Fundamental Rethinking Of Federal Education Policy

Now is the time to begin a focused discussion of a course in miracles app reform at the national level and that this discussion should be rooted in an appreciation of and understanding of the reform successes among the states. Washington, in other words, can learn a great deal from what has happened to education among the states and should look to the states for ideas and solutions. That would be a profound transformation in a set of policies and programs that have signaled to states that ideas – and rules – flow from Washington.

This is the moment for fundamental rethinking of federal education policy and for supporting at the national level the reformation of public education that is beginning to take place at the state and local levels. The central organizing concept for this much-needed transformation is student achievement. Results in student achievement must be emphasize and reported in a way easily understood by parents and taxpayers, creating an academic bottom line. Everyone in public education – at the federal, state and local levels, elected officials and professional educators – must focus on that bottom line and be held to account for it.

Public education is undergoing an overdue transformation. The tides of accountability, innovation and flexibility are sweeping the education landscape at all levels – except one. Federal policy has simply not kept up with the pace of reform occurring at the state and local levels. It now must change to complement and support this new reality. No longer should energy and ideas be thought to flow from Washington outward. It is time for the federal government to contribute to this flow. Americans are better inform than ever about school performance and its implications for our future, and feel a sense of urgency to take decisive action to improve their children’s education.

This urgency is shifting the policy focus at every level of government. Examples abound of localities placing the educational needs of children and desires of parents over the ingrained habits of systems. Educators are focusing on improving student achievement rather than strict compliance with process and procedure. Superintendents and school boards are adopting policies that free the creativity, energy and unique abilities of communities, enterprising school leaders and committed teachers.

Responding to the needs of students, parents, educators and communities, states have adopted high academic standards with rigorous assessments to measure student performance. Student achievement is being emphasize and report. A way easily understood by parents and taxpayers, creating an academic bottom line. Those responsible for producing that bottom line are accountable for results, not simply for intentions or efforts.

Education choices have been increase through initiatives such as strong and autonomous charter schools. Efforts are underway to improve the quality of teaching and reduce the regulations that make it difficult for the best and brightest to enter and remain in the profession. Despite these changes, federal programs enacted generations ago have been pushing in the wrong a course in miracles app. Toward ever-stricter micro-management from Washington via thousands of pages of laws and regulations. Increasing procedural controls, input mandates and rules seem to have become an end themselves. With little consideration of whether they actually are improving student learning.

We understand that education initiatives, policies and practices are strongest when generated by those closest to the children being serve. And weakest when imposed upon communities through federal mandates and regulations. The federal government has a legitimate role in supporting national priorities in education. It does not follow, however, that every issue that concerns someone in Washington should have a corresponding federal program. That every legitimate national priority is best attain via rules set in Washington.

This approach makes sense to most citizens. But in practice it will require overcoming years of ingrained assumptions about the proper roles of the federal, state. And local governments in providing America’s children with a quality education.

Title I came into being as part of the landmark ESEA (Elementary. And Secondary Education Act) of 1965 and remains the centerpiece of the federal role in public education. Its purpose always has been commendable: to boost academic performance of poor and disadvantaged children. And reduce the performance gap between rich and poor a course in miracles app. Despite this clear and present commitment, Title I has failed to deliver the results it promised. The academic achievement of disadvantaged students has not been significantly improve. And the performance gap between rich and poor has not been significantly narrow.