Prediction: New federal education bill will not turn around falling test scores

[Todd-'o'-Vision]

Libertarian Newsletter

WASHINGTON, DC -- The education bill signed on Tuesday by President Bush will cause test scores to plummet and America's children to become more ignorant, Libertarians predict -- because that's what has happened after the enactment of every federal education bill over the past 30 years.

"The real education crisis in America is that politicians never seem to learn," said Steve Dasbach, Libertarian Party Executive Director.

"They haven't learned that government-run schools are the cause of student failures, and that the only way to improve education is to decrease the role of the federal government, give more power to parents, and move toward a genuine free-market system in education."

Yet decreasing federal power wasn't one of the so-called reforms in the education bill that Bush praised at signing ceremonies on Tuesday in Ohio, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire while flanked by a beaming Senator Teddy Kennedy.

The legislation, which passed Congress last year with broad bipartisan support, mandates annual math and reading tests in grades 3-8, gives local school districts more "flexibility" in spending federal aid, and gives parents the right to transfer children from one government-run school to another.

But the widely praised initiative is doomed to failure, predicted Dasbach, because history shows that more federal involvement in schools actually decreases student achievement. According to Department of Education figures:

* Between 1970 and 1995, federal education spending nearly doubled from $19 billion to $35 billion. Yet SAT scores fell by an average of 50 points. And since 1960, federal education spending has more than tripled, yet SAT scores have fallen by 100 points.

"The evidence is clear: More federal funding and involvement equals lower test scores," Dasbach said. "And now George W. Bush has signed a bill that will make the problem worse. The new budget increases funding for the Education Department, which has squandered $550 billion since 1980, by a whopping 40%."

Meanwhile, the reverse is true in private schools: They cost less money and deliver better results, Dasbach said.

* The average private school tuition nationwide is $3,116 -- less than half the $6,857 per pupil expenditure at government schools, according to the Center for Education Reform.

Yet private school students scored proficient in the 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress reading test at 1.5 times the rate of public school students, and scored higher in math at every grade level.

So why do students do better at private schools?

The answer is simple, Dasbach said: "Private schools are rewarded only when they succeed, but government schools are rewarded even when they fail. As Education Department statistics show, government-run schools have been failing America's children for decades. Sadly, their latest reward for that failure came on Tuesday, when Democrats and Republicans increased their budget -- again."

The solution, Dasbach said, is to decrease the role of federal bureaucrats in local education, eliminate meddlesome federal mandates, stop showering federal money on failing public schools, and work to give every child the opportunity to attend a private school.

"One simple way to improve education would be to enact a dollar-for-dollar tax credit to allow any individual or company to fund private tuition for any child or any private school," he said. "Until that first step is taken, politicians will continue to pretend that government schools can be reformed, and our children will be the losers."

What are your thoughts on this ?

 

[lobito]

My thoughts are that I like it better when you DO NOT cut and paste.

Seriously Todd, you have this THING against The school systems in the U.S. when you live where? Oh yeah, CANADA! Please give it up, trying to make some think you know what will work for the U.S. These aren't even YOUR thoughts, they belong to someone else. You just post them.

 

[Todd-'o'-Vision]

My thoughts are that I like it better when you DO NOT cut and paste.

Seriously Todd, you have this THING against The school systems in the U.S. when you live where? Oh yeah, CANADA! Please give it up, trying to make some think you know what will work for the U.S. These aren't even YOUR thoughts, they belong to someone else. You just post them.

Canada's Schools systems are all ready to fucked up to ever be repaired the U.S. still has an opportunity to prevent it from happening.

Just like If I used a Electric drill that had a short in it and got a shock, I suppose you would have me not tell the next person about it too

 

[lobito]

D.P.

 

[lobito]

Todd, your analogy of the drill is SO stupid. It means NOTHING, when trying to relate it to this subject of cutting and pasting someone elses thoughts about the U.S. school system.

Anyway, in this day and age, they should be using cordless drills, MUCH more convenient.

 

[Todd-'o'-Vision]

Todd, your analogy of the drill is SO stupid. It means NOTHING, when trying to relate it to this subject of cutting and pasting someone elses thoughts about the U.S. school system.

Anyway, in this day and age, they should be using cordless drills, MUCH more convenient.

So I am not allowed to post someones elses thoughts even If I agree with them and would of said the same thing just not as grammatically and spelling correct?

Cordless convenient? Yeah if you only have to do 20-50 screws and they don't need to be tight.

 

[MidnightAngel]

{I keep telling myself I'm not posting on this type of thread anymore! *bangs head against wall*}

With the exception of students with documented learning disablilites, the reason that students do not learn in school is because they do not care if they learn or not, IMO. While I do realize that some students learn/grasp concepts easier than others, all of the students in the school district that I live in receive the same quality of education. Why do some pass proficiency tests on the first try, and some can't pass the ninth grade exam as seniors? Because they didn't get the propler education?, or was it because they didn't care enough to pay attention in class?? Students will learn if they have the desire to do so, regardless of whether it is a public or private school; government-funded or private for-profit business.

My opinion.

 

[Calamity Jane]

Students will learn if they have the desire to do so, regardless of whether it is a public or private school; government-funded or private for-profit business.

My opinion.

Ditto.

But I would add that the only way children are going to get excited about learning is if their parents make it a priority long before the kids ever set foot in a school.

I find it disturbing that most kids can't read until 3rd grade. I could read in preschool. I think a large part of the problem is that we tend to teach to the lowest comoon denominator. Making everything easier so the slower kids can keep up instead of making them realize that just maybe they need to work a little harder to keep up. We've removed reality from the classroom.

 

[Todd-'o'-Vision]

Why do some pass proficiency tests on the first try, and some can't pass the ninth grade exam as seniors? Because they didn't get the propler education?, or was it because they didn't care enough to pay attention in class?? Students will learn if they have the desire to do so, regardless of whether it is a public or private school; government-funded or private for-profit business.

My opinion.

Nothing against you just throwing this out for someone to grab and run or tackle thier choose.

How did these seniors become seniors, if they can't pass ninth grade exams as you suggest?

 

[Todd-'o'-Vision]

Ditto.

But I would add that the only way children are going to get excited about learning is if their parents make it a priority long before the kids ever set foot in a school.

I find it disturbing that most kids can't read until 3rd grade. I could read in preschool. I think a large part of the problem is that we tend to teach to the lowest comoon denominator. Making everything easier so the slower kids can keep up instead of making them realize that just maybe they need to work a little harder to keep up. We've removed reality from the classroom.

I think tha hits it on the head, and it is not the fault of the teachers either. I think its parents and governments and Teachers get the unfortunancy of getting stuck in the middle of two warring tribes.

 

[virgo2000]

Actually I believe it is combination of things. First the Federal Government has not learned you can not regulate evrything. Education takes some incentive to leran things. This is the job of the parents and the teachers both to instill the desire of the kids to learn. But today the parents worry more about having something better than the guy next more than their own kids. Kids need rules and structure in their lives. The kids today do not have to work for anything they want. I was picking up potatos in a field at 10 to earn money to buy a bike. My dad said if you want it,earn it and then you will appreciate it. The teachers today pass the kids and let them be someone elses problem and god forbid "little Johnny" fails. the parents come down on the school real quick. It is do your job and teach my kids. I should not have to help them. The teachers are not as dedicated today as they were when the pay was not there. Now it is high pay and long summer vacations for the teachers. The majority of kids today are spoiled and think the world owes them a living. The government in their divine wisedom removed most types of punishment for bad kids in schools and the parents let the kids do what they want. I KNOW THIS IS NOT THE CASE IN EVERY FAMILY. I am talking in general terms. bad behavior by a couple kids in a classroom effects the whole class!!! Maybe if there was a way to eliminate the unruly the rest would get the hint and work toward getting an education.

 

[virgo2000]

Actually I believe it is combination of things. First the Federal Government has not learned you can not regulate evrything. Education takes some incentive to leran things. This is the job of the parents and the teachers both to instill the desire of the kids to learn. But today the parents worry more about having something better than the guy next more than their own kids. Kids need rules and structure in their lives. The kids today do not have to work for anything they want. I was picking up potatos in a field at 10 to earn money to buy a bike. My dad said if you want it,earn it and then you will appreciate it. The teachers today pass the kids and let them be someone elses problem and god forbid "little Johnny" fails. the parents come down on the school real quick. It is do your job and teach my kids. I should not have to help them. The teachers are not as dedicated today as they were when the pay was not there. Now it is high pay and long summer vacations for the teachers. The majority of kids today are spoiled and think the world owes them a living. The government in their divine wisedom removed most types of punishment for bad kids in schools and the parents let the kids do what they want. I KNOW THIS IS NOT THE CASE IN EVERY FAMILY. I am talking in general terms. bad behavior by a couple kids in a classroom effects the whole class!!! Maybe if there was a way to eliminate the unruly the rest would get the hint and work toward getting an education.

 

[Calamity Jane]

Maybe if there was a way to eliminate the unruly the rest would get the hint and work toward getting an education.

So all children should conform to some quiet ideal? They shouldn't think for themselves? They shouldn't be allowed to have alternate viewpoints? What is your definition of unruly?

 

[Todd-'o'-Vision]

So all children should conform to some quiet ideal? They shouldn't think for themselves? They shouldn't be allowed to have alternate viewpoints? What is your definition of unruly?

When I think of unruly I don't think quiet ideal or self thought or alternative views.

I think of some of the kids that were insome of my glasses. Throwing spit balls, airplanes, pulling chairs out from other students, throwing books around. Unproductive activities.

 

[MissTaken]

Ludicrous!

Weeding out the bad seeds .....phooey!

Half of us here wouldn't have made it through school or college or into the successful worlds we live in without a spit ball here and there!


Education needs to be individualized, not ringing of conformity!

Each child needs to be given the opportunity to learn in the best environment suitable to his/her needs. Each child's needs shoudl be assessed. their learning style and motivational factors should be considered. Then a plan developed to ensure their growth and learning. Every child can learn with support, motivation and structure.

Now that sounds as if the school system will be expected to excel in social work as well. Sadly enough, there is quite a trend to incorporate social work/counseling and human services into the school system.

Finally, the parents need not only to support the child from the home front, but be directly involved in planning for the child. HOw to motivate parents....example: Welfare recipients in New York who do not ensure their children's attendance could face sanctions of their benefits. Take it a step further...did they attend the teacher's conference? Is homework done/not done? Why? Yes....there are many variables...but, the parents are equally, if not more so responsible than the government in terms of child education.

Do state tests work toward this ideal? Not likely, teachers have the task of meeting curriculum requirements and find themselves tied down by state regs, leaving little room for their creativity and individualizing their program. (Or so I am told by many teachers.)

Todd, ya gotta stop blaming the government! Kids in private schools may do well because of a number of other factors, parent interest, individualized attention etc.

There is no clear answer....but an across the board generalization doesn't cut it.

Sorry to be so wordy....

 

[sigh]

todd, corelation does not prove cause and effect...just because every education bill has (supposedly) been followed by a decline in the quality of public education in the states doesn't mean that the bills CAUSED the decline...there are scads of reasons for the decline of a culture, decadence not being the least

look to the romans, they too rose and fell...it's an age-old pattern...(not that i think we're plummeting into ruin, by the way, it's just that i have no illusions that ours will be the first permanent superpower)

it's quite possible, likely even, that the public education bills have greatly slowed an inevitable decline...have you considered that?

 

[MidnightAngel]

How did these seniors become seniors, if they can't pass ninth grade exams as you suggest?

Well, they begin taking the exam in ninth grade. They have 4 years to pass all parts of it. If they haven't passed all parts by the time they are seniors, they get a piece of paper stating they have attended 12 years of school, not a diploma. Anyway, I think that's the way it goes this week. They change the standards every year, it seems.

Anyway...no more headaches for me.....mine passed all parts on the first try! (Shameless smart-kid boast! )

 

[WriterDom]

A law needs to be passed to require all politicians to send their kids to government schools.

 

[Todd-'o'-Vision]

Well, they begin taking the exam in ninth grade. They have 4 years to pass all parts of it. If they haven't passed all parts by the time they are seniors, they get a piece of paper stating they have attended 12 years of school, not a diploma. Anyway, I think that's the way it goes this week. They change the standards every year, it seems.

Anyway...no more headaches for me.....mine passed all parts on the first try! (Shameless smart-kid boast! )

Awesome parenting to have them pass all on the first try, Truely a deserved congrats.

I guess School has changed since I grad'd 9 {damn has it really been that long, damn} at no stage was a student allowed to pass from one grad to the other without passing everything from grad 9-12. If you didn't met the score you stayed in that grade, I almost did cause of english {damn mother toungue and i still have it screwed up} There were no hopes of making it up in the next four remaining years of hopefully passing it, it was do it that year or do that year over again.

 

[Azwed]

You can't use SAT scores as your only measure of how kids are doing. the SAT test has changed a lot over the past 30 years. You can't compare scores from now to scores from the 80's.


I have been hearing that the SAT is starting to fall out of favor with people. Some people think it is not a very accurate test and it is too easy to just study for the test or take it over and over to do well.

 

[bored1]

A law needs to be passed to require all politicians to send their kids to government schools.

You mean elected officials dont send their kids to public schools? Im shocked In my city the School Board President sends her kid to a private school........The system is failing and the top admistrators make 6 figure incomes...Its amazing.the super makes 175000.00 she has 4 assistant superintendents.The clown who oversees the buses makes 92000.00.He used to be Superintendent but resigned,and was offered the Transportation position.Funny thing is I suspect that this is the norm in most large city districts

 

[PrincessSalome]

I reserve the right to bitchy on this thread because I have been administering standardized tests to twelve and thirteen year-olds ALL WEEK. Sure we only test them for three hours in the morning, but then we send them in class sizes of 30 back to class and expect the teachers to teach. When do we as adults ever sit for 3 hours and rack our brains and then sit for more three hours and try to fill them with more new stuff? How about doing that for 4 days in a row?

First, I would like to say that the reason students in private schools do better (on average) than students in public schools is because their parents have money, education (usually) and motivation. Plus, private schools can deny anyone admission. Meaning, they don’t have to let kids with low test scores, learning disabilities, behavior problems, parents who can’t volunteer during the day (or provide transportation, etc. etc. etc) in to their schools in the first place.

Public schools have to take everyone, which is why “Leave No Child Behind” is an unrealistic expectation. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be a goal, but when are we going to stop saying that public schools are failures because they don’t achieve the impossible? Most schools with high test scores are not “good” because the teachers are better and the administrations are more efficient, it’s because they are starting with a different type of kid and parents.

I love teaching. I believe in what I do. I do a good job. Do all my students succeed? No. And in my school district, parents have the supreme right to promote students up until the ninth grade. Politicians can’t hold schools accountable unless schools can hold kids accountable. I also don’t believe that retention is always the answer. Most kids who fail once are not going to succeed next time they sit through the exact same classes. Alternative programs are needed but cost a lot because those kids need extra help. Most districts can’t afford to put that kind of money and energy into kids will low success potential to start with.

So what’s the answer? I wish I knew. I try to teach student by student and not go crazy in the process. I believe in public schools. There are many successes in public schools, not that we can’t improve, but we certainly aren’t failing (that’s 60% on my grading scale)!

I want to talk about sex now.

 

[bored1]

I reserve the right to bitchy on this thread because I have been administering standardized tests to twelve and thirteen year-olds ALL WEEK. Sure we only test them for three hours in the morning, but then we send them in class sizes of 30 back to class and expect the teachers to teach. When do we as adults ever sit for 3 hours and rack our brains and then sit for more three hours and try to fill them with more new stuff? How about doing that for 4 days in a row?

First, I would like to say that the reason students in private schools do better (on average) than students in public schools is because their parents have money, education (usually) and motivation. Plus, private schools can deny anyone admission. Meaning, they don’t have to let kids with low test scores, learning disabilities, behavior problems, parents who can’t volunteer during the day (or provide transportation, etc. etc. etc) in to their schools in the first place.

Public schools have to take everyone, which is why “Leave No Child Behind” is an unrealistic expectation. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be a goal, but when are we going to stop saying that public schools are failures because they don’t achieve the impossible? Most schools with high test scores are not “good” because the teachers are better and the administrations are more efficient, it’s because they are starting with a different type of kid and parents.

The public school system has been deteriorating for 30 years.There are many reasons for this failure...I was in the same school system as a kid that I wrote about in the above post.......I recieved a very good education,we didnt have the mandatory tests.We had order and disipline and accountability.......My parents were involved in the process including making sure I did my homework.As I recall the schools at that time had to take everyone also..Except if they were disruptive to the rest of the class. If parents refuse to become involved in the process the kid and the school will fail...the standardized testing is another liberal social experiment that has failed.But instead of admitting failure the process is repeated with the same outcome....Maybe the time has come to return to disciplin,accountability and order..........I doubt thats gona happen.......10 years from now ths same issues that are being discussed here will not be resolved.My quess is that more laws will be passed and the cycle will start over again

 

[miles]

Public schools suck because they are run by the government.

Period.

Remember, these are the folks that bring us zero tolerance. It's a policy that requires zero common sense or intelligence.

 

[Guest]

Libertarian Newsletter

WASHINGTON, DC -- The education bill signed on Tuesday by President Bush will cause test scores to plummet and America's children to become more ignorant, Libertarians predict -- because that's what has happened after the enactment of every federal education bill over the past 30 years.

"The real education crisis in America is that politicians never seem to learn," said Steve Dasbach, Libertarian Party Executive Director.

"They haven't learned that government-run schools are the cause of student failures, and that the only way to improve education is to decrease the role of the federal government, give more power to parents, and move toward a genuine free-market system in education."

I love how all these politicians talk about giving power to parents. You want to give power over education to the group LEAST involved in education today. Sure, in a suburban, upper-class community you may have 25% of the parents involved in the school. IF they're not too busy to have time for that, they have to work 60 hours a week to keep their lifestyle you know. The number is closer to 0 in other schools. Parents believe that it's the job of the school to educate their child, leave them alone, they're too busy trying to work to clothe and feed their child.

Yet decreasing federal power wasn't one of the so-called reforms in the education bill that Bush praised at signing ceremonies on Tuesday in Ohio, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire while flanked by a beaming Senator Teddy Kennedy.

The legislation, which passed Congress last year with broad bipartisan support, mandates annual math and reading tests in grades 3-8, gives local school districts more "flexibility" in spending federal aid, and gives parents the right to transfer children from one government-run school to another.

Ready for some reality here. The current tests are norm-referenced tests. That means that a score reflects the percent of students that performed worse than the child on the test. It doesn't tell you anything about what the child knows. On norm-referenced tests, by design, exactly half of schools will score below 50% and half above 50%. There WILL always be "failing" schools if you use norm-referenced tests.

The tests called for in this legislation are criterion-referenced tests. That means a 70 score will mean the student answered 70% of the questions correctly. WOW, what a concept. It doesn't matter how well the other students do, we're comparing Johnny to himself. Does he know what he's supposed to know.

But the widely praised initiative is doomed to failure, predicted Dasbach, because history shows that more federal involvement in schools actually decreases student achievement. According to Department of Education figures:

* Between 1970 and 1995, federal education spending nearly doubled from $19 billion to $35 billion. Yet SAT scores fell by an average of 50 points. And since 1960, federal education spending has more than tripled, yet SAT scores have fallen by 100 points.

"The evidence is clear: More federal funding and involvement equals lower test scores," Dasbach said. "And now George W. Bush has signed a bill that will make the problem worse. The new budget increases funding for the Education Department, which has squandered $550 billion since 1980, by a whopping 40%."

Meanwhile, the reverse is true in private schools: They cost less money and deliver better results, Dasbach said.

* The average private school tuition nationwide is $3,116 -- less than half the $6,857 per pupil expenditure at government schools, according to the Center for Education Reform.

Yet private school students scored proficient in the 1994 National Assessment of Educational Progress reading test at 1.5 times the rate of public school students, and scored higher in math at every grade level.

So why do students do better at private schools?

The answer is simple, Dasbach said: "Private schools are rewarded only when they succeed, but government schools are rewarded even when they fail. As Education Department statistics show, government-run schools have been failing America's children for decades. Sadly, their latest reward for that failure came on Tuesday, when Democrats and Republicans increased their budget -- again."

The answer for this is two words--- SPECIAL EDUCATION. The tremendous increased in spending would, if they could be stated in 1970 dollars, be the difference in the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (now in it's third version) and the requirement that public schools teach ALL children. Special education is enormously expensive. In some instances special education students require an individual aide for the entire school day, and federal law requires that the school pay for that aide.

Private school do NOT have to teach every child. They can refuse children for any number of reasons, and many have entrance examiniations that admit only high achieving students to their schools. And a behavior problem, start exhibiting symptoms and you'll be sitting right back in your local public school before you can say "less-structured environment."

Interesting that the private school tuition does NOT include the amount the body supporting the private school contributes. Most church run private schools receive support from their church and other private schools have means of support other than tuition alone.

[/b]
The solution, Dasbach said, is to decrease the role of federal bureaucrats in local education, eliminate meddlesome federal mandates, stop showering federal money on failing public schools, and work to give every child the opportunity to attend a private school.

"One simple way to improve education would be to enact a dollar-for-dollar tax credit to allow any individual or company to fund private tuition for any child or any private school," he said. "Until that first step is taken, politicians will continue to pretend that government schools can be reformed, and our children will be the losers."


[/B]

And what does Mr. Dasbach plan to do with the millions of students that will not meet the criteria to attend the private schools? Are we rescinding IDEA? We're going back to pre-1974 when the principal can tell a parent, "You're child just doesn't learn at our school, take him/her home and don't sent him/her back."

WONDERFUL! I'm sure the test scores will go up. And that's all that matters, isn't it?

Oh, but wait, SAT scores WON'T go up, it's a norm-referenced test.