Post by tjnavic on Mar 23, 2012 11:22:03 GMT -6
Please discuss the following questions for Diane Ravitch 
1. Why did you believe the NCLB policy you supported was a good idea; what makes your new stance different, and why do you believe it has any better chance of being effective?
1a. The curriculum you suggest was the first to be reformed (Humanist), why are you confident it wouldn’t be reformed once again?
1b. Who has the right to make presumptions about what/how learning should take place?
2. After the drastic changes NCLB had on learning, it is not feasible to separate testing from standards. How then, do we proceed with new standards and not once again fall into the rut of “teaching to the test?”
3. It is easy to proclaim “teachers are important,” but how can policy reflect this fact; how can teachers reform, instead of being reformed?
3a. What is the role of teachers in determining curriculum and instruction; what is their role in education reform?
3b. How can teachers take back the curriculum and instruction, and the trust they never deserved to lose?
4. As curriculum and instruction decision-making becomes compartmentalized and marginalized, how do I, as a teacher educator, continue to affirm the role of a teacher in the classroom?
4a. How can we ask teachers to stand up for content and methods they are teaching—and how can teachers instill confidence in their students—without choice and the ability to learn freely?
5. How can we motivate parents to look at the big picture in making educated decisions about their child’s learning?
6. We respect that you have had the courage to disagree with a policy you once supported, but now, moving forward, how do we avoid compromising/ruining the education of another generation of learners?
7. What is the role of diversity? How can diversity and a standard curriculum be reconciled?
7a. Why does your book not include a discussion of students with special needs, students who live in poverty, students whose families are immigrants, and students of color for example? How can school reform address students who are usually marginalized and devalued
1. Why did you believe the NCLB policy you supported was a good idea; what makes your new stance different, and why do you believe it has any better chance of being effective?
1a. The curriculum you suggest was the first to be reformed (Humanist), why are you confident it wouldn’t be reformed once again?
1b. Who has the right to make presumptions about what/how learning should take place?
2. After the drastic changes NCLB had on learning, it is not feasible to separate testing from standards. How then, do we proceed with new standards and not once again fall into the rut of “teaching to the test?”
3. It is easy to proclaim “teachers are important,” but how can policy reflect this fact; how can teachers reform, instead of being reformed?
3a. What is the role of teachers in determining curriculum and instruction; what is their role in education reform?
3b. How can teachers take back the curriculum and instruction, and the trust they never deserved to lose?
4. As curriculum and instruction decision-making becomes compartmentalized and marginalized, how do I, as a teacher educator, continue to affirm the role of a teacher in the classroom?
4a. How can we ask teachers to stand up for content and methods they are teaching—and how can teachers instill confidence in their students—without choice and the ability to learn freely?
5. How can we motivate parents to look at the big picture in making educated decisions about their child’s learning?
6. We respect that you have had the courage to disagree with a policy you once supported, but now, moving forward, how do we avoid compromising/ruining the education of another generation of learners?
7. What is the role of diversity? How can diversity and a standard curriculum be reconciled?
7a. Why does your book not include a discussion of students with special needs, students who live in poverty, students whose families are immigrants, and students of color for example? How can school reform address students who are usually marginalized and devalued