Here's a chance to talk about academics for a change, instead of school facilities. With the Illinois State Board of Education releasing 2007 School Report Card data, we learn that three of Naperville's four high schools are not meeting goals of the No Child Left Behind Act. What does it mean?
It means that even in Naperville, where the majority of children receive top-notch public-school educations, the federal government has found a way to deem that the schools are failing. Critics say the Bush administration's No Child Left Behind Act is part of a strategy to push school vouchers: Eventually every public school in the nation will be categorized as failing because of the unrealistic subcategory requirements of NCLB, thereby allowing feds to throw up their arms and say, "We can't have children attending failing schools! Here, let the government pay for your child to attend a private, most likely segregated, parochial school."
What so you? Are you concerned that some Naperville schools are "failing?" What do you think of No Child Left Behind?
It's interesting how these recent "blog" posts are worded. I think someone at the Sun has discovered that constant inflammatory postings regarding the school district are a sure fire way to fish up lots of comments, page views, and most importantly: Ad impressions. (You know, these annoying pop-unders for Lasik Plus that appear on every page load.)
If three of the four Naperville high schools are not meeting the goals of the No Child Left Behind Act, it means they need to work harder to meet those goals. The entire purpose of the act is to improve education. Why bother looking at things logically when we can just rage against both the Bush (err, sorry, Bu$h) administration and the Naperville school districts at the same time? It's like a two for one deal!
Never the less, there is room for improvement- Today's post only rates a 7.5 on the Naperville smug-o-meter.
Why the negative spin on school vouchers? The state currently holds a monopoly on education, and unless you're extremely wealthy you don't have the opportunity to go anywhere other than through the public school system. With parents able to send their children to the school that provides the best educations instead of the school they're defaulted to because it's the only thing they can afford, public schools will either be forced to cut the crap and offer a competitive education or risk losing their "business" entirely.
Competition is never a bad thing.
Eli,
I appreciate your post. As for being slanted, I can't hide my distaste for No Child Left Behind. Consider special education, for example. I believe there are major problems with NCLB that no one intends to fix, that the law is intended to make schools fail. For example, the state limits the number of students that can have Individual Education Plans and therefore be exempt from taking standardized tests. So you have special education students (as well as limited English proficiency students, etc.) taking tests designed for regular education students. Teachers can make great strides with a student and advance his learning proficiency by two grade levels within a year, yet that student may not master a standardized test. So his subgroup fails to make progress, thus the entire school "fails." I'm all for raising the bar for education. But I see flaws with this legislation.
I have to agree with 'Eli' on the inflammatory nature of the blog questions. Is pitting residents against the local school districts really in the best interest of the readers? It certainly discourages a mature discussion of the issues.
I have also noticed that the story headlines have become more salacious / borderline offensive. I was appauled at the headline "The Day the Grass Didn't Get Mowed" regarding immigration rights. Or the recent D204 story with a D203 headline.