7 ms·
I think the question is, can 100% of children be brought up to read and write and do basic math? If so (and it would be pretty controversial to argue otherwise
by dgreensp 12y ago
I think the question is, can 100% of children be brought up to read and write and do basic math? If so (and it would be pretty controversial to argue otherwise -- who are these genetically unhelpable children? maybe there are a few, but less than 1%), then the goal of "No Child" is at least coherent, even if the implementation was so poor that it could never have improved public education so drastically.
- Solarsail 12y agoOnly genetically unhelpable? I would sooner expect issues with teaching children who don't want to be taught than any actual ability to learn.
- cbd1984 12y ago> I think the question is, can 100% of children be brought up to read and write and do basic math? No. There are children whose brains pretty much failed to form, children with intact brains but severe mental retardation (such as the most serious form of Down Syndrome), and children who were normal until an adverse environment in the womb or later made them seriously mentally retarded, such as fetal alcohol syndrome. You can reduce the fraction of the children we can't help by defining "read and write and do basic math" as broadly as possible, but that won't be useful from two angles: One, at some level you have to really be able to read and write and do basic math, and, two, some children can't be brought up to any reasonable level. The fraction of the ineducable might end up being very small, but, hey, you're the one who said 100%.