home / contact / Established on 9/1/2007 --- Please send us suggestions for sites to add to this list -- and suggestions on how we might improve the site / Tell your friends about this site: we have no ad budget and depend on happy visitors to spread the word / Martin R. Carbone / 5123 Don Rodolfo Drive / Carlsbad, CA 92010 / Telephone: 760-603-1910 / FAX: 760-603-1930 / Website <<http://www.alphabeticalist.com>>

STOPPING THE NCLB / The current focus is misplaced.

We argue;

1) The NCLB Act violates The Constitution of the United States.
2) The current focus of the arguments against the NCLb are misplaced and may do more harm than good.

1.1) The Federal Government has no power under the Constitution with regard to local schools. That right is, by the tenth amendment, left to the States and The People.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." From amendment X - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791.

2) The current focus of the arguments against the NCLB are misplaced and may do more harm than good.

2.1) In general the basic arguments so far put forward more-or-less ignore the fact that the law is unconstitutional. Those arguments generally fall into these categories;
2.1.1) NCLB is educationally bad practice. It results in teaching to a test and therefore delivering information rather than asking students to think critically.
2.1.2) The federal government is underfunding the NCLB program.
2.1.3) The federal government expects the states to fund the program and that is directly contrary to the wording within the NCLB Act.
2.1.4) "One size does not fit all". No single program can possibly fit all school districts.
2.1.5) The Act is ill-conceived and poorly executed.
2.1.6) The testing mandated by the Act does not make sense.
2.1.7) Professional classroom teachers are best suited to determine the specific teaching methods that should be used for a particular child.
2.1.8) The program was developed by, and aimed at profits for certain large educational publishing companies.
2.1.9) Throughout the country, the federal government supplies less than 9% of all school funds. This 9% should not allow them to essentially dictate what should be taught and how it should be taught. The federal-government -tail should not be allowed to wag the public-school-dog.

2.2) While all of these arguments are probably correct, it is possible to make logical counter-arguments, resulting in a situation where it is difficult for the general public and for the educational establishment to make a solid case one way or the other.

2.3) If only these arguments and others like them are offered, the winner will probably be those factions that shout the loudest and have the most amount of money to spread their views.

2.4) All of the above arguments, no matter where or how presented, tend to muddy the water because there is no way to prove which teaching techniques work best in which circumstances.

2.5) It is a generally accepted legal principle that our legal rights can be lost if we do not vigorously protect them. In other words, if we allow the federal government to tell public schools (a) what to teach, (b) how to teach and (c) how to measure the efficacy of various methods, the local schools may lose the right to decide those things.

2.6) Refocusing on the Constitutional issue properly sidesteps all the problems otherwise inherent in the above arguments.

2.7) In our opinion, it is best for teachers to be PUBLICLY silent as to which teaching methods, techniques and systems work best. That should be left for professional discussions with other teachers, always acknowledging that the ultimate decision as to what and how to teach should be up to the professional teacher in the classroom. You very rarely hear medical doctors, lawyers, engineers, dentists, accountants and other professionals arguing in public about which professional technique or method is best for this or that job. Those decisions are discussed in professional journals and such. Teachers seem to be the only professionals who voice their professional opinions in public. This of course is probably because they have such an important job and they tend to get challenged in public venues. There is a natural fear of keeping silent when others are speaking out, but every answer to a foolish charge amounts to giving some credence to that foolish charge. Everything appears to be just a matter of opinion -- with the opinion of everyone having equal weight.

2.8) The non-constitutional arguments against NCLB, in our opinion, should be limited to, "Public school teachers are professionally trained and they know best what should be taught and how it should be taught -- case closed."

Martin R. Carbone