NCLB
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 82,468
Likes: 1,193
Originally Posted by mikes2k,Apr 1 2006, 11:12 AM
The average class size in the School District of Philadelphia is over thirty kids!
Here is some PA. state funding rhetoric.
[b]
Here is some PA. state funding rhetoric.
[b]
In 2005, the funds from the US Gov't to the state of PA (just for the NCLB program) was $754million, an increase of $25million from 2004 ($719million).
These are JUST the funds given to PA from the federal govt-does NOT INCLUDE any local/state funds.
2001-$525 million
2002-$663 million
2003-$718 million
2004-$719 million
2005 $754 million
(the figures for 2006 have not been finalized yet)
(source edu.gov)
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 82,468
Likes: 1,193
In an official statement , Weaver also said, "Lawmakers say they want accountability, they want results, but they won't back up the rhetoric. Schools are already hurting because No Child Left Behind has been underfunded by approximately $40 billion. Now, Congress is talking about cutting even more, as part of the biggest cuts in the history of the Education Department as proposed by the president. If these lawmakers aren't held accountable for these cuts, students are going to feel the impact for years to come."
Facts:
29% increase in total Federal education funding (from $42.2 billion in 2001 to $54.4 billion in 2007);
33% increase in total K-12 funding (from $27.3 billion in 2001 to $36.3 billion in 2007);
40.4% increase in total NCLB funding (from $17.4 billion in 2001 to $24.4 billion in 2007);
45% increase in Title I (from $8.8 billion in 2001 to $12.7 billion in 2007);
68.5% increase for Special Education (IDEA) grants to states (from $6.34 billion in 2001 to $10.7 billion in 2007); and
Quadrupled funding for reading (from $286 million in 2001 to $1.2 billion in 2007) (a 300% increase).
(source edu.gov)
Where are the cuts that the NEA is crying about? And how did Mr Weaver come up with thsi $40billion shortfall?
I am not familiar, but reading the links now. 
Moderator
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 109,425
Likes: 1,648
From: SJC
The first article that Dave posted only reinforces my point that no two schools should be funded the same way. Urban schools have different needs that suburban schools than rural schools.
Also, it's obvious where that paper's political affiliations lie: they quote one Democrat on what appears to be non-partisan/bi-partisan issue.
Oddly, NCLB has been a boondoggle for big business (at least here). In order to meet the testing mandates, The Princeton Review and ESS have lined their pockets quite well. Moreover, the list of approved texts has actually gotten smaller as a result (thus creating an increase in market share for the larger publishers).
My own crooked superintendents (both the one I work for, and the one whose district I live in) seem to be very "pro-reform" while lining their pockets, FWIW.
Seeing as we're at a nationwide average of 61%, I don't think we're that far off philosophically. The rest is oversight, which is where you and I as voters of school board members should take responsibility.
Also, it's obvious where that paper's political affiliations lie: they quote one Democrat on what appears to be non-partisan/bi-partisan issue.
Oddly, NCLB has been a boondoggle for big business (at least here). In order to meet the testing mandates, The Princeton Review and ESS have lined their pockets quite well. Moreover, the list of approved texts has actually gotten smaller as a result (thus creating an increase in market share for the larger publishers).
My own crooked superintendents (both the one I work for, and the one whose district I live in) seem to be very "pro-reform" while lining their pockets, FWIW.
Seeing as we're at a nationwide average of 61%, I don't think we're that far off philosophically. The rest is oversight, which is where you and I as voters of school board members should take responsibility.
