Do you think that the federal government's involvement in education is beneficial? Why or why not?

Answer 1

I could bore you for hours with the mine field called No Child Left Behind. It is rife with contradictions and is so very costly to implement. It robs good curriculum that promotes debate and critical thinking and creativity. It is poorly measured. It looks good on paper... and that's about it. It is one of the reasons I left a teaching career of more than 30 years.

Answer 2

Did you know that the "womens lib" movement was funded by the rockerfellers as a way of breaking down the traditional family unit? The faster the family falls apart, the faster children are enrolled in school, or indoctorined to the ways of the state. Think about it.

Answer 3

IO think the general idea of making sure our kids get to a basic level of understanding is great. However the implementation of this act has been poor at best. Unfortunately, the schools that are failing tend to be the poorest and do not have the funds to bring their student scores to where they need to be.

Answer 4

the government bases academic achievement on standardized tests which do not reflect a child's general knowledge. the teachers, instead, are teaching the children to pass one test.
i think the persons best suited to determine the level of a student's education, are the educators in the classroom who deal with them on a daily basis. not some blow-hard bureaucrat in the capitol building. and don't even get me started on our fearless leader. leave no child behind? pleeeeeease! he couldn't put together a coherent sentence to save his life.
here's a guy with the world's largest stash of nuclear weapons, and he can't even pronounce it properly.

Answer 5

Aitch EEE double hockey sticks no! Linking government with education forms an oxymoron. The government is only in it for the buck$ and not at all concerned with one of us becoming wise enough to remove their sponsored rose-colored glasses.