I am so with you on this one Jason. I see NCLB as Bush's Obamacare. Both were done with the very best of intentions, but were flawed by unintended consequences. Instead of looking at the flaws and working together to work out the kinks, partisans jumped on them as campaign ammunition and "we the people" got caught in the cross-fire. Maybe trying to do anything on such a large scale is the problem in the first place. We see how different some things are just from Patch to Patch, and how differently people think and feel, so how could anyone expect us as a country to fit into one box.

Education concerns sort of hit us all at the core. And naturally, so many schools have figured out how to get scored the way they need to be scored that sometimes, they are administered JUST to be compliant, rather than being an institution of learning for our children. The intent is usually good, the implementation is of something this large is generally not consistent, so it isn't "good" for anyone in the long run.

But yeah, in an election year, it is going to be hard to get anything much productive done that doesn't have a large segment of our population calling for its change - lobbyists and PAC's ... and I don't see NCLB on the radar unfortunately.

I will also say, however, that parents should STILL parent - no matter school policy. Make a home in which homework is important and it will get done. And my experience has been that if the homework is done, the children will usually do well on any kind of test that is administered. They're ready for academic promotion by virtue of proving they have learned the curriculum. But in a home where education is not important, or takes a back seat to other priorities, the kids aren't apt to be prepared.

As for me ... I'd love to see more situations like the Hope Center set up to help students of all backgrounds rather than see this regulated governmentally.

I loathe "big government" . That said I cant go for no federal oversight on public education . Knowing where I live it's a cinch that our public schools would eschew their mostly secular nature and our kids would be learning "Creationism" in science class after morning prayers...
No thanks

Playing devil's advocate here Grant, (and please don't warm up that flame thrower, I burn easily) wouldn't a choice give you an opportunity to send you child to a school that doesn't teach "creationism," and infringe on your right not to believe in it. In that same trend, the child of a parent who choses to believe in it could send their child to a school that does - like Christian Schools do at the moment. Under the current system, however, the parents of that child have to pay for your child to go to a school that is more in turn with your beliefs, and then turn around and pay for the school they send their own child to. We really don't all believe in the same thing, and that probably means that someone is wrong. Just none of us think that someone is us.

No, no, no!!! It's not Tuesday, people! It's Thursday! Only rainbows, kittens, and cheesy motivational poster-type comments allowed.

Sharon ....Science isnt about "beliefs",

Teaching "beliefs" are what the churches are for (that we all pay for regardless of our beliefs and in direct violation of Georgia's Constitution) .

Grant, and that is your opinion and I so respect your right to have it. However, it isn't everybody's - as evidenced by the number of religious organizations that teach.

Again ... science isnt about opinion Sharon... It's about observation , research and experimentation. Unlike religion it doesnt begin with a conclusion.

" Religious organizations that teach..." Teach what? Religious beliefs? Cool, no issues with that as that is exactly what they are there for. I do take issue with the unconstitutional government funding of these organizations but thats another issue. Suffice to say "religion" is available to those that seek it
One would think that none of us would want agents of the government (aka public school teachers) teaching their religious beliefs to a captive audience of school kids... I certainly dont , but if indeed Federal Regs that prevent religious cults and fanatics from "praying" on our children under the guise of "science" are dropped I do look forward to some time with everyone's children to teach them about how The Flying Spaghetti Monster created everything (starting with a mountain and a midget ) R'amen .

Right...so, how you doing with that whole "people vs ideas" thing? Might also humbly suggest giving "dont be a dirtbag" the ok once over...

Grant, your feelings are certainly shared by a large portion of the population - maybe even more than half - sometimes. However, not by everybody - hence the number of debates, discussions etc. on the subject. I happen to believe in separation of church and state too. But think those two bump heads a whole lot less when government doesn't infringe so much in everyday life. I think if we were all a little more tolerant of what other people think and feel, but still stick to our own principles for ourselves, we would all get along a whole lot better. Okay, you can put that flamethrower back in the garage now - I'm always happy to agree to disagree.

Again Sharon... This isnt about "feelings" or some sort of majority belief.

If /when the Creationists can come up with some science to support the theory then by all means it belongs in science class. There is none to date ,hence it cannot be defined as science.
Facts , not opinions or "feelings"

It's unfortunate that those religious fundamentalists that seem bent on inflicting their religion on all of us attempt to use the government as a tool and the schools as a recruitment center . Without federal oversight , considering our specific demographics , my kid would most certainly be bombarded with religious "stuff" at school on a daily basis. Thankfully , the Constitution and by association the Federal Government prevent that sort of nonsense... and thats a good thing

Couple of comments:

- First of all, knowledge is a combination of reason and faith, whether you're talking science or religion. Whenever we learn something we are evaluating whether or not the topic is reasonable according to our experience or history or logic; then, we take by faith the view that the topic is fact. (For example, people who believe that televised wrestling is real but the moon landing was faked...)

There are always gaps of proof in any philosophical system, and those gaps must be overcome by our decision to believe the evidence or not. So from an educational perspective, are we giving our kids the tools to effectively evaluate systems of thought and make choices that correspond correctly to the world around us?

- Second, Grant if you don't mind, I'd like a little more clarity on how Georgia unconstitutionally supports religion. I think you're talking about tax-exempt status, but I'd like to be sure.

OOOOO! This is turning into a Loganville Slide! From NCLB to Creationism ... which is a debate several years old from which I met some of my most favorite friends! So is it time for me to call "GAME ON!"??

Jason writes
"Whenever we learn something we are evaluating whether or not the topic is reasonable according to our experience or history or logic; then, we take by faith the view that the topic is fact."
I disagree with this assertion. Science , by it's very nature , never demands that we accept something on "faith" . We may come to conclusions based on the evidence but those conclusions arent swallowed blindly on "faith" and they are constantly being tessted , researched and amended as we gain more data. Science never concludes that the unexplainable is the supernatural .
As for the constitutional issue
Section II
Paragraph VII of the State of Georgia Constitution

". Separation of church and state. No money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church , sect, cult, or religious denomination or of any sectarian institution "

FWIW I didnt intend for this one to slide into the Creationism "debate" . Only used that as an example to support my assertion that , at least in our area , federal school oversight is required to keep the religious recruiters away from our kids.
Of course if ya wanna do the whole creation thing, in five part harmony... with "feeling"
I'm game .:)

Lord, I love you people. I would prefer not to debate Creationism myself. The church has ample opportunity to teach it within its walls.

Jason ,
If you got a letter from the government stating you didnt owe any taxes this year isnt that exactly the same as getting a check in that amount? Of course it is . It's just a different method of payment .

Some other points
1) Other non profits arent specifically prohibited in our constitution, religious entities ARE.
2) Other non profits are subject to financial review, those entities designated as "churches" are under no such requirement

10:44 am on Friday, February 10, 2012
Wow, playing devil's advocate can certainly open up a whole can of worms. But civil discourse is what it is all about. Imagine how boring it would be if the world was named Stepford.

Jason, honestly, that's where I draw my line at teaching creation. If the churches around here aren't doing it, then there's something wrong with the church - not the schools. If appropriate time were spent teaching basics IN THE CHURCHES, there would be no need to augment it in a public school setting. I'd not want my children taught about God by someone who may or may not be qualified to teach it according to MY belief. And which version of the Bible would they be using as a textbook?

And Churches are 501(c)3 by choice of their membership, for the benefit of their membership. By the Constitution, the CHURCH is already tax exempt; taking the 501(c)3 status makes contributions tax deductible ... and therefore puts them squarely in line with other non-profit corporations. And yeah, subject to governmental regulations. Can't have it both ways.

Kris...

The "beliefs" of those "numerous" "scientists" are irrelevant without some quantifiable supporting proof of their "theory".To date there is exactly none and until those "numerous scientists" find something their beliefs are simply beliefs. "Faith" if you will .

Obligatory link pukeage for real perspective
The List of Steves http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/steve/

And I believe this is a record for most comments on any of my posts.

I feel so...special. And yet somehow dirty...

Clarification on the 501(c)3 issue as applied to churches.
The 501(c)3 regs do indeed install some governmental oversight into what might be said from the pulpit. Churches are ,however, exempt from the financial review required of every other 501 (c) 3

"According to IRS Code § 508(c)(1)(A):

Special rules with respect to section 501(c)(3) organizations.

(a) New organizations must notify secretary that they are applying for recognition of section 501(c)(3) status.
(c) Exceptions.

(1) Mandatory exceptions. Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to—

(A) churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches.

When we have that Loanville-Grayson one-year anniversary get together, should I ask if they can serve some Valium with the coffee?

Obviously we need to meet in a church, with an open bar ..

Maybe I can set those pews up at Moe's ....and get him a tax break to boot!

Actually , thats kida of my point .

As a minister I can declare some or all of my friend Moe's non residential property "a church" and BOOM , he's no longer on the hook for property taxes. I dont have to hold services ,provide any real or imigined benefit to the community or even prove anything to the government as long as I claim membership in one of the government's "established" tax free religions and even that requirement is tenous.

The only reason I havent done such a thing is my own personal integrity and moral compass.

I think you misunderstood Jason , no intention of offending

I'm not suggesting that some churches arent a boon to their communities, certainly many ,maybe even most, are .

The point that I was trying to make is that " churches" dont HAVE to provide any real or imagined services to get the tax free cookie..Meaning a guy like me with less integrity and upstanding moral values can easily bilk the county (and by extension the citizens) out of their money by nothing more than a simple declaration. There is no oversite like there would be on other non profits, simply say you are a "church" and BOOM you are a church regardless of what , how , who you worship or what if any benefit you might provide to the community in exchange for your tax free status.

I did misunderstand, Grant, and I am truly relieved by the clarification. I must say, it seemed a little more--strident--than your usual musings, and I should have given you the benefit of the doubt.

Man, my head hurts. Maybe our Patch soiree should also include free neck massages...

Would it be wrong to plug Escape Relaxation Clinic? Assuming it's not wrong to plug Escape Relaxation Clinic I highly recommend Escape Relaxation Clinic as the ultimate in awesomeness
.

I for one am happy to see GA as part of the first ten states to be let out from under the yoke of NCLB. Yes, I have mixed feelings about not having federal oversight and hope the politics of education do not leave GA public school in tatters. FWIW, I work on a lot of teachers who are buried under incredible mountains of paperwork due to NCLB. Every teacher I have met feels a huge responsibility to complete the paperwork with integrity which takes a great deal of time. The paperwork alone is staggering and it takes many of them away from actually teaching the kids. The penalties for the teachers, administrators and schools for not completing these giant mountains of paperwork are enough that they all understand the paperwork is must get done. Which means the actual teaching of the kids takes a backseat. There absolutely HAS to be a better way. Yes, NCLB was created with good intentions but the end run has saddled the schools with even bigger problems.

Oh and Jason, give me a call and I'll help you with that neck issue. :0]

For those who are interested... Escape Relaxation Clinic
http://loganville.patch.com/listings/kathy-mackay-lmt

I forgot what the original topic was! But here's my 2 cents anyway. As a speech -language pathologist in a public school, the part of this that galls me is that since we are no longer tied to NCLB, a teacher's evaluation now has to be tied to student achievement. (Race for the Top) Just how am I going to be evaluated compared to a classroom teacher? If my students have noun-verb agreement and proper syntax at the end of the year? If my students can say their /r/ sounds at mid-year and their /r-blends/ by the end of the year. Really? What about art, music, PE? How will they be evaluated? Who drew the best picture, who plays the oboe the best, who can run a 5K without getting out of breath? I mean, really. So, now that one mess is gone (NCLB), another can of worms will open up. And don't get me started on non-motivated students, ELL students, students who change school as often as their underwear.....and the list goes on and on............No matter, my performance (and all types of teachers; classroom and support) will be linked to their success..........OK, I'm off my soapbox (for now!)

Jason, you're right, I'm going to say "neither." :) But sad to say, I don't have a solution either. There are so many factors to concider, but in order to get funding, rules and demands and unattainable goals are put on teachers. Teachers need to be able to teach. Period. There are so many good ones out there that are bogged down with paperwork and outlandish demands, that they are discouraging kids from even going into the profession. Granted, there are some poor ones out there too (just like in any job) but they get all the press, so the opinion is that teachers are lazy, horrible people, and they only work 180 days (UGH!) I think more time and energy needs to be placed on the "average" student, because they get lost in the shuffle of the gifted (how to challenge them) and the remedial (how to make them meet standards and graduate) so they linger. More emphasis is needed on teaching the trades instead of pushing everyone towards college. And don't get me started on the use of technology in the classroom - it may be well and good to teach how to USE technology, but now so many subjects are taught using the white board, computer games, quizzes on-line etc. that the social aspect of communication is getting lost. (There's another column for you!). I love my job, and want to help all students get a better grasp on improving communication skills and speech proficiency, but at times it is an uphill battle. Now, aren't you sorry you asked!! :)

to say that the church offers nothing to the community is asinine.

Let me see....feed the homeless, visit folks in jail, pay their families' rent and help them find a job, go around the world and the country building dental clinics and doctor offices, fixing cleft palates, ....all of this free of charge, without government help or $$...got to stop here, but if a person is not actively involved with what a church actually does, they shouldn't speak to the subject. And no referring to the churches and people that make the news media. That's 1% of churches. Every entity has their devils, even the church.

kim, well said.

...and Kathy! Well said as well. Both hit the nail on the head.

Uh...scroll back about 10 posts...I cut and pasted it from jason...lol

Allow me to step in and reiterate that I did, indeed, misunderstand Grant's initial comment above. He was speaking of what he could do hypothetically, not what all churches do de facto. Between his reply to the comment you quoted, Tammy, and my own re-reading of his initial comment, I realized that I had misread the intended point.