I'm not a big
fan of educational standards coming out of bureaucratic, partisan obsessed,
centralized oriented Washington, D.C., so if I am elected, I will have no
problem sponsoring a bill to cancel "Race to the Top" and "Common Core." I am
not going to sit here, today, and propose detailed curricula for our public
schools in Washington, because that's better left to the education professionals
who have the training, expertise and experience, but I will say that I am more
interested in teachers just teaching than worrying about an over abundance of
assessments, tests and general scoring. Sure, we need all of these data at some
point, but too much of a good thing often ends up being counter productive and
has students being trained by rote and conformity rather than giving them the
space that they need to be exploratory and intellectually innovative, both of
which have been important factors in the past for the United States being at
the forefront of scientific, mathematical and artistic advances. Our nation
wouldn't have reached these accomplishments by just following a pattern put on a
piece of paper by nationally centralized bureaucrats, which is why we cannot and
will not, if we elect the right people, let Washington, D.C. set the educational
policy for the entire nation.
I think charter schools have and can continue to serve a good educational purpose, but like a lot of things, the devil is in the details, and therefore caveats are necessary. I don't see that it's wise to restrain our overall educational progress, even at the local level, to a one size fits all mindset or pattern, but if charter schools are only going to replicate what is already done generally, just with more tools and better equipment, then I would question why public dollars are not spread out more proportionately. However, if charter schools have some kind of educational uniqueness, innovation and some field of specialty in which students could take advantage of because of their particular circumstances or interests, then charter schools serve a good purpose. Of course, these kind of specialized schools are going to be a magnet for parents who naturally want their children to have the greatest opportunities available, which is why the state will have to go out of its way to make sure that the selection process is unquestionably fair or even randomly implemented.
On the whole, I think there has to be limits on specialization of entire schools in the grade school and high school stages, and that they shouldn't become dominant, if for no other reason than the budgetary complications involved, not to mention that specialization should basically be left to particular fields of post-high school collegiate study and trade schools, Fast-tracking advanced younger students to post-high school fields of education should probably be more of an option than already the fact, but that opens up a whole new can of worms that would likely prove controversial. This is why we have school boards, so they can make these decisions, and not far flung representatives and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.
We need to keep the federal government out of educational standards, basically, and let each of the 50 states set their own standards, programs and tests. At least that way, a broad range of ideas and practices can be tested, and whichever states come up with the best standards and outcomes will eventually serve as a model for other states to copy and perhaps improve on. The states have always been a kind of laboratory for what works and what doesn't in a wide variety of areas, so we need to let federalism work itself out in the educational arena and, no doubt, other arenas in which the federal government should best not meddle in.
-- Mark Greene, Candidate for Congress, 9th District, Washington
I think charter schools have and can continue to serve a good educational purpose, but like a lot of things, the devil is in the details, and therefore caveats are necessary. I don't see that it's wise to restrain our overall educational progress, even at the local level, to a one size fits all mindset or pattern, but if charter schools are only going to replicate what is already done generally, just with more tools and better equipment, then I would question why public dollars are not spread out more proportionately. However, if charter schools have some kind of educational uniqueness, innovation and some field of specialty in which students could take advantage of because of their particular circumstances or interests, then charter schools serve a good purpose. Of course, these kind of specialized schools are going to be a magnet for parents who naturally want their children to have the greatest opportunities available, which is why the state will have to go out of its way to make sure that the selection process is unquestionably fair or even randomly implemented.
On the whole, I think there has to be limits on specialization of entire schools in the grade school and high school stages, and that they shouldn't become dominant, if for no other reason than the budgetary complications involved, not to mention that specialization should basically be left to particular fields of post-high school collegiate study and trade schools, Fast-tracking advanced younger students to post-high school fields of education should probably be more of an option than already the fact, but that opens up a whole new can of worms that would likely prove controversial. This is why we have school boards, so they can make these decisions, and not far flung representatives and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.
We need to keep the federal government out of educational standards, basically, and let each of the 50 states set their own standards, programs and tests. At least that way, a broad range of ideas and practices can be tested, and whichever states come up with the best standards and outcomes will eventually serve as a model for other states to copy and perhaps improve on. The states have always been a kind of laboratory for what works and what doesn't in a wide variety of areas, so we need to let federalism work itself out in the educational arena and, no doubt, other arenas in which the federal government should best not meddle in.
-- Mark Greene, Candidate for Congress, 9th District, Washington
Comments
Post a Comment