New to the art form? This Wall Street Journal article will get you orientated. Also, for more information on how some of these titles mislead lawmakers and the citizenry, find some academic commentary from Brian Christopher Jones here:

Wednesday, July 17, 2013

Possible Success[or] to No Child Left Behind?

A potential successor to the No Child Left Behind Act, the Student Success Act (H.R. 5) will be on the House floor the next couple days. While it may have Republication support, the While House has already released a statement noting that Mr. Obama will likely veto the legislation if presented with it. 

The White House stance is as follows:  
The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 5, the Student Success Act. The Administration believes that the Congress must act to reform the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), to support State efforts to adopt and implement State-developed standards that ensure every student graduates from high school prepared for college and a career; create a fairer, flexible, and focused accountability system; support effective teachers and leaders; and promote innovation in our public education system. These principles are reflected in the flexibility that the Administration has offered to States with respect to the Federally-mandated, one-size-fits-all standards of NCLB. States' overwhelming participation in ESEA flexibility indicates that they already are committed to moving toward this vision of comprehensive reform.
Instead, H.R. 5 would represent a significant step backwards in the effort to help our Nation's children and their families prepare for their futures. Among other things, the bill would not support State efforts to hold students to standards that will prepare them for college and careers; would not support our international economic competitiveness; would virtually eliminate accountability for the growth and achievement of historically underserved populations; would fail to support meaningful improvement and reforms at the Nation's lowest-performing schools; would eliminate maintenance-of-effort requirements, which could reduce overall investment in public education; and would not reauthorize key Administration priorities, including effective initiatives like Race to the Top, Investing in Innovation, and Promise Neighborhoods.

No comments:

Post a Comment