Wow! Had No Child Left Behind come from a democrat, some of these comments
wouldn't have been made."NCLB" was similar to "21st
Century", of the Clinton term.Both of these concepts were
flawed.Anyone ever think both Democrats, and Republicans are
No doubt the Founding Fathers would be called extremists, since they didn't
even allow the Federal government to be involved in Education. Utah, supposedly
a bastion of liberty loving constitutionalists, can't see the forests for
the trees. In essence, we revere the founding fathers in name only. I'm
certain that many people on these blogs don't even consider the
Constitution when making decisions about pertinent issues. If the people of
this state were abiding by the Constitution, NCLB would never have gotten off
the ground, and support of Common Core would be the 'extremist'
position, not those who like the Constitution and personal liberty.
No child left behind needs to go but the GOP plan to hand over tax dolliers with
no accountability and no oversight is a step I the wrong direction.
The feds won't give up control of education.With a weak
economy, health care system, and education program,--people stay dependent on
political leaders. This is power, and control which is nearly impossible to give
up.People cannot figure this out, and will keep dependent by begging
for more government benefits, and aid. We may never be a true independent
nation again, and we'll be accountable, and regulated by a central
NCLB morphed into NO TEACHER LEFT STANDING...The new and improved
Republican alternative..."...would fail to hold states and
schools accountable for assuring that students are learning...result in a loss
of educational opportunities for low-income students, English language learners
and the disabled...".Welcome to The Brave New World of
Republican House directed policy...No accountability...Loss of opportunity...No thanks.
No Child Left Behind was based on a lie to begin with and was never effective.
It is time for it to go.
"But the measure passed with no Democratic support and drew a veto threat
from the Obama administration, which said it would be a "step backward"
in efforts to better prepare children for colleges and careers and to bring
improvements to low-performing schools."Although this law was
well-meaning, it actually has done the opposite for many of the children in the
US. The test scores have been dropping as the children are now taught to the
different testings instead of being challenged at many different levels. This is
pigeonholing the children into one type of scenario, when there are so many. Local districts have a much better idea as to what the children need, not the