(03-13-2018 04:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-13-2018 03:31 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  You're making my point perfectly - I appreciate that.
DeVos could not even provide a salient response like yours, that actually addressed the question. Like I said, she could have been for one side, the other, or completely tearing down the debate, but she wasn't. Instead she was uninformed and unable to respond to a question that should be easy for someone to respond to that has thought about how to measure student progress. The idea of measuring student progress isn't a bureaucratic idea - it is a fundamental idea in education. It's why there is a grading scale...
You can go ahead and debate the merits of that all you want, but my point is DeVos isn't equipped to have that debate.

Well then, maybe I should be secretary of education.

I'd track students, on at least three tracks--gifted, college prep, and vocational. And the vocational track would be a lot more rigorous. And we'd have school choice and vouchers. And I'd replace Common Core with a curriculum designed not by teachers alone but by employers in conjunction with teachers, based on skills that are actually needed in the workplace, and students would be tested to that curriculum, so no more of this "do I teach the curriculum or do I teach the test?" And to be eligible for vouchers, a school would have to spend at least X% (I'm thinking 90, but open to debate) inside the classroom and subject its students to those standardized tests annually to measure proficiency to determine which tracks students were eligible for, so they would have skin in the game, as well as growth to evaluate teachers. And I'm thinking vouchers would be $3,000 per student with requirement that $2500 go to teachers' salaries and $500 to classroom materials, so a teacher with a 20 student load would be guaranteed $50,000 compensation and $10,000 to buy supplies, minimum, before the state or district spend a dime. Those are some of my thoughts. What say you?

So I have at least given this some thought, and I'm fine with DeVos.

Why are you fine with DeVos? What has she said that actually makes a case for her being Secretary of Education? You haven't really addressed that at all - you've just railed against faceless bureaucrats and said she wasn't one of them. Is that her only selling point that makes her qualified in your opinion?

I'm not letting you turn this conversation around from being about the qualifications of one candidate to the merits of different educational philosophies.