EDLD+5344+Discussion+Board+Posts

Since W. started the NCLB based on Tx. school accountablility and performance, I have only one concern with it. The tests for accountability are left up to the states, instead of being standardized for the nation. That means that many states are giving very minimal standards on the tests to score high for the NCLB whereas Texas standards were already higher for our testing= inequality in test results across the nation. I personally feel that all children in high school should be given end of course tests before moving to the next level of that particular subject. Since there is such a readiness component for younger children (they all learn at different levels of preparedness) I feel that the TAKS tests now are very stressful for them, especially since at certain grade levels, they must pass before promotion to the next grade. In conclusion, requiring all states to be held accountable for the students' learning is a positive. Not standardizing the testing itself is a negative and puts states on uneven playing fields. So how can you really compare the results of students' scores across the nation? It has also added an extra layer of stress for school districts is another negative. Stress for administrators, educators, and students. Another negative is that we no longer have the luxury of teaching students to use higher cognitive skills or of allowing, or even encouraging, creativity in our students. There is more to life, and should be more to school, than test based outcomes.
 * Week 1**

My very first year teaching in 2003, we had a situation arise where many students on our campus began wearing colored wrist bands. We didn't think anything of it at first, but then we found out that apparently these gel wrist bands had became the subject of a widespread urban legend linking them to a supposed sex game explaining their popularity among young teenagers, they were subsequently dubbed " sex bracelets ". Our school told the students that they would not be allowed to wear these wrist bands to school in order to avert disruption and because they were inappropriate. The majority of parents and community members agreed with this decision.
 * Week 2**

I would schedule a time for the teacher to meet with me. I would let him know that I have heard that some potentially damaging things have been said about me, and that I also heard that he was the source of them. I would allow him to share his side of the story. I would tell him that I have heard great things about him and the job he has done at the school, and I would also tell him that I can appreciate the relationship that he had with the previous principal. I would make it clear that I do not want him talking negatively about me in the future and that he should only say positive things about our school. I would make him aware that I was issuing him an oral directive, and that the next step would be a written reprimand in his file if I heard that he has done it again. I would notate all of this in his personnel file and make sure that it was all properly documented.
 * Week 3**

This situation is very similar to decisions made in Davis v. Monroe, where a student is being denied education because he was not in a safe learning environment. A full investigation should be launched in order to find out all of the details. The teacher should be verbally reprimanded for not assisting the student. I would document this and put it in the teachers file. I would follow the district's policies when determining how to discipline all involved.
 * Week 4**

I think public schools should stress the values of the community, and students need to be introduced to the various cultures, families and theories in society. They need to understand the beliefs and values of their community in order to be a productive member of the community, themselves.
 * Week 5**