Where does your representative rank among small donors?
As the 2020 primary heats up, candidates are touting not just how much they’ve raised but also how many people have contributed to the campaign. A new page from the Center for Responsive Politics reveals how much candidates receive from small individual contributions. Read More
by Mitchell Robinson
A lot of public school advocates have become pretty disillusioned trying to find a politician from either party who seems to actually “get it” when it comes to public education. So many teachers and parents are yearning for a candidate who supports traditional public schools, recognizes charter schools as an expensive, unnecessary, and dangerous distraction, and reject all efforts to privatize our schools via vouchers, or “education tax credits,” or “education freedom scholarships,” or any other patriotic-sounding euphemism the neo-liberal ed reformers come up with.
But who are our options?
Cory Booker? No.
Beto O’Rourke? No.
Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders? Unclear.
So, reading this recap of a recent meeting of public school parents and activists in New York City was an astonishingly fresh breath of air. I’m sure it didn’t hurt that Diane Ravitch, perhaps the most vocal defender of public schools, teachers, and students today, was on the panel:
READ-SHARE-DISCUSS-LEARN more here – https://www.eclectablog.com/2019/03/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-lets-turn-the-ship-around-on-education-policy.html
Author: Mitchell Robinson Mitchell Robinson is an associate professor and chair of music education at Michigan State University. His research is focused on music education and education policy. Follow him on Facebook HERE and Twitter at @mrobmsu. His own blog is at MitchellRobinson.net.
Test scores show American students have made no progress in reading for two decades, and experts are speculating on the cause of the stagnation. Here’s one reason that few have focused on: the nature of standardized reading tests themselves.
Last week, scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress—often referred to as the NAEP, or The Nation’s Report Card—revealed that about two-thirds of students across the country scored below the “proficient” level on reading tests administered in 2017. The even worse news is that the figure hasn’t changed since 1998.
Education policy wonks have been trying to come up with explanations. Maybe we haven’t been spending enough money on education, or perhaps we’re not holding schools and teachers sufficiently accountable for low scores. Maybe it’s deepening levels of poverty. But what if the reason for the flat scores is that by putting so much emphasis on reading tests, we’ve been undermining our own efforts?
Parents and teachers have complained loudly for years about the way testing has come to dominate the curriculum. The NAEP itself can’t be held responsible for that, because it carries no real consequences. But the yearly state tests that have been mandated since the No Child Left Behind law went into effect in 2002 have had significant consequences—and a huge impact on instruction.
The influence of testing goes far beyond one big end-of-year test. Beginning in the earliest grades, students also take tests throughout the school year that are supposed to predict their performance on the big tests. And they spend many hours on activities designed to prepare them for tests.
READ-SHARE-DISCUSS-LEARN more here – https://www.forbes.com/sites/nataliewexler/2018/04/15/if-we-want-to-boost-reading-scores-we-need-to-change-reading-tests/#16190448495a
Thank you to Leighton Township Library for their donation of books for our Little Free Libraries! If you or your organization would like to donate books, contact Susan at firstname.lastname@example.org .