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.