that all students be held to the same high standards. The final regulations supporting the enforcement of NCLB at Section 200.6 (a) (2) (ii) make clear that alternate assessment systems must yield results for the grade in which a student with disabilities is enrolled...."even if the IEP team believes that academic and cognitive testing demonstrate that the student is not capable of performing at that level."

SNIP

Many students who appropriately meet the eligibility criteria for receipt of special education and related services are, by definition, unable to reach 100% proficiency. If they were able to meet 100% proficiency they would be, by definition, ineligible for special education and related services. Further, requiring an assessment system to account for special education eligible students "even if the IEP team believes that academic and cognitive testing demonstrates that the student is not capable of performing at that level," undermines the authority of an IEP team constituted by federal and state law, and seriously compromises any meaningful results associated with statewide testing efforts.

For special education students with severe cognitive disabilities the regulations allow schools/districts to demonstrate AYP based on their individual learning standards (as established by each student’s IEP team). Unfortunately, these regulations: 1) establish caps on the percentage of students whose scores on alternate assessments may be counted for AYP purposes, 2) rigidly define those students for whom such alternate assessments are appropriate, and 3) do not address graduation rates (meaning that students with severe cognitive disabilities who do not receive a regular diploma count against high schools/districts in demonstrating AYP). This could have a serious negative impact on the current successful inclusionary practices in schools and districts.

[sandnsea]

54. Oh good grief

"For special education students with severe cognitive disabilities the regulations allow schools/districts to demonstrate AYP based on their individual learning standards (as established by each student’s IEP team)."

There are many more kids with learning disabilities who graduate right along with the rest of the class than there are kids who will "demonstrate AYP on their individual learning standards."

My facts are just fine as demonstrated by your own damn information.

Why are you pretending otherwise?

And one more damn time - the education proposals are intended to change these test-driven standards which all of you brilliantly educated people would know if you would READ THE GODDAMN SPEECH.

[pnwmom]

58. You conveniently left out the next sentence which is key.

" Unfortunately, these regulations: 1) establish caps on the percentage of students whose scores on alternate assessments may be counted for AYP purposes, 2) rigidly define those students for whom such alternate assessments are appropriate, and 3) do not address graduation rates (meaning that students with severe cognitive disabilities who do not receive a regular diploma count against high schools/districts in demonstrating AYP)."

In other words, there are many special ed students in addition to the students with "severe cognitive disabilities" (who, according to the NCLB, can be held to individual learning standards). The NCLB places an artificial cap on the number of students who can have individual learning standards AND it "rigidly defines" the categories of students who are eligible for individual learning standards. Thus, MANY special ed students who are not capable of achieving at 100% proficiency -- by virtue of their disabilities -- are still expected to do so (and not allowed the option of succeeding with an individual learning standard).

On edit:

I just reread Obama's speech, and he's not talking anywhere about fixing NCLB with regard to the 100% proficiency issue; he's talking about raising the standards for the states that have lower standards -- which will only make the situation more difficult for teachers of special ed students, ESL students, etc.

I don't blame teachers one bit for being worried about this issue. The impossible is already being expected of them, and now Obama is talking about raising standards? Something has to give.

[sandnsea]

67. My son was one

And graduated right along with everybody else with the same standards as everybody else. So did my step-son.

I am really sorry. I'm not stupid. You're shoveling a load of shit.

[pnwmom]

83. Are you going to pretend that every special ed or LD kid is the same?

I'm happy about your son. But what was true for him isn't true for every child out there.

Also, with 50 different state standards, your son might have had more trouble meeting the standard in a different state. You can't know.

It's interesting that you accuse me of "shoveling a load of shit" when you haven't given a single source to back up all your statements. Admit it. You're just spouting off.

[sandnsea]

86. YOU are the one doing that

YOU. By pretending that every LD kid is going to have to meet the same requirements as the mainstream students. YOU are shoveling shit faster than I've seen it shoveled at DU.

[pnwmom]

88. I have acknowledged that a segment of severely disabled students --

capped at an artificial limit -- will not have to meet the same requirements. That doesn't solve the problem of the MANY special education students who will still be expected to meet high standards they're incapable of meeting.

Why do you think name calling adds strength to your argument? It doesn't, not to any clear-eyed person who can see through the hot air.

[sandnsea]

90. And many WILL meet the high standards

Just like many of the mainstreamed kids won't meet test score standards regardless of their capability to meet them.

Who called names? You're shoveling shit. Anybody who has spent two minutes in a school knows there are a variety of students and that some LD kids can do quite well, get straight A's even; and some can't. They are measured accordingly, no matter how many different ways you want to pretend otherwise in order to go on your rant.

And regardless of any of it, the entire purpose of new education proposals is - NEW education proposals. In order to change NCLB. Why you want to argue that is stupifying. There isn't one Democrat who has said we need to leave NCLB the way it is.

[pnwmom]

92. They aren't all measured accordingly, that's my point.

Because of the artificial cap, and because of the limited categories defining who is eligible for individual standards.

And Obama's speech does not address this issue -- all it talks about is raising the standard, not making it more flexible.

[sandnsea]

95. *sigh*

"And I'm calling on our nation's governors and state education chiefs to develop standards and assessments that don't simply measure whether students can fill in a bubble on a test, but whether they possess 21st century skills like problem-solving and critical thinking and entrepreneurship and creativity."

What the hell do you think this means?

[pnwmom]

103. That quote doesn't address the problem I've been talking about.

Our state's WASL test doesn't require students to fill in bubbles on a paper. It's considered to be one of the best NCLB tests, with high standards, and it was designed to measure problem solving and critical thinking. But it STILL isn't appropriate for all the special education and ESL students who are required to take it.

Good luck on designing a test that will measure entrepreneurship and creativity.

You want to destroy a student's creativity? Then design a test to measure it.

[pnwmom]

25. That is not what NCLB says. It says "all children" NOT "every child who is able."

There is a huge difference.

[sandnsea]

28. Nobody was talking about NCLB in the OP

That is something he threw in afterwards.

[pnwmom]

33. Of course he was. It's in the SUBJECT LINE.

"*all children* will be proficient at reading and math by spring, 2014."

That's an obvious reference to NCLB.

[sandnsea]

38. "merit pay", in the post

This has been a discussion about merit pay that Uly decided to divert into a discussion about NCLB, which it never was. He absolutely refuses to look at any of the measurements being proposed to see that they have absolutely nothing to do with testing or NCLB or lumping all kids into one school measurement or anything else. Just like almost all the teachers at DU, he just throws out wild accusations with complete disregard to the actual facts.

[southerncrone]

40. Please tell us what makes you such an authority on this subject.

When is the last time you spent any amount of time in a public school classroom?

[sandnsea]

41. Parenting 4 kids for 30 years

means nothing?

Until it comes time to blame somebody because a child has failed, and suddenly the parent is supposed to know everything about educating their kid.




This is about Obama's education speech yesterday. I bothered to research what he was talking about.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8256531&mesg_id=8256531

[pnwmom]

45. NCLB changed everything. If your parenting started 30 years ago, then

you might have missed the monumental changes wrought by NCLB. But my own children were in elementary school for a total of 16 years, and I watched the changes and they were huge -- and not for the better. The teachers have had to become obsessed with teaching to the test -- in our state, something called the WASL. Social studies was dropped from the curriculum because it's not on the test. So was science, for a number of years. And the whole program was based on the fantasy that all children, no matter how disadvantaged or disabled, could achieve in reading and math at the high level set in the WASL.

I don't know why anyone goes into teaching anymore -- with so much stress and so little pay and appreciation. And yet, idealistic young people keep going into the field. My hat's off to them -- but not to the NCLB , which should be tossed.

[sandnsea]

46. OMFG = It's about the Education Speech for chrissake

NCLB has absolutely NOTHING to do with the debate today and yesterday. NOTHING.

[pnwmom]

48. Of course it does. Why? Because NCLB sets the rules for measuring student progress.

Student progress would be an important element in measuring teacher's merit.

Teachers are already under incredible pressure trying to meet impossible NCLB standards. Adding merit pay would just add to the pressure.

[sandnsea]

50. But that is not the plan

and it has never been said to be the plan.

[pnwmom]

53. What is not the plan? Student progress wouldn't be a key element

in calculating teacher merit pay?

[pnwmom]

55. What you don't understand is that NCLB overshadows everything else

in public education these days. It is impossible to talk about merit pay or any other significant educational issue out of the NCLB context.

NCLB has become the absolute bottom line.

[sandnsea]

56. That's why Obama wants to change it - helloooo?? n/t

[pnwmom]

60. He's talking about changing it by raising the standards HIGHER

in many states.

That is hardly going to help teachers whose special ed and ESL students are already having trouble meeting the current standards.

[sandnsea]

62. High Standards! Ack - The HORROR!!!

This is absurd. This is also the reason Democrats were out in the cold for twenty years.

[pnwmom]

65. It is a horror to label special ed students and their teachers as failures

because of standards that they can never logically be expected to meet.

And before you go on about individual learning plans -- I'm talking about the MANY special ed students who don't fit into one of the severely limited categories allowed by NCLB or who exceed the artificially limited cap.

[sandnsea]

68. Again - thus the reason for the change

in approach in measuring success in meeting objectives. You don't let some states get away with phony results by lowering standards. And you don't set standards arbitrarily in Washington D.C. And one last time, read the speech. This is not about NCLB.

[pnwmom]

77. I read the speech. But I'm not sure you did. Nothing in the speech

addresses the problems with the NCLB with respect to vulnerable subgroups -- which will overshadow anything else Obama tries to do.

1) Raising standards that are already too high for many children won't help them to attain proficiency.

2) Obama says we shouldn't have 50 state standards -- the only alternative I can see is ONE standard set in Washington, D.C. Or do you have some insider information on that?

3) Obama's speech talks about measuring student progress as a component of merit pay. The way student progress is measured is through NCLB tests. The only change he talks about with NCLB is to make the tests HARDER. So how will this deal with the Catch 22 of requiring special education students to meet standards of 100% proficiency?

[sandnsea]

79. That's not what he said

Nice twisting of his words. If that's the game you want to play, do it by yourself. I'm done.

[pnwmom]

87. I didn't say Obama said that. That is the effect of the NCLB --

to label special ed students and their schools as failures.

And I don't see anything in his speech about how he will address that.

[southerncrone]

59. I am also a parent & have high expectations of my children, & put forth

lots of effort to make sure they are educated, as well as taken care of. I am sure you did the same for your children.

However, teaching is not the same as parenting. You didn't answer my last question about when the last time you spent any time in a public school classroom. I asked this because things have changed greatly in public schools in the past decade.

Our society has changed. We teachers are basically required to ALL be Special Ed. teachers now, even though most of us are not, nor did we want to be when we entered education. We must educate so many students with such a variety of needs, that it is basically an impossibility. Kids who are neglected, emotionally unstable, abused (physically, emotionally, verbally, & sexually), ESL, autistic, & a broad spectrum of learning disabilities for which we must make accommodations.

We are receiving children without the basic skills we took for granted as caring parents. Teachers must spend lots of time teaching social skills....skills that all kids had before they entered school just a few years ago. This sets the entire process back & schools are playing catch-up for the rest of the time the kid is in school. This is why "early childhood education" programs are being pushed so hard.

Many of these situations are borne from the fact that we have more single-parents now than ever before. These parents are forced to work long hours (often 2 jobs), thus are unable to spend as much time with their kids as the kids need. They are also tired when they do finally "get time with the kids". This translates to lots of kids being home alone when it is not age-appropriate & they are unsupervised leading to other bad consequences. In other words, the kids are raising themselves in lots of cases.

Drug-addicted parents are another problem. Here is where the neglect & abuse escalate. These kids often have learning disabilities or other psychological problems relating back to the drug use while Mom was pregnant with them.

Because of "economics", our class sizes are increasing. Many of our schools are physically in shambles, yet we must persevere. Every year we hear "We're getting less money, so stretch your $'s & be creative with your money." "Being creative with your money" usually ends up meaning you spend a lot out of your own pocket. This on a salary that is not that much to begin with.

So....please spend some time in your local schools. Be a substitute teacher. The schools desperately need them, especially people who have already raised a number of children.
Then, please reply back here on how your experience goes.

[pnwmom]

61. Thanks for the dose of reality, southerncrone.

And thanks for your important work with children.

:hug:

[southerncrone]

69. It goes back to the old Indian saying, "Walk a mile in my moccasins."

I entered the teaching profession in my 40's, after working in the private business sector, taking time off to raise my kids to teenagers & owning my own business. I've done a lot of things in my life. By far, teaching has been the most eye-opening experience of all.....also, the most unappreciated.

Most people think they are experts on the schools because almost all of us WENT to school. I confess I felt that way before I began teaching. There is NO DOUBT that the SYSTEM is a big part of the problem. NCLB only made the SYSTEMATIC problem 1000 times worse. School systems have poured billions of dollars into this (& the testing companies that support it) instead of on the students, teachers & school infrastructures. This is why taxes have been raised in many municipalities....to fully fund NCLB. Next to the Iraqi War it is probably the biggest lie Bush told the American people.

Merit pay will not "fix" our educational woes. We need a holistic approach to dealing with our nation's youth. It must include all stakeholders & be comprehensive. Testing is NOT the answer & teachers are NOT the problem.

Someone up thread spoke of teacher burn out. Teachers get burnt out because the system in simply impossible & it hurts to see students be the ones who lose. Ultimately, our entire society loses when this happens.

[pnwmom]

78. While my third child was in elementary school, NCLB went into effect and

I watched the very best most dedicated teachers slowly but surely throw in the towel. Almost overnight, we had 75% new teachers, naive enough to think the new standards and methods made sense. (In our district, teachers across all the schools are literally supposed to be on the same page in the same lesson each and every day. What a nightmare.)

I gave up, finally, and put my youngest into private school. I fully support the teachers in my district, but I'm not going to sacrifice a child to a district obsessed with NCLB.

[southerncrone]

110. We are going through the same "on the same page at the same time" nonsense

here in TN, too. I teach HS, so we have lots of other factors that come into play. Our school days are always disrupted by some sort of "activity". It is getting steadily worse each year. I, too, am considering "throwing in the towel".....and I'm not alone. Our VERY BEST teachers, those who students have paid homage to for decades are doing the same.....retiring now when they really would have remained in the classroom for many more years if not for this NONSENSE.

I fully believe that part of this is economic & power-driven. Since teachers are paid by education level + # of years experience, if school systems can "run off" the MORE EXPENSIVE teachers, then they save money. It's a bottom-line issue. I doubt there will be many teachers in the future who receive "tenure". Instead we will have a revolving-door of young, inexperienced teachers who are LESS EXPENSIVE. As long as the job market is so bad, this method will work. But what of the kids?

Our education system started declining when the "business model" was applied to it. Until our society realizes that our children deserve better than to be treated like assembly-line products, things will not improve. The kids now will tell you that the school systems don't care about them, they only care about "how the system looks to people on the outside".

I guess this has taught our kids something.....how to be cynical.

[sandnsea]

64. And so the solution is to ignore all of that?

Because that's what you're saying. Anybody who wants to start implementing programs and measure success is to be demonized. Because it's hard to teach and nobody but a teacher can understand.

You think I don't know what goes on in schools? I don't know there are drug addicted parents? I was in the treatment field for ten years.

You do not have to be a teacher to have a brain.

[southerncrone]

72. Not sure where you got the idea that I'm saying things should be ignored.

I have no problem implementing programs, or measuring success. Don't put words in my mouth.
But the program implementations must be well thought out & the measurements must be reality-based to be valid.

The problem with "measuring success" in education is the subjective nature of the beast.
Standardized tests are not the answer.

The real measure of success is if the child can function in the workplace or the college classroom.
We need more involved input from the workplace & more coordination between secondary schools & post-secondary schools. They should be like a hand & glove. As it stands now, they are separate entities that don't have much interaction.

To have been in "the treatment field" you seem to be very hostile. Are you aware that you are coming off that way? No one is attacking you, yet you are responding as such.

[sandnsea]

74. Here

I am not going to talk to somebody else who has got no clue what this is about and is busy putting words in my mouth.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8256531&mesg_id=8256531

[southerncrone]

75. You posted on a thread that is addressing NCLB. It is obvious to those of us involved

in education that is what the OP is talking about. WE DEFINITELY HAVE A CLUE ABOUT THIS.

The OP is indicating that until NCLB is changed....or better yet, eliminated, teacher merit pay is not going to matter. NCLB is a formula for failure. Sounds good on paper.....but impossible.

Posting Obama's plan is fine, but don't get indignant toward us when you have tried to twist this thread into something else than it was intended.

No one here is putting words in YOUR mouth, quite the contrary, YOU have been trying to force them into ours.

[sandnsea]

76. The OP posted in response

to various threads about the education speech yesterday and merit pay. That's what happened. You're jumping in at the end of the show.

[southerncrone]

80. This is a new thread. The other threads stand alone.

[sandnsea]

85. Yeah, another fantasy

you can join pnwmom in.

[pnwmom]

81. The OP is saying exactly what southerncrone is saying.

That as long as NCLB is in place, with all its problems, then any merit plan is unworkable.

First we have to admit that the 100% proficiency goal is a fantasy.

Only then can we decide how to measure student progress and, finally, address the issue of merit pay.

[sandnsea]

84. Yes, 100% proficiency goal is a fantasy

a fantasy you made up to justify your insane rant this evening.

[ulysses]

91. WOW. you really think that kids with learning disabilities

have a different standard for proficiency under the law??? Kids with severe and profound intellectual disabilities, yeah, as pnwmom noted, but kids with ld?

That explains a lot about last night's attempts to talk to you.

[sandnsea]

93. Uhm, LD kids graduate with mainstream kids

Did you miss that post? Plenty of LD kids learn everything that mainstream kids learn, that's the point of special ed. There's no reason to lower standards for them. That's what I said. Quit twisting things to suit this crazy need to insist nothing can be done to improve schools.

[ulysses]

94. amazing.

Do you believe that children with learning disabilities get a different proficiency standard that they have to meet under NCLB? Yes or no.

[sandnsea]

96. Some do, some don't

It depends on the extent of the disability.

Do you seriously believe you need a special degree to know that there are variances in learning disabilities?

[ulysses]

98. in Georgia, at least, no child with a learning disability is exempt from state requirements.

Maybe other states do it differently, but unless they got their own versions of the federal law, I very much doubt it.

The only children who qualify for exemptions from meeting proficiency on the standard test are those with moderate, severe and profound *intellectual disabilities*, those with very low IQs.

[sandnsea]

100. Variances in disabilities

Like I said.

[ulysses]

101. yes, but not in learning disabilities.

LD is a different thing than an intellectual disability.

As...fascinating as this discussion has been, I need to go get ready for work. Adios.

[sandnsea]

102. As the district evaluates

and will make sure and put in the appropriate category to meet necessary state standards.

[ulysses]

109. "appropriate category"?

There are two categories, those who take the standard test (in Georgia, the Criterion Referenced Competency Test, CRCT) and those who are tested in an alternative fashion (in Georgia, the Georgia Alternative Assessment, GAA).

Children with learning disabilities take the CRCT and are held to the exact same proficiency standard as their non-disabled peers. The same goes for students who have emotional/behavior disorders and mild intellectual disabilities (normally, those with measured IQs of 55-69). There is no special scoring category for these children. If a child without a disability must score 55 out of 70 (this is a hypothetical) to be considered proficient, a child with one of the above disabilities must score the same to be considered proficient.

The alternative assessment is probably the source of your confusion. GAA kids are those with moderate intellectual disabilities (children with Down Syndrome are often in this category), severe intellectual disabilities and profound intellectual disabilities. IQ range, under the law, is 40-54 for moderate, 25-39 for severe, and below 25 for profound.

I'm not sure what you've been told, but these are the only categories.

[sandnsea]

112. appropriate category

Learning Disabled or Intellectual Disabled.

I am not confused.

Learning Disabled children can do just as well as mainstream children. There is no reason to hold most of them to a different proficiency standard.

Although - I never said I supported the NCLB proficiency standards in the first place, and neither did Obama -

which is why they're going to be CHANGED.

I honestly don't know why people insist on labeling completely different programs that include financial incentives as a test-based merit pay when they aren't. And when they have NOTHING to do with NCLB - because it's going to be CHANGED.

That was the entire point of the speech.

[pnwmom]

24. LD kids are part of "all children." Please don't tell them they aren't. n/t

[sandnsea]

30. Not when it comes to reading and math proficiency

And please don't distort measurable proficiency by pretending that they are included in that dynamic, because they aren't. And stop with the condescension. It's sickening.

[pnwmom]

42. LD kids ARE included in the NCLB statistics and requirements.

How can you pretend they aren't?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

31. Without even going into those with learning disabilities...

...some kids are just fucking dumb and either can't or won't learn. I grew up with rednecks. Ain't gunna be no fancy lernin' for lots of them.

[Greyhound]

104. IQ below 50 is "a mild intellectual disability"?!?

I'm not disparaging the kid, we all have what we have, but I am stunned that <50 is considered mild.

[ulysses]

108. not normally.

But because of past lawsuits, a child with an IQ below what would normally be considered "mildly disabled" has to be considered in the mild category if their functional/daily living skills are high.

[msongs]

2. all children will be above average as well - nt

[ulysses]

4. I want to meet all the strong women.

;-)

[rwheeler31]

7. We still try to make all those kids stars. Do not give up.

[ulysses]

10. of course.

I work my kids hard, and I'm not about to give up. I'm not saying that we shouldn't hold all kids to the highest standard they can achieve. I'm saying that that standard may not always be the state's idea of proficient.

edit: "shouldn't", not "should"

[FLyellowdog]

23. All children above average is impossible...

simply by it's definition. "Average" is variable depending on which scores are used in a given time frame. As groups of children improve their performances, the average for the groups rises. Averages are demonstrated as some being below and some being above as well as some being in the middle.

A better goal would be to raise the performance standards for all...based on projected potential. No child should be left behind, but that doesn't mean all children will achieve the same proficiency. I taught children with learning disabilities and diminished capacity and they learned to their potential...but could not compare to those without handicaps.

[sandnsea]

70. proficient does not mean above average

It means proficient, competent.

Obviously all kids can't achieve the same proficiency. That is so obvious that it's a bafflement that anybody would think that they were adding something intelligent to a conversation by even stating it.

My son has learning disabilities and is smarter than most people. I'm glad nobody categorized him as unable to compare to those without handicaps.

[pnwmom]

82. All students, except a fraction of the most severely limited,

are expected to meet the same standard, which is defined as "proficient." Thus, they can be proficient -- or more proficient. That is all NCLB allows.

And what does proficient mean? From the American Heritage Dictionary:

pro·fi·cient
adj. Having or marked by an advanced degree of competence, as in an art, vocation, profession, or branch of learning.
n. An expert; an adept.


So -- how can ALL students be ADVANCED? If it weren't such a tragedy, NCLB would be a joke.

[FLyellowdog]

105. Interesting...

but the mere fact that someone is categorized as having a learning disability does in fact set him/her aside from those who don't. Being handicapped isn't a limiting condition in and of itself...it simply means that some areas of that person's life may be more challenging for them than for others. The whole purpose of IDEA is to recognize these differences and to ensure that students who need different approaches to learning are afforded those opportunities. My point to the poster was that their statement of "all students being above average" cannot by definition ever be accomplished. Proficient is certainly a much more realistic goal and a better term to use.

[FrenchieCat]

5. All children without learning disabilities, i.e., children who are capable with

some attention and some hard work on behalf of students, teachers and parents.

[pnwmom]

34. Unfortunately, that's NOT what NCLB says.

NCLB says "all children" in all subgroups, and that includes LD, recent ESL students, kids on the autism spectrum. ALL means ALL.

[ContinentalOp]

14. A few other goals we should add to that...

All mothers and fathers will be be excellent parents. All politicians shall serve their constituents loyally. All food shall be very tasty... etc etc and other such vague, undefinable absurdities.

[ulysses]

15. :)

Thanks for that.

[sense]

29. straw man

[ContinentalOp]

36. How so?

"Proficiency" is an arbitrary concept, defined by the corporations who publish the very testing material that NCLB requires. Corporations whose heads are, "coincidentally", close friends with the Bush family.

[Ichingcarpenter]

21. Its really called 'reading comprehension' and math

Comprehension takes a life time for some and then some for some.

Understanding may take longer and has to be generational at times.

[B o d i]

37. re: reading comprehension, this thread is a great example of the bell curve

Some get it right away, but some are... a little slow on the uptake. Read for yourselves and judge for yourselves.

[last_texas_dem]

35. Oh yeah...

Reminds me of the luminaries in the Texas legislature who claim that 100-percent of students are eventually going to be able to pass the TAKS test. It's great to have folks that out of touch with reality making the rules...

[Hannah Bell]

44. i believe bush made a similar pronouncement with a different deadline.

i bet this one will pan out about the same.

btw, how will our childrens be learning when their parents are unemployed & homeless?

[madfloridian]

57. That is exactly what Dean said in 03....NCLB is setting schools up to fail.

Even got the time line right.

2003 Howard Dean on NCLB... "every school in America by 2013 will be a failing school."

"The president's ultimate goal," said former Gov. Howard Dean (D-Vt.), one of the Democrats who now harshly attacks NCLB, "is to make the public schools so awful, and starve them of money, just as he's starving all the other social programs, so that people give up on the public schools."

...."Dean criticized President Bush, saying his administration will lower the standards for good schools in New Hampshire, making them more like poorly performing schools in Texas. The Bush administration believes ''the way to help New Hampshire is to make it more like Texas,'' Dean told supporters in Manchester, adding that ''every school in America by 2013 will be a failing school.''

''Every group, including special education kids, has to be at 100 percent to pass the tests,'' Dean said. ''No school system in America can do that. That ensures that every school will be a failing school.''

...""The standards are so ridiculous that every single public school in America will be deemed to be a school in need of improvement or a failing school by 2013," former Vermont governor Howard Dean said in a teleconference yesterday. He said the law, which he has pledged to dismantle, was "making education in America worse, not better."

..."As governor, Dean opposed No Child Left Behind and said Vermont would have to raise $80 million more from property taxes to implement it. Yesterday, he called the law an "intrusive mandate" and said Democratic candidates who voted for it were "co-opted" by Bush's agenda, which Dean says aims to "put public schools out of business."

His views did not set well with the party leaders. He was right, though.

[pnwmom]

63. Dean was right. It was a complete CATCH-22.

And designed to label all schools as a failure.

[Richard Steele]

66. Yes- by 2014, all children in the USA will be above average.

When viewed properly, the premise is ridiculous upon its face.

[JCMach1]

71. More idiocy from the Obama administration on education...

One area where I 100% disagree with everything he has had to say. I also don't think he has a real grasp of the issues (read naive).

[EFerrari]

89. Or maybe his writers are just falling down on the communication.

I'm hoping. Maybe? Because the message is hamfisted and seems strangely out of touch.

[Fumesucker]

97. No one can be an expert, or even competent really, at everything..

Every single person on this planet has strengths and weaknesses, Obama specifically included.

[JCMach1]

99. True, but if you want to offer a major initiative...

:shrug:

However, you can't fault him for keeping his campaign promise.

My only beef is that his promise is about 180degrees from my own position.

[ColbertWatcher]

73. In order for that to happen ...

... someone will redefine "child," "reading," "math," and "Spring."

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

106. Next year's fifth graders will be smarter than last year's fifth graders.

And each following year the next years fifth graders will be smarter than the previous until morale is restored.

[cloudbase]

111. Without reading through 110+ responses,

this will require changing the definition of proficient. Not a problem for the truly creative.


(My apologies to anybody who posted something like this prior to me.)