Interesting that no one has left a comment on this in almost two days. I'm guessing that many are like me-- no time to really study this issue and deal with it in an thoroughly rigorous way! It's an emotional thing that there are too many mandates and testing and fear and a lack of funding, etc.

Talk about the legislature's move (defeated) to make teacher's responsible for reporting (suspected) abuse with a minor and I think people get pretty hot.

Or how about, Sara, the BTU's plan to send 60 (sixty) representatives on an all expense paid vacation to the National Convention, I for one begin to get a little hot. Waste of money-- like the issues might all of a sudden change, and the AFT will start supporting republicans? hah!

Since we, as a nation cannot agree on anything and my trust of the Dept. of Ed is low considering how they handle things, I would be loath to hand control over to a national govt. agency. I will say that more clarity and guidelines from state to state would be great.

For example, the number of students that constitute a "group" that must be counted in computing AYP varies greatly with Md. having one of (if not the) lowest number of kids that make a group "count". Why isn't there a guideline for this? We have schools failing to meet AYP since a small sub group of kids (called n in AYP parlance) failed to meet proficient. In other states, had that same size group not met standard, the school would still have met AYP. Seems nuts.

In another example, states can (and I believe for a variety of reasons SHOULD) choose which assessment they use. Md.'s MSA, while I really like many things about it, is SO flawed as to be almost unusable for anything. Some believe that the MSA gives teachers insight into what areas of need and strength students have. Total BS. The results are MEANINGLESS in terms of reporting where students are and what they need. No one will share what sections of the test are counted - some rumors about the BCR's not being counted, the BCR's being the only section counted and so on, - and since the test changes from year to year there isn't a way to track either teacher (grade/class) year to year OR to track kids as they move up in grade level. This is outrageous and should be a long story in the Sun. As a tax payer I spend a lot of money to develop, give, prep for and score these tests. As a teacher I spend a lot of time and energy sweating over the test (and not teaching) and as a parent of kids in BCPSS schools I see how stressed out they are about doing well. I like the fact that schools and districts are held accountable and within a state, help to the same standard (no longer can Montgomery county hide their poor or minority students within an "average" of all their kids and laugh at the city and PG county as they struggle with a disproportionate % of students who fit that description), but just as the old MSPAP data was unfairly comparing different LEA's, NCLB's guidelines are so vague that states are now being unfairly compared to each other. You cannot compare since the data is not consistent. Where is the story about this (sorry in the middle of giving the math section of the test and it's exceptinally stressful - you know I have nothing but love for you Sara:-)

How about eliminating it altogether? Why do we trust the federal government to determine what our children should be learning instead of our child's teachers?