Discussion Questions:
1. Do you agree with this act? If so why?
2. If this act was still taking place when your kids are in school, would you want them to follow it?
3. Do you think this act could be improved in any way?
4. Does no Child Left behind violate the Constitution? How?
1. Yes I do agree with this act, I believe that education is a key to a successful society. I agree that setting higher standards will achieve individual growth in education.
ReplyDelete2. Yes
3. I do not think there should be consequences as strict as cutting funding, I also think that the standards they set may not be so reasonable.
4. Yes, education is not a federal enumerated power in the constitution. Therefor, according to amendment 10, it must be a state power.
1. I dont agree with no child left behind. This unfunded mandate says that the states must provide better education and reach a higher academic standard. Nevertheless, the national government does not set guidelines for the standard and the schools can lower the standard to whatever will ensure that their students will meet the standard. Also the standard tests are mainly the concern throughout the academic year and teachers are teaching to the test.
ReplyDelete2. I'd rather them learn how to learn, rather than them learn how to pass a test so that the school can reach its academic standard.
3. They could find a better way to determine whether the students are learning the material rather than the standardized tests.
4. Yes, education is a state power as delegated by the 10th amendment. The national goernment is violating the staes rights by this act.
1. No Child Left Behind was a good idea, in theory. It had a good concept behind it, wanting students to reach higher academic acheivement, but the way it was carried out was not good. Because of this, I do not agree with No Child Left Behind. The government threatens to take funds away from schools if they don't reach a certain level of academic proficiency, but doesn't give them any money to fix the gaps in education that they have. Letting states choose the standards is also a bad idea because they can lower them enough that they have a 100% passing rate and get all of their money, even though students haven't learned anything. I think it should be more about students learning the material than them being able to pass a test.
ReplyDelete2. Because I don't agree with the act, I would hope that it is repealed by the time I have kids in school, but I also hope that my kids don't struggle with passing these tests so it wouldn't really be a big problem for me.
3. If the government gave schools more funding in order to improve their education rather than take away funds for having bad education, that would be a huge improvement. Schools need money to afford new teachers and resources for teaching students if they cannot pass these standardized tests and right now this act is not helping them at all.
4. Education is supposed to be a state power, so I say that it is unconstitutional, but officially since it is just an unfunded mandate, it is constitutional.