The New Education Bill

Here are couple of links that discuss this new legislation.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/education/


http://www.time.com/time/education/a...191537,00.html


What I'm somewhat surprised at is that Bush is expanding the size and the role of the Federal government and it certainly will lead to higher taxes at least in those states that have to comply (probably others that do comply as well). If the Feds are going this far why not make proficiency in science, history, and english mandatory as well? I suppose I should give it a chance but these big government programs tend to create more bureaucracy and inefficiency. Are proficiency tests really a good idea anyway?

Don't be surprised. A lot of Republicans aren't particularly consistent or conservative. I supported Bush, but the whole Republican education bit isn't particularly conservative. But I think Bush stood a better chance to be elected than some true conservative who would scrap the Department of Education and spend no federal money on education. Conservative states are no better. If a state had guts they'd just send back the federal bribe check. Then the feds wouldn't have any power. This assumes state and local governments are any better at providing education which is not really possible to assume of course.

Tom,


I'm surprised that you're suprised.


We'll have to wait to see what kinds of tests will be used to gain information. I would expect, though, tests that are easy to administer and cost efficient, which will certainly be the wrong kinds of tests to use. A preferable test will be some kind of performance-based test, but those are costly and take time to administer and "correct." In other words, we need to see if kids can read--not if they can simply mark the right blanks on a piece of paper.


After all, isn't that how we ended up with Bush?


John