It can be. I consider it relieving the pressure on the system
allowing for growth (and decay) to happen as it does for a time.
They still maintain control over the low 5% of "failure
factories" - they were always the "big problem" anyhow. Give
another 12-15 years, continue collecting the data as it arrives,
and allow for new strategies to emerge that are more suitable
for local environments. To use a gravity analogy, let the
natural saddle points emerge, the resting spots form... some
rising to higher electron shells and some to lower. There's
great variety in the USA. We're a big place. Lots of people.
There may be surprises that were unable to spring forth due to
excessive testings and over-reliance on federal funding for
student performance. Besides, a lot of benefits have been made.
Let's see what stays and what dies, and what grows. Let the
birds leave the nest as it were and see how the teachers and
local districts and states do themselves. Because they know that
at any given Senate session, their freedom can be taken away
again. They have a greater impetus to _perform_, lest Momma US
says, "enough is enough" again and we return to a constricted
testing-heavy environment. == I explained it to my 10 yr old
nephew that it'll mean less testing if Obama signs it, which he
probably will. He understood, "Wait, no more benchmarking!?"
He's happy. I mentioned Bush ("9-11 guy?", I said "yeah") - that
all the extra testing was from his time. He went outside,
pointed at a bush and said, "No! Bad bush! No. No.. Just No,
bush, No. No more bush. No." He gets it. ==
