Can someone explain the "Unfunded Mandates" that come with NCLB? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

SwampYankee · #1 01-12-2009, 08:34 AM

Serious question, not being a wise a$$, I must be missing something.

For example, according to CT's Attorney General, No Child Left Behind is an unfunded mandate which costs the state millions of dollars. For what? Why does it cost so much to administer a test and send them off to be scored? Are the states responsible for printing/copying them? Is there more to it than losing one day of school to pass out a test?

I can see the state's argument that the CT Mastery Tests are more stringent than the NAEP test and that it's repetitive but I just don't see what all the money must be going to. No one ever addresses that part of it, just that it's an "unfunded mandate."

Please help, I'm sure there's an easy explanation. I've just never heard/read it.

Brian Carlton · #2 01-12-2009, 09:03 AM

From my limited knowledge, it's far more than a simple test. If the children don't make the required test scores, it's the responsibility of the district to put in whatever remedial training is required to improve those scores. It's an expensive proposition if you've got 20% of the class failing to meet the numbers.

pj67coll · #3 01-12-2009, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

From my limited knowledge, it's far more than a simple test. If the children don't make the required test scores, it's the responsibility of the district to put in whatever remedial training is required to improve those scores. It's an expensive proposition if you've got 20% of the class failing to meet the numbers.

Correct.

CT Should be in a far better position that other states in that regard. For example where I work with some schools at 80 percent or higher Mexican student population. The district has to find the money for the extra teachers and "specialists" for the relevant catch up education that's required.

- Peter.

SwampYankee · #4 01-12-2009, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Carlton

From my limited knowledge, it's far more than a simple test. If the children don't make the required test scores, it's the responsibility of the district to put in whatever remedial training is required to improve those scores. It's an expensive proposition if you've got 20% of the class failing to meet the numbers.

If that's it, that makes sense. It's not the test-taking portion but the resulting expense of bringing those below acceptable level up to it. Although the CT Mastery Tests would also require that on the state level.

Something I hear often from teachers here, but never have wanted to call them on it in public settings, is that they have to "teach to the test" (for both CMT and NAEP) rather than going with their usual curriculum. I would think they would both be grade specific and something the kids ought to be able to do already.

I've got kids on both end of the spectrum. My oldest son (11) and daughter (9) tested on the high end of the "Proficient" category (near perfect in all categories) and then I have son #2 with DS (6) who will obviously have testing issues. We've been generally very pleased with their school catering to our widely varying needs and having a student with Special Needs I'm well aware of the extra resources he takes, so I tend not to question them too much. The terms seem to get parroted from the politicians to the teachers to the parents who oppose NCLB so it just got me wondering what the reason behind it was.

Thanks, Brian and Peter.

Matt L · #5 01-12-2009, 10:50 AM

The other problem is that NCLB is misnamed. It should be called No Child Gets Ahead.

pj67coll · #6 01-12-2009, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SwampYankee

Something I hear often from teachers here, but never have wanted to call them on it in public settings, is that they have to "teach to the test" (for both CMT and NAEP) rather than going with their usual curriculum.
.

Never quite understood the problem with teaching to the test myself. I come from an educational environmnt where that was the norm. The curriculum was set at he state level and you were tested quarterly on it. Without tests how can you possibly tell if someone has actually learned anything or not?

The problem seems to be where there is a disconnect between whoever dreames up the "curriculum" and the state/federal government who figures out apparently completely different requirements for "testing". For the life of my I cannot understand why those are not in sync. But I guess thats government for you.

- Peter.

LUVMBDiesels · #7 01-12-2009, 12:06 PM

There are problems with NCLB

1) W enacted it so the teachers automatically hate it.

2) NCLB means that teachers are being held accountable for the student's scores. The AFT hates this

3) NCLB means that teachers have to teach actual hard facts instead of teaching self esteem.

4) NCLB goes back to a system of teaching that existed before 'new math', 'authentic literature', and other so called progressive teaching methods that came out of Columbia University's Teacher's College in the 1970's.

This mandate should not be a cost increasing one. The money for it should be found in the normal teaching budget as teachers should be teaching the things detailed in NCLB anyway.

For what it's worth, it has been a success. I read an article about a school in Richmond that had been an utter failure. Since NCLB things have been improving rapidly.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/850gvneh.asp

If NCLB had existed in the 1980s I probably would have continued my teaching certificate. I basically left the program over the dogma being rammed down student teacher's throats by Teacher's College -- Oh boy, you had better toe the party line and not exhibt any differences or you will be cast out!

pj67coll · #8 01-12-2009, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LUVMBDiesels

There are problems with NCLB

1) W enacted it so the teachers automatically hate it.

True.

Quote:

2) NCLB means that teachers are being held accountable for the student's scores. The AFT hates this

True, however not so simple. You can lead a horse etc...
Some kids want to learn, some are just wastes of oxygen, not matter who holds whome accountable for what.

Quote:

NCLB means that teachers have to teach actual hard facts instead of teaching self esteem.

Theoretically true, however there is still a major disconnect between what the feds regard as the relevant facts, and what the state thinks about that, and schools are run at a state level not a national level.

Quote:

4) NCLB goes back to a system of teaching that existed before 'new math', 'authentic literature', and other so called progressive teaching methods that came out of Columbia University's Teacher's College in the 1970's.

I think that may be the intent of it, but there's way more to it than that. You can pretend to teach to any particular standard or philosophy, but when your job largely consists of babysitting other peoples mistakes any pretence at "teaching" is largely that, pretence.

Quote:

This mandate should not be a cost increasing one. The money for it should be found in the normal teaching budget as teachers should be teaching the things detailed in NCLB anyway.

Sorry, that's just a joke. When you are sitting with a school that's over 50 percent spanish speaking, and I do mean non-fluent in english, you will not find the money in a
"normal" teaching budget for the extra teachers you are required by law to find simply to try and get the kids able to speak english before you can even begin to teach them regular subject matter.

Not to mention special needs kids who sholudn't even be in a regular classroom environment to start with.

Quote:

For what it's worth, it has been a success. I read an article about a school in Richmond that had been an utter failure. Since NCLB things have been improving rapidly.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/850gvneh.asp

I'm not sure a few individual cases provides a sufficient data set.

Quote:

If NCLB had existed in the 1980s I probably would have continued my teaching certificate. I basically left the program over the dogma being rammed down student teacher's throats by Teacher's College -- Oh boy, you had better toe the party line and not exhibt any differences or you will be cast out!

No arguement there. I could never be a teacher myself. Way to much PC psychobabble from what I've seen.

- Peter.

strelnik · #9 01-12-2009, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SwampYankee

Serious question, not being a wise a$$, I must be missing something.

For example, according to CT's Attorney General, No Child Left Behind is an unfunded mandate which costs the state millions of dollars. For what? Why does it cost so much to administer a test and send them off to be scored? Are the states responsible for printing/copying them? Is there more to it than losing one day of school to pass out a test?

I can see the state's argument that the CT Mastery Tests are more stringent than the NAEP test and that it's repetitive but I just don't see what all the money must be going to. No one ever addresses that part of it, just that it's an "unfunded mandate."

Please help, I'm sure there's an easy explanation. I've just never heard/read it.

The US Constitution says the national congress has the authority to compel the states to do certain things, then it's up to the state to raise the revenue top pay for them, in any way they like. In the past, people have lobbied for cash for these mandates, but previously to that,
a) there were many many fewer mandates;
b) the states just figured out a way to pay for them.

Educational unions and the NEA lobby have created a giant bureaucracy which the congress and the people have to jump through have chosen to jump through instead of scrap. It's done to create a power base and to support (financially) their own interests, just like the UAW and the Teamsters created make work programs like the Jobs Bank (where you get paid for doing nothing, literally). This enables these guys to create their own power elite.

Education gets shortchanged because the only way to make the system work is by creating emergency loopholes tohire competent part-time substitute teachers.

Simple example: to be a French teacher, you don't need to know French, you just need a degree in language education and courses in French. No one EVER checks to make sure that you can do the job.

I was a government French interpreter for NATO and translator for a two-star admiral, a four-star general and for corporate vice presidents. When they would send me people to help, I interviewed the former language teachers first, figuring they would be the best, since they use it every day, right? They were the worst. One kept her certification by taking French cooking classes (they were"culture" classes. Culture of what? yoghurt?).

In the real word I have been French-language voice talent, recording training programs etc. in French. I've been the French sound track for Big 3 CEOs when the message went to foreign news sources. The video studio didn't care about how many degrees I had (I have three, one from a French university) , they wanted to see me perform, because that's what they pay for.

Hence, those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. And don't give me that crapola about "oh you don't know...bla bla bla). I have also been a high school teacher and a grad school business prof.

So the answer is: squeeze all the fat out of the school system (convert to biodiesel?

), and save the money, using it for value-added stuff, not bureraucracy and other things, then you will have the money to educate, not subsidize industries or political cronies that can't make it on their own, because their managers are too dumb,greedy or short-sighted.

In Detroit, no one knows how they spent 4 million bucks of school district money. The Detroit superintendent is fired, but she still wants her 250K salary for three years after she's gone. The governor is taking forever to appoint a state-controlled administrator to take over the purse strings, in the meantime, $30,000/day is disappearing

...where's it going?

Aren't you sorry you asked about "unfunded mandates"....

aklim · #10 01-12-2009, 01:53 PM

Problem with the education system here is that NCLB assumes that every child wants to be in school. Fact of the matter is that is simply not true. So, the kids become prison inmates and cause trouble for those wanting to learn. We spend more per kid than many other countries and get less. Someone see the beauty of that equation? Of course letting them grow up illiterate isn't an option to many because they will become a burden on society. So, dragging them thru school and hoping they will suddenly see the light seems to be one hell of a hope.

Maybe the solution is to take away the safety nets, let those that want to learn have all they need and those that don't, well, same as a high wire walker that falls without a safety net. He becomes a statistic AND AN EXAMPLE to others who insist on tempting the same fate.