Low standards are a tactic that takes pressure off teachers' unions by accepting mediocrity and failure for kids.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
If we're going to have standards in schools, let's be honest and have standards.
The standards to get in are very high. We don't want to lower those standards.
Education standards need to be set at the state level. High standards are an important way to ensure that the education system we are funding is actually working and producing, at a minimum, what we would expect it to.
As we embark on something as ambitious as the Common Core, educators must be able to teach to the standards with the necessary support and collaboration and without the sense that there will be dire consequences if students, schools and their tests don't make the grade.
We have seen that, in another unfunded mandate, the so-called No Child Left Behind Act, which created tougher standards, and we all support that, but Congress did not provide the money to attract and hire the best teachers.
People mistake their limitations for high standards.
Let's not be afraid to speak the common sense truth: you can't have high standards without good discipline.
There are teachers' unions around the country realizing they want to improve standards of the profession, improve the quality of their profession, and ultimately attract the best and the brightest to their profession. The vast majority of teachers are dedicated and committed.
The teachers' unions that block school reform have done serious damage to the union brand. The public no longer views unions as their friend, much less their champion. They view them as corrupt, intransigent and more interested in protecting their political clout within the Democratic Party than protecting their members or even school children.
The nicest thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from.
No opposing quotes found.