Congratulations to Fairfax County Schools in Fairfax, Virginia. Finally a school district demonstrates an ounce or two of common sense and a little backbone.
On Thursday, the school board voted to defy the U.S. Department of Education and not test immigrants with the same reading exams as their native English-speaking peers. It is a small step, but it highlights two of the problematic portions of this law: the myth of local control under No Child Left Behind, and the insane proposal that 100% of students can attain the same standards in targeted subject area, regardless of their circumstances.
The decision is likely to make the school district some uncomfortable enemies. The decision will likely cause the district, one which is highly respected, to fail the federal standards.
Immigrants’ rights groups are also concerned.
“We don’t want English-language learners to be left out of education,” said Peter Zamora, acting regional counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. “If you remove this set of standards from the No Child Left Behind accountability system, you are removing the incentive to teach them.” — Washington Post
Testing is being unfairly equated with education. Unfortunately, Mr. Zamora has a point. With the high pressure of these tests, it is likely that any group receiving an exemption will be neglected in favor of spending more time and resources on target groups whose scores are evaluated by NCLB. Just as subject areas which are not tested are neglected.
My suggestion to the state of Virginia (and the other 49 for that matter) is to simply refuse to take the money. Even as it is likely to increase as NCLB comes up for reauthorization this year. For one small step in the right direction, however, I commend the Fairfax County School Board.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Karl Marx would love the popular moves among politicians in various state governments and the federal government to ban so-called "junk" food in schools, and to "put healthy food in" convenience stores and on the tables of those they define as poor. It's a very elitist and arrogant mindset that promotes this ideology, and it needs to be addressed.
Ultimately, the war supporters in Congress prevailed in the vote on the resolution. Still, the vote was significant because it places every member of Congress on the record as supporting or not supporting the unconstitutional, costly, violent occupation of a country that never attacked us. This vote should serve as an important reminder to the American people of where their representatives really stand when it comes to policing the world, empire building, and war.
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works license.
Video published by this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Sampling+ license.
Facebook
Digg
del.icio.us
reddit.com
Newsvine
Brian
Jan 29, 2007
Dana;
I have long wondered why some academic of the libertarian ilk never researched the outcome and consequences of local schools refusing to take federal funds. I would really like to see the information. My opinion is that local schools would have significantly better results if they refused federal aid due in part because they would be able to allocate local and state funds to the students rather than the bureaucracy.
Dana
Jan 29, 2007
It would be interesting information, but how common is it for anyone to refuse federal funding for anything? Let alone public schools?
I know of one case, but it is perhaps only tangential and involves a university. I’ll look into it more and perhaps post something.
I believe they’d be better off, as well. But for better or for worse, the affairs of the local school district are not the business of the central government.
nobody
Jan 29, 2007
Here we go again. Trying to treat the symptoms while the patient dies of the disease. The constitution forbids direct taxation of the people by the federal government for a great many reasons. This is one of the reasons. The supreme court ruled in the early twentieth century that “people” were protected from direct taxation by the federal government and that income tax could therefor only apply to non entities such as corporations. Income tax was therefor applied as a temporary “voluntary” donation to pay the national debt. It still is. You are however required by law to self asses your potential liability. The IRS Code is not law and to settle with the IRS you must wave your rights to judicial proceedings by agreeing to Tax Court arbitration. Tax Court is not a part of the Judiciary. The law does not apply there, but IRS Code only. If you do not agree to wave your rights, the IRS can prosecute you in Judicial proceedings. They can convict you of failing to legally self asses your potential liability. They seldom win against a jury of your peers. This does not stop them from collateral damage by confiscating your property through coercion or other tactics. They effectively make it too much trouble to assert your rights by ruining you financially. “Here is the disease”.
Q
Jan 30, 2007
good work nobody, I wasn’t sure if anyone else knew about that.
Matt
Feb 02, 2007
actually, the 16th amendment says
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
From ANY source. Including people.