Rotherham Watch
Timing is everything Andy.
On today’s Eduwonk you post a snide one-liner dismissing a Thornburg Center article about how NCLB has had a negative impact on environmental education.
Global Warming: Relax, your carbon footprint is not the problem…it’s No Child Left Behind.
The silly (according to Rotherham) Thornburg Center post says:
School systems have shortened recess and physical education to meet the needs of NCLB.
There is no significant mention of environmental education in NCLB, the dominant policy shaping virtually all short and long term, local, state and federal education decisions. In fact, environmental education is not even organized under the U.S. Department of Education at the federal level.
Instead, the office of environmental education is part of the U.S. EPA. While the administration may have a new focus on science and NCLB, that focus is on global economic leadership and homeland security.
In fact, the crucial environmental issues facing our society are not even mentioned.
How ironic it is then that Sam Dillon in today’s NY Times reports on a study by the Center for Economic Policy that says (what!?) the very same thing:
The report, by the Center on Education Policy, a Washington group that studies the law’s implementation in school districts nationwide, said that about 44 percent of districts have cut time from one or more subjects or activities in elementary schools to extend time for longer daily math and reading lessons. Among the subjects or activities getting less attention since the law took effect in 2002 are science, social studies, art and music, gym, lunch and recess, the report said.
The report, based on a survey of nearly 350 of the nation’s 15,000 districts, said 62 percent of school districts had increased daily class time in reading and math since the law took effect.
Within a year of the law’s implementation, teachers and their associations were reporting that schools and districts were suggesting or requiring that they spend more time on reading and math to improve test scores, and that they cut back time spent on other disciplines.
So Andy, let me explain it to you. At the risk of being attacked as a post modernist by you again, our carbon footprint and what we teach our children can (what!? Get outta here!) be related.
