Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
34 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So Ted Kennedy Was Behind No Child Left Behind??? (Original Post) rsmith6621 Apr 2013 OP
And the Republicans were responsible for not funding it. ForgoTheConsequence Apr 2013 #1
^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^^^ pkdu Apr 2013 #4
'Behind?' elleng Apr 2013 #2
I.e. "responsible for" n/t TroglodyteScholar Apr 2013 #5
Facts, please. elleng Apr 2013 #6
... TroglodyteScholar Apr 2013 #7
"No Child Gets Ahead" -- it should be. cheapdate Apr 2013 #3
I'm pretty sure that movie is conservative-backed propaganda . . . snot Apr 2013 #8
It is beginning to look like outright fraud Mnpaul Apr 2013 #10
Yes. Philip Anschutz funded it. Starry Messenger Apr 2013 #20
Gates and company were behind this load of garbage duffyduff Apr 2013 #34
he was coauthor. HiPointDem Apr 2013 #9
Yes, he put tremendous work into it and was very proud of it Recursion Apr 2013 #11
A very good point that some seem to be overlooking imo. Rex Apr 2013 #12
and that would have made something different -- how, exactly? HiPointDem Apr 2013 #14
How would funding it have made a difference? Recursion Apr 2013 #16
*fully* funding it. It was funded & the results were crap and destruction. Your claim is that HiPointDem Apr 2013 #19
It would have actually had a chance to do what it was designed to do Rex Apr 2013 #23
how's that? it did what it was intended to do. HiPointDem Apr 2013 #24
By raising science and math scores around the nation? Rex Apr 2013 #25
It instituted the rating and comparison of schools and students, established data bases, locked HiPointDem Apr 2013 #26
Well I do not believe Ted Kennedy thought that was the purpose Rex Apr 2013 #27
So you are against Ted Kennedy too? along with Clinton and Gore? graham4anything Apr 2013 #29
What was the intent of NAFTA? ForgoTheConsequence Apr 2013 #30
Something I did not know. DemocraticProse Apr 2013 #13
Unfortunately I've heard hour-long debates in which the students aren't mentioned Recursion Apr 2013 #17
Nobody's perfect. eShirl Apr 2013 #15
behind no child left behind Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #18
Yes, and it received bipartisan support. tammywammy Apr 2013 #21
It wasn't ALL bad. ananda Apr 2013 #22
Kennedy was a good politician, but not an educator. immoderate Apr 2013 #28
Teddy was also against vouchers. ForgoTheConsequence Apr 2013 #31
Ted was well intended to deal with the troubles of urban schools. Dawson Leery Apr 2013 #32
Waiting for Superman is a fraud and has been debunked duffyduff Apr 2013 #33

cheapdate

(3,811 posts)
3. "No Child Gets Ahead" -- it should be.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 12:40 AM
Apr 2013

I despise this law. It would be immediately repealed in its entirety if I had my way.

Mnpaul

(3,655 posts)
10. It is beginning to look like outright fraud
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:06 AM
Apr 2013

Michelle A. Rhee, America’s most famous school reformer, was fully aware of the extent of the problem when she glossed over what appeared to be widespread cheating during her first year as Schools Chancellor in Washington, DC.

A long-buried confidential memo from her outside data consultant suggests that the problem was far more serious than kids copying off other kids’ answer sheets. (“191 teachers representing 70 schools”). Twice in just four pages the consultant suggests that Rhee’s own principals, some of whom she had hired, may have been responsible (“Could the erasures in some cases have been done by someone other than the students and the teachers?”).
http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2013/04/12/did-michelle-rhee-ignore-her-own-cheating-scandal-a-new-memo-suggests-clear-evidence-was-discounted/?cxntfid=blogs_get_schooled_blog

It looks like the principals under Rhee may have altered test answers to get better scores. I have also seen allegations that she moved out special ed. students to bring test scores up.

Starry Messenger

(32,342 posts)
20. Yes. Philip Anschutz funded it.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:04 PM
Apr 2013
http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/10/philip-anschutz-and-walden-media-what.html



Philip Anschutz and Walden Media: What Kind of Agenda?
One of the key players in the distribution of Waiting for 'Superman' is Walden Media, a film company owned by Philip Anschutz. Barbara Miner touches on him (and many other players) in her recent article, but I've yet to see anyone look at how Anschutz uses his family's foundation to push a conservative/libertarian agenda.

As I'll lay out below, the Anschutz Foundation, chaired and financed by Philip, is quite fond of some of the biggest players in conservative education advocacy: the Manhattan Institute, Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, Hoover Institution, and the American Enterprise Institute. The foundation also gives to the Freedom Works Foundation, Washington Legal Foundation, and various other influential think tanks/organizations. I won't really get into it here, but it's fair to say this foundation uses their philanthropic arm much the way the Koch brothers do: to further their own conservative agenda while creating a climate that is more friendly for their businesses.

Many left-leaning moviegoers will believe the film must be true: it's produced by that great curly-haired fellow who made 'An Inconvenient Truth.' Never mind his misunderstanding of NAEP cut levels, his misrepresentation of tenure, and his refusal to provide even a slight bit of nuance about charter schools - the public comes away from this flick not even know what they don't know (yes, I've seen it). And, as far as someone like Philip Anschutz is concerned, that's just fine and dandy - it fits right in with the school reform agenda pushed by the think tanks he funds.

<snip>



 

duffyduff

(3,251 posts)
34. Gates and company were behind this load of garbage
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 08:25 PM
Apr 2013

It doesn't matter if the director or whatever is a "Democrat."

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
11. Yes, he put tremendous work into it and was very proud of it
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:09 AM
Apr 2013

But W suckered him into believing it would be fully funded.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
19. *fully* funding it. It was funded & the results were crap and destruction. Your claim is that
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:55 PM
Apr 2013

*fully* funding it would have given better results.

so, how?

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
23. It would have actually had a chance to do what it was designed to do
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:25 PM
Apr 2013

instead of being sabotaged from the very beginning of signing it into law. Personally, I would have never trusted GWB to help do anything good for this nation - but that is just me.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
25. By raising science and math scores around the nation?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:35 PM
Apr 2013

It did NOT do that, not even close. If it had been fully funded and implemented in good faith (which it was not), maybe it would have worked. I don't think so and still to this day think standardized testing is stupid - we pay teachers to teach let them do their jobs.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
26. It instituted the rating and comparison of schools and students, established data bases, locked
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:45 PM
Apr 2013

in the principle that 'failing' schools could be closed down, personnel fired, converted to charters, etc.

That's what it was intended to do. That's what got funded.

And those are the policies that Obama has continued.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
27. Well I do not believe Ted Kennedy thought that was the purpose
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:49 PM
Apr 2013

and would have never signed on knowing it was just built to fail from the beginning.

 

graham4anything

(11,464 posts)
29. So you are against Ted Kennedy too? along with Clinton and Gore?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:09 PM
Apr 2013

It's the same with the Clinton's and Gore and NAFTA

What was the original intent was disallowed by the Bush's and became the opposite that it was

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,846 posts)
30. What was the intent of NAFTA?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:39 PM
Apr 2013

You can blame the Republicans for a lot but NAFTA was a Republican idea that Clinton gladly went along with. We started to see the results before W even took office.

 

DemocraticProse

(28 posts)
13. Something I did not know.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 06:27 AM
Apr 2013

I firmly believe education is something that needs to be solely about children.

Too many of the hurdles we face in education reform are more about labor issues than children and I find that troubling and selfish.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
17. Unfortunately I've heard hour-long debates in which the students aren't mentioned
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 07:10 AM
Apr 2013

As long as reform focuses on the teachers, from one direction or another, I think it's doomed.

 

immoderate

(20,885 posts)
28. Kennedy was a good politician, but not an educator.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:56 PM
Apr 2013

And the policy was anti-education. What did they expect?

--imm

Dawson Leery

(19,348 posts)
32. Ted was well intended to deal with the troubles of urban schools.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 07:58 PM
Apr 2013

His mistake was signing on with the BFEE. When you deal with the Bush's, you lose.

 

duffyduff

(3,251 posts)
33. Waiting for Superman is a fraud and has been debunked
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 08:24 PM
Apr 2013

It is a propaganda piece peddled by the likes of the billionaires and Wall Street crowd.


It was Bush who was behind NCLB, but Democrats got onboard to their everlasting shame. This was rammed through Congress right after 9/11.

Obama's education policies are a million times worse.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So Ted Kennedy Was Behind...