Two of the goals were:
- Students were to be tested annually in math and reading.
No Child Left Behind Act requires that school demonstrate that each student is on grade level, in key areas such as math and reading. States must set goals which will demonstrate schools are making "adequate yearly progress" in math and reading.
- Facilities were to be upgraded to meet Federal standards.
School that can not demonstrate this proficiency stand to lose Federal funding.
I hope this helped you. :)
Yes I think that each side has good things to say about the other side. This is because I think that many people's political viewpoints don't always perfectly align to one party or the other. In reality, life is much more complicated than picking one side. Sure some people might agree with policies from the Democrat's side, but they might see other Republican views to be valid as well. I like to think of it as a buffet of ideas, where people tend to pick and choose which talking points they magnetically snap to. We could have for example a socially liberal person but who supports conservative financial measures; or we could have someone who has very religious conservative morals, but supports liberal monetary policies.
In other words, it's unrealistic to assume people will be purely one party. Those who seem that way tend to be stuck in a bubble where it's like a feedback loop of talking points fed to them. Fox News is one example of this on the conservative side, while MSNBC is an example of this on the liberal side. Those stuck in this bubble would likely not have much nice things to say about the other side, if they have anything nice to say at all. However, I think to some (if not many) people, politics has become very toxic that they simply turn the tv off entirely. By "turn off", I mean literally turn it off or change the channel to something else. These people I'd consider somewhere in the middle in a moderate range. Furthermore, these moderates are likely to have some nice things to say about both sides, but they might have their complaints about both sides as well.
In short, if you pick someone from either extreme, then it's likely they'll have nothing nice to say about the other side. If you pick someone from the middle, then they might have nice things to say about both sides. It all depends who you ask. Also, it depends on how politically active they are.
Answer:
The conservative faction of the Republican Party was larger than its Progressive faction in Congress. The conservatives, or “Old Guard,” as they were called by the Progressives, were led by House Speaker Joe Cannon and Senator Nelson Aldrich.
Explanation:
The social cognitive perspective is the research perspective emerged in the 1970s to answer the general question of what specific mental processes are involved in the person's construction of an understanding of the social world.
What is social cognitive perspective?
Social conduct is seen as a result of cognitive processes that go along with situational circumstances from a social cognitive approach. Therefore, violent behavior occurs in a social setting and is largely a result of the individual's interpretation and processing of social information.
How does cognitive perspective explain human behavior?
This strategy focuses on the impact of one's inner sentiments and beliefs on behavior. The cognitive method places an emphasis on the value of memory, perception, and attention, as well as language, judgment, and problem-solving. This method frequently makes a comparison between the human brain and a computer.
Learn more about social cognitive perspective: brainly.com/question/14368393
#SPJ4
The Equator, or line of 0 degrees latitude
