Homework Skirmishes Go to Court: Courts Have Tended to Leave the Question of Homework-How Much and How Often-To Local Schools and Local School Boards, Which Is the Proper Venue for Deciding Such Issues
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
When Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal recently sued U.S. Department of Education in opposition to Common Core, he pointed to his son's math homework as last straw. governor, however, is not only parent to rail against tradition nearly as old as school itself. Homework is subject of lawsuits, state legislation, parent group meetings, and kitchen table debates across nation. Both state and federal laws have been recent influences on student's homework. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) transformed academic expectations of students and thus their homework assignments. By contrast, last few years have featured creation and deployment of Common Core State Standards --a forward-looking set of broad principles adopted voluntarily by all but handful of states. Gov. Jindal told news out lets that negative encounter with homework sparked his August 2014 federal lawsuit. When his son brought home an indecipherable math paper one day, Jindal said, it flipped his previous support for Common Core into intense opposition. Jindal asserts in his 29-page complaint that Common Core forces states down path toward national curriculum and is being implemented ... in contradiction to 50 years of Congressional policy forbidding federal direction or control of curriculum, cornerstone of education policy. Even though more than 40 states adopted English and math standards on their own, Jindal suggests that states were coerced because adopting Common Core was easiest way to qualify for billions of dollars in Race to Top funds and to receive waivers from NCLB requirements. Jindal has used legal means before to challenge Common Core. In June 2014, he issued executive orders to halt Louisiana's Common Core testing. Two months later Louisiana state court reversed that order, ruling that Jindal's deed would create a state of chaos in Louisiana's K-12 public schools. summertime blues Jindal's courtroom defeat is mirrored by another parent who earlier responded to homework frustration with legal action. In 2005, Milwaukee-area parent, Bruce Larson, and his 17-year-old son, Peer, sued to quash teacher's rule that precalculus honor students must complete three homework assignments by certain dates during summer break. father and son duo from suburban Milwaukee hamlet of Hales Corner included state superintendent of public instruction, Whitnall High School principal, math department chair, and Aaron Bieniek, his math teacher, as defendants. Peer said he submitted his homework late (and got lesser grade in response) due to his challenging job as camp counselor. Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Richard Sankovitz was not amused. He called lawsuit frivolous and said Peer should be directing his homework angst to school board. Had Larsons done bit more homework, Sankovitz wrote in opinion, they would have noticed that the people of our state granted to Legislature ... power to establish school boards. Larsons appealed decision and lost again, but this time Wisconsin Court of Appeals ordered them to pay court costs and attorneys' fees. The Larsons have utterly failed to present an arguable legal basis showing why their case should not have been dismissed, state court decision explained. Summer homework--particularly for an honors class for which students receive additional credit--fits comfortably within range of what is reasonable. This kind of clash is not unique to U.S. public schools. In 2009, Calgary, Alberta, couple sued over amount of homework their children received. Tom and Shelli Milley prevailed, signing settlement with their Catholic school. agreement allowed their son and daughter to be graded only on work done in classroom. With two children in school, there was just an inordinate amount of homework coming home and lot of it was busy work, dad, Tom Milley, said. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».