Beware of Obama Comedown Syndrome

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

cornnifer wrote:

These are serious socio-cultural issues that have a huge impact on a child's academic success.

I am not digging any deeper in to your reply than to comment on the above and say, with all due respect, that the very insightful commentary above regarding the massive "socio-cultural" issue which you have identified is by-and-large an end result of the system you are trying to save.

I could get all crazy "conspiracist" about it, but i think as an educator you should just be able to think about it for a minute and realize it is true. Children have, since the end of the 50s, grown up programmed by class rooms that have removed the focus from nurture, creative expression, rigorous route study which develops character and personal responsibility, and moral truth (real right from wrong) and replaced ALL of it with a moraly repugnant behavioral approach that only rewards kids for being right, and punishes them for being wrong and conditions them to be little more than cogs in a machine. It imparts skills for JOB success, not LIFE success, and THAT is where humanity is failing miserably.

cornnifer · February 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

I am not digging any deeper in to your reply than to comment on the above and say, with all due respect, that the very insightful commentary above regarding the massive "socio-cultural" issue which you have identified is by-and-large an end result of the system you are trying to save.

I could get all crazy "conspiracist" about it, but i think as an educator you should just be able to think about it for a minute and realize it is true. Children have, since the end of the 50s, grown up programmed by class rooms that have removed the focus from nurture, creative expression, rigorous route study which develops character and personal responsibility, and moral truth (real right from wrong) and replaced ALL of it with a moraly repugnant behavioral approach that only rewards kids for being right, and punishes them for being wrong and conditions them to be little more than cogs in a machine. It imparts skills for JOB success, not LIFE success, and THAT is where humanity is failing miserably.

Speaking as someone who actually knows what goes on in the classroom, who not only sees it, but practices it, i have to say you are mistaken. Does some of this happen? Of course it does. Are there teachers in our system who skate by? Yes. Just like in any profession. That is the problem with current NCLB legislation as implemented by the current administration. It emphasizes standardized test scores and handcuffs educators into teaching to these tests. They have no choice for they risk being fired if students don't perform well on these tests. The implementation of NCLB is terribly flawed. The fact that the vast majority of educators despise NCLB is witness to your mistake in judgement of educators and their goals. Is it the goal of the education system to indoctrinate and brainwash childern? That is simply not the case. Is it the goal of the Obama plan, which is really at the heart of this discussion? No. By focusing on early childhood education, he would address a major obstacle to a child's academic success. It is also true that he seeks to completely reform NCLB legislation, which actually has a respectable mission statement, so that it actually addresses the situation as it should be adressed. No more teaching to a test. No more punishing schools that don't perform well, but rather supporting them so that they will perform better. Furthermore, he adamantly endorses parental responsibility. Also, he champions art, music, literature etc. You exaggerate the problem, and wrongly assess senator Obama's plan to address it.

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

cornnifer wrote:

Speaking as someone who actually knows what goes on in the classroom, who not only sees it, but practices it, i have to say you are mistaken. Does some of this happen? Of course it does. Are there teachers in our system who skate by? Yes. Just like in any profession. That is the problem with current NCLB legislation as implemented by the current administration. It emphasizes standardized test scores and handcuffs educators into teaching to these tests. They have no choice for they risk being fired if students don't perform well on these tests. The implementation of NCLB is terribly flawed. The fact that the vast majority of educators despise NCLB is witness to your mistake in judgement of educators and their goals. Is it the goal of the education system to indoctrinate and brainwash childern? That is simply not the case. Is it the goal of the Obama plan, which is really at the heart of this discussion? No. By focusing on early childhood education, he would address a major obstacle to a child's academic success. It is also true that he seeks to completely reform NCLB legislation, which actually has a respectable mission statement, so that it actually addresses the situation as it should be adressed. No more teaching to a test. No more punishing schools that don't perform well, but rather supporting them so that they will perform better. Furthermore, he adamantly endorses parental responsibility. Also, he champions art, music, literature etc. You exaggerate the problem, and wrongly assess senator Obama's plan to address it.

Here is what i don't get.
Your ONLY praise for NCLB is it "has a respectable mission statement".

That alone should tell you something.
Look at the Federal Reserve.
What is it's mission statement?
It is VERY admirable.
Keep prices stable, and inflation low.
Moderate business cycles.
What does it ACTUALY do?
The EXACT OPPOSITE.
It is RESPONSIBLE for the business cycle,
inflation is running RAMPANT, and prices are up up and up.

So when somehting is created with a commendable mission statement but utterly fails to deliver, does it just need some "tweaks" or is it SEMANTIC DECEPTION?

Secondly,
My criticism is NOT of the TEACHERS ... they themselves have been subject to a system that is trying to wrongly guide them. That they still recognize the problems with NCLB is great, but it doesn't mean those responsible for the NCLB policy were not deliberate in their intentions.

Now,
you DO recognize that the problem with NCLB is "teaching to the test", and as far as i understand, that IS what NCLB is ... it is pretty much nothing OTHER than that ... a set of standardized tests that MUST be "taught to" ...

How in fucks name is switching from punishment to positive reinforcement for teaching to the test fixing the problem? It simply gives teacher FURTHER incentive to teach to the test, right?

Where in this am i off the mark?

And again,
i am begining to be much of the opinion that Obama is a man of character (at least how he perceives himself) and is indeed well intentioned (which i think is the reason i think the establishment is still desperately trying to get hillary in office instead!) ... HOWEVER ... i think that he is going to fail (since he does not control the textbooks or the the coursework for educators themselves) with education ... and these programs are going to fail the children, just like NCLB currently fails, because even though HIS intent is well meaning, THOSE who will ultimately manipulate and set the framework for these new programs will make them in the same vein as NCLB.

Thats just how i see it though.
Obviously.

cornnifer · February 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Here is what i don't get.
Your ONLY praise for NCLB is it "has a respectable mission statement".

That alone should tell you something.
Look at the Federal Reserve.
What is it's mission statement?
It is VERY admirable.
Keep prices stable, and inflation low.
Moderate business cycles.
What does it ACTUALY do?
The EXACT OPPOSITE.
It is RESPONSIBLE for the business cycle,
inflation is running RAMPANT, and prices are up up and up.

So when somehting is created with a commendable mission statement but utterly fails to deliver, does it just need some "tweaks" or is it SEMANTIC DECEPTION?

Secondly,
My criticism is NOT of the TEACHERS ... they themselves have been subject to a system that is trying to wrongly guide them. That they still recognize the problems with NCLB is great, but it doesn't mean those responsible for the NCLB policy were not deliberate in their intentions.

Now,
you DO recognize that the problem with NCLB is "teaching to the test", and as far as i understand, that IS what NCLB is ... it is pretty much nothing OTHER than that ... a set of standardized tests that MUST be "taught to" ...

How in fucks name is switching from punishment to positive reinforcement for teaching to the test fixing the problem? It simply gives teacher FURTHER incentive to teach to the test, right?

Where in this am i off the mark?

And again,
i am begining to be much of the opinion that Obama is a man of character (at least how he perceives himself) and is indeed well intentioned (which i think is the reason i think the establishment is still desperately trying to get hillary in office instead!) ... HOWEVER ... i think that he is going to fail (since he does not control the textbooks or the the coursework for educators themselves) with education ... and these programs are going to fail the children, just like NCLB currently fails, because even though HIS intent is well meaning, THOSE who will ultimately manipulate and set the framework for these new programs will make them in the same vein as NCLB.

Thats just how i see it though.
Obviously.

NCLB in name and mision statement is admirable. No child should be left behind. i don't hear you arguing that. There is a serious academic achievement gap that needs to be addressed, which is what NCLB, in its mission statement speaks to. When i say the mission statement is admirable, this is what i mean. The legislation recognizes a problem that needs to be adressed. Its mssion statement is admirable. Its practice and implementation is not admirable. Its horribly flawed. Where you miss the mark is on your assesment of Obama's plan. It is more than throwing money at failed approach. It completely changes the approach. There would be no more teaching to a test. That would stop. Real education issues would be addressed and the proper support would be offered where it is needed. Parents are stongly encouraged to be parents and take an active role in their childs education, essential early chldhood education programs would be stressed (yes this requires funding), content area would be diverse, teachers WOULD have more freedoms in their methods, etc.
If you have a quality mission, and a failed, problematic strategy of implementing and achieving that mission, that doesn't mean you scrap the mission. The mission is good. What you scrap is the failed implementation practices.

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

cornnifer wrote:

NCLB in name and mision statement is admirable. No child should be left behind. i don't hear you arguing that.

Like i said, the Federal Reserve has an admirable mission statement. You don't hear me arguing that either. But i think the Federal Reserve should be abolished.

At some point you have to accept that it is possible that the ENTIRE program was build on semantic deception, and that the reason ONLY the NAME is "good" is because that was the INTENTION.

In other words, no amount of "retooling" of the Federal Reserve will fix it, because it is a deliberately fucked system.

I believe the same thing about NCLB, and the board of education in general, to be frank.

Now,you say "teaching to the test" would stop, but i don't see that anywhere in the literature.

NCLB IS teaching to the test.
How can you "re-tool" your way around that.

In specifics, what significant policy changes will totaly rework this system.

Beyond that, why doesn't he just scrap the damn name too, since it is so controversial and already comes with a bad connotation tied to it?

cornnifer · February 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

to be frank.

Now,you say "teaching to the test" would stop, but i don't see that anywhere in the literature.

NCLB IS teaching to the test.
How can you "re-tool" your way around that.

?

"Reform No Child Left Behind: Obama will reform NCLB, which starts by funding the law. Obama believes teachers should not be forced to spend the academic year preparing students to fill in bubbles on standardized tests. He will improve the assessments used to track student progress to measure readiness for college and the workplace and improve student learning in a timely, individualized manner. Obama will also improve NCLB's accountability system so that we are supporting schools that need improvement, rather than punishing them."

Its right there.

NCLB is a name. Period. The way it is CURRENTLY IMPLEMENTED is teaching to a test. You CAN retool that. You CAN reform that.
That being said, it is important to remember that tests are not, in and of themselves bad. Even standardized tests can be a powerful tool for formative assessment of student progress. They aren't the only means. Far from it. Furthemore, they shouldn't be "taught to" or used as a be all and end all of assessment. THAT is the problem with NCLB implementation. The problem is not the name. Trust me, as an educator, married to an educator, and friendly with educators, i have not only read and theorized about NCLB, i experience it. Under Obama, NCLB would cease to exist as it is currently praticed if not in name.

fanch75 · February 2008

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/2008/01/19/8-barack-obama/

rebornFixer · February 2008

fanch75 wrote:

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/2008/01/19/8-barack-obama/

Ha! Classic.

fanch75 · February 2008

reborncareerist wrote:

Ha! Classic.

Yeah, and this one summarizes many folks on this board:

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/2008/02/24/75-threatening-to-move-to-canada/

rebornFixer · February 2008

fanch75 wrote:

Yeah, and this one summarizes many folks on this board:

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/2008/02/24/75-threatening-to-move-to-canada/

I love Number #71 ... I call this "Vancouver syndrome".

RolandTD20Kdrummer · February 2008

Funny. The title of this thread says it all.

Obama votes to give money to Bush for the war three times: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/22/obama_defends_votes_in_favor_of_iraq_funding/

Obama says "no" to war funding however "yes" in reality:http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/739563,CST-NWS-sweet14.article

Obama openly supports Israel http://obama.senate.gov/news/060110-obama_meets_sha/index.php

Obama supports missile strikes on Iran and Pakistanhttp://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/oct2004/obam-o01.shtml

Obama also refers to the Iranian Republican National Gaurd a terrorist organization as well as Hezbolla

I think some people are a little too stoned out on the Obama rhetoric to see through the all smooth words they want so very desperately to hear.

Glen Beck makes some points on Obama here
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=14f_1203601141

I read this quote in an article I think it sums it up somewhat

"Obama appeals to an increasingly childish class of adults who crave an emotion-based politics and don't particularly care about the details of the package in which it comes. There is a "Kids for Obama" section on his web page but it is not clear where it ends and the rest begins."

Urban Hiker · February 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Funny. The title of this thread says it all.

Obama votes to give money to Bush for the war three times: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/22/obama_defends_votes_in_favor_of_iraq_funding/

Obama says "no" to war funding however "yes" in reality:http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/739563,CST-NWS-sweet14.article

Obama openly supports Israel http://obama.senate.gov/news/060110-obama_meets_sha/index.php

Obama supports missile strikes on Iran and Pakistanhttp://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/oct2004/obam-o01.shtml

Obama also refers to the Iranian Republican National Gaurd a terrorist organization as well as Hezbolla

I think some people are a little too stoned out on the Obama rhetoric to see through the all smooth words they want so very desperately to hear.

Glen Beck makes some points on Obama here
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=14f_1203601141

I read this quote in an article I think it sums it up somewhat

"Obama appeals to an increasingly childish class of adults who crave an emotion-based politics and don't particularly care about the details of the package in which it comes. There is a "Kids for Obama" section on his web page but it is not clear where it ends and the rest begins."

Looks like there's at least one blogger who has come across this info and subsequently befallen to Obama Comedown Syndrome. ---> http://beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=5413#more

BTW - thanks for your input RTD20KD

Beware of Obama Comedown Syndrome

Comments

Categories