No Child Left Behind
From WikEd
Contents |
[edit] Descriptions, definitions, synonyms, organizer terms, types of
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 signed by President George W. Bush was a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). NCLB is designed to ensure that:
- "all students, regardless of background, have the opportunity to obtain a quality education and reach proficiency in core academic subjects. To reach this goal, NCLB refocused federal education programs on the principles of stronger accountability for results, more choices for parents and students, greater flexibility for states and school districts, and the use of research-based instructional methods." (U.S. Department of Education, 2005)
"States have set academic achievement standards and adequate yearly progress measures to ensure that all students are proficient in reading and mathematics by school year 2013-14." (U.S. Department of Education, 2005) Adequate yearly progress (ayp) is measured with standardized testing every year in grades 3 through 8 and once between grades 10 and 12, state by state. Eventually, perhaps, there will be a test aligned with the National Standards that all American students will take. Currently, every student is required to make ayp including those with severe learning disabilities, special education students, and those whose primary language may not be English. There are four subgroups: ethnicity, socioeconomic status, mastery of English, and disabilities. If one of these subgroups within a school does not meet the academic standards, the entire school fails. Failure to meet these academic goals can force schools to offer school choice to students, replacing curriculum, staff removal, administrative removal, and in some states removal of state funding.
NCLB continues to be a contentious matter of debate with educators, parents, and politicians alike.
[edit] Critics and their rationale
The National Education Association other groups including civil rights, religious, parents', and educators' organizations have joined together to refocus the NCLB law. Some state legislatures and members of Congress are calling for change as well. Current recommendations to Congress include:
- Ensure a more comprehensive picture of school and student performance by shifting from an overwhelming reliance on standardized tests to the use of other student achievement measures in addition to testing.
- Give states and local governments the funding and support they need to meet the objectives of the law without reducing expenditures for other education programs.
- Provide resources that will strengthen the knowledge and skills of school and district staff, and supporting programs that help parents and communities actively participate in their children’s education.
- Replace sanctions that neither have a consistent record of success nor allow schools to continue successful reform efforts.
"We believe every child can learn. We want to know if every child can read and write and add and subtract early, before it's too late." (Bush from http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/04/20/nochild.poll.ap/index.html 2004). This, of course, sounds very utopian, as many teachers believe the NCLB program is for students of poverty. There is a major gap between students from higher and lower socioeconomic backgrounds. Many teachers express their concern that outside influences need to be changed first in the lower socioeconomic group that has the hardest time meeting the NCLB standards. Somehow teachers are expected to overcome this and make the push. While parents see this as possible, teachers are not receiving any additional support from the legislation but may even be cut off if theier school is underperforming. For many teachers, this seems contrary to the logic of what should be done: More funding for struggling schools where poverty is high.
[edit] Alternative explanations due to Diversity considerations
Socioeconomic status is an issue addressed by No Child Left Behind
[edit] Signed "life experiences", testimonies and stories
In the Educate America 2000 act, arts were included as part of a "core" curriculum. Unfortunately, many of these arts programs have been devastated because of the expanded emphasis on the testable subjects. I doubt that music or art will ever be tested in the same way that math, reading and writing have been tested. Nonetheless, it is very important that teachers understand the ramifications of the high stakes testing and how it will affect all the students. Can you imagine a world without art and music? I can't, but in some communities it's becoming a reality. - W. Rank
The No Child Left Behind Act is absurd to me. It is a wonderful idea but is impossible in practice. Students with special needs can have a very difficult time meeting these standards and we cannot "fix" their brains to where they gain the same amount of knowledge as other students, in order to meet those standards. There is no child that will ever meet 100% of the standards. In actuality we will be either adjusting scores and expectations and/or teaching a test. Why not get back to better teaching? How about expecting more effort from the teachers, students and families? It is a sad state that we are in that students graduating from 8th grade less than 80 years ago could graduate from college today with that same education. - V.C.
Wheeling Elementary School District 21 is a "failing" district in Illinois. Six of the 12 District 21 schools did not meet the reading or math standards in all subgroups. The subgroups that did not meet the standards were minorities, limited English speakers or disabled students.
Phil Pritzker, a school board member running for re-election, said the law establishes a "standard that is unrealistic," which requires disabled students to perform at the same level as their non-disabled peers. He suggests that school boards, district leaders and other organizations team together to make logical changes in the law as it will be reauthorized in 2006.
Other school districts in Illinois, including Ottawa Township and Ottawa High School, have filed law suits against the federal government in regards to Title I funding. School districts face major financial implications without this money which can only currently be earned by "passing" schools.
It makes no sense to me that if a school district which has a large population of students who are having learning difficulties either diagnosed as special education or not, would lose funding if their student body doesn't meet the standards. It is just those schools that need the extra funding to improve the students' test scores. It is my understanding that if a school doesn't meet the standards then they would lose their Title I funding, and the funding from those students who wish to move to another school that is meeting the standards. It seems like a lose/lose situation. Sharon Morrisette
Isn't the key word in this legislation "opportunity"? Surely, even George Bush cannot be so ridiculous as to believe that everyone can be competent. Doesn't he know Dan Quayle? This is a program destined to fail- it's easy for Bush to propose these outcomes but where is the plan for implementation? He comes from a state notorious for having a poor school system. Perhaps he should have done his "homework" before sending this one out. N. Meeker
The name "No Child Left Behind Act" (NCLB) is in and of itself a form of propaganda. The United States government used NCLB to personalize the originally named "Elementary and Secondary Schools Act." This move was in an effort to persuade the citizens to support said act. By indicating that the government did not want to leave your students behind in their desire for a quality public education, they used this new label as a way to demonstrate their steps as being a positive method for achieving their goals. What most citizens do not realize is that the same students are not tested from one year to the next for the passing/failing adequate yearly progress (AYP). Also most citizens do not realize that the schools that continue to fail will loose funding, thus making it more difficult to ever have AYP in the future. C. Watson
The National Education Association recently filed a lawsuit against the Federal government in regard to funding of NCLB. I think that the major problems of NCLB are well summed up in their website, which I have quoted below.
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 (the latest revision of ESEA) presents real obstacles to helping students and strengthening public schools because it focuses on:
- punishments rather than assistance
- rigid, unfunded mandates rather than support for proven practices
- bureaucracy and standardized testing rather than teacher-led, classroom focused solutions
S. Borkgren
One unintended consequence of NCLB's emphasis on testing, is that school officials care more about test results than they care about learning. When the writing scores were returned this year, our school had not made AYP. Several of my Special Ed. students did very well, and a number of my gifted students did very poorly. When i pointed out that the gifted students were better writers (with examples to prove it0 i was told that I was not supposed to be teaching children how to write, but rather I was supposed to be teaching them how to pass the test. Warner Ferratier
One of the more questionable aspects to the No Child Left Behind legislation is the term "highly qualified teacher." About a year ago, the teachers of our district went through a check by the administration to see how whether or not their credentials matched up with NCLB standards. Needless to say, there were a lot of concerns when some teachers, who had been teaching in their fields for quite some time, were now unqualified to teach that particular class because they were a credit hour or 2 short from NCLB criteria. H. Ro
It's good to see that a task force has been formed to standardize reporting of school statistics with regard to NCLB. It's been amazing to see how different each state, and, each school district, reports their scores and statistics. With such high stakes being attached to public education, we still have a long way to go to standardize public education. S. Luxbacher
In the Spring of 2005 I heard a presentation that I have quoted many times sense then. The presenter, an educational policy expert, predicted that NCLB would be gone in its current form in 5 years. However, what is not going away, and what should not go away, is a national focus on all groups of students that is supported by data. NCLB is good (if only in part) because it forces us to look at portions of the population that we could (and did) easily ignore a few years ago. With that said, there are many problems with the legislation that need urgent fixing. G. Johnson
The State Superintendent of Illinois gave a short speech at our school. He said some very interesting things in regards to this subject. He stated that in theory it was a very good idea. As educators, we want our students to have an optimal education. We want to improve their test scores. But, the contents of NCLB require our students to gain more than a years progress in one year. Every year, more and more students have to pass the test at their grade level. That means that more and more students are going to have to speed up their learning to gain the level of their peers. Jenny Circello
What most concerns me about NCLB is the emphasis it places on districts to teach to the test. Many districts are doing away with innovative learning experiences that improve the education of all students because it isn't on the test. I worry about the educational consequences of these decisions. I think a lot is being lost in education when all focus shifts to a test. - E. Remington
I find that like what was said before me that most teachers are being told to teach to the test by their administrators. It takes away for any individuality in your teaching style if you are constantly being told to teach to the test. I think this is going to be a major problem in the future. -N. Hartz
I think that NCLB is a good idea in theory but it fails to translate to real life causing more funding issues throughout schools. The idea that all students should achieve the same high standards throughout the nation no matter where their starting position is, is nearly impossible. This becomes even harder when the government fails to fund the programs needed to achieve high quality education. --J. Brewczynski
I am not a fan of the No Child Left Behind act. As others have stated, it causes schools to focus on standardized tests, and other good programs suffer. Everything I learned in college suggested that standardized tests were not authentic assessments, and yet this is our policy. Furthermore, the legislation punishes schools who do not succeed via test scores with cuts in funding. How does this make sense to anyone- and what are we saying to our public schools? A school that does not meet "AYP" is in need of more funding, not less, from the government. I do not understand how struggling schools can be expected to fix their problems without adequate funding- which leads me to question the motives of NCLB itself. It seems like Bush still wants his vouchers, so he has to increase the population of private schools in order to gain support for them. -S. Yunker
I agree with the comment made by J. Brewczynski in that NCLB is a good idea in theory but that it is not realistic. I am not a pessimist by any means, in fact, I am a big optimist, always looking on the bright side. NCLB is not realistic though. I believe it is hurting, more than helping, our schools and our children. How can all children be expected to be performing at the appropriate grade level in a few years? All children are unique in their own way and some are more capable than others of performing, academically, where they should be. It is not realistic for students with learning disorders or other special needs to be at the same level as their non-special needs peers. Also, I think that too much accountability is placed on the teachers and on the schools. Where is the parents' accountability? School is only so much of a student's life. Yes, it is of utmost importance in a child's life to receive an education, but what about home life? What are the parents being held accountable for? Shouldn't they also be playing a highly active role in their child's education by reading to and/or with them daily and helping them with their homework and just plain talking to their children about school? ~K. Kleckauskas
I think that the NCLB should have been followed up with the NTLB (No Teacher Left Behind)act. It is very difficult to only address one issue and expect great things. If I have a flat tire and I add air, I have a solution for maybe a little while. If I have a flat tire and I go but a new tire but have no means or experience changing the tire. I don't have a good solution. We need to look at all of the factors, some of which are way beyond our control (parents), to find the right solution. T. Ashley
I agree with the idea that NCLB is an experience in futility. The overall message behind the program, eg. 100% higher test scores, 100% teacher accountability, et al. are great, but in the end, not very practical. I remember, during Vietnam, the mission was No Soldier Left Behind...I wonder where George came up with the title? Every president wants to be known as the education president, and each has come up with their own program to show their support of that endeavor. However, this program, built on ESEA, can not possibly succeed because the bar is set too high. To attain 100% is to say that every child will graduate, every school will attain AYP, every teacher will be a master teacher...and to reach this goal, the government states that they will fund the program.. however, that funding is very inadequate, and the schools are left floundering, attempting to reach the lofty goals with little, or no, support. I believe that the ideology behind NCLB is a very worth one, and one we as educators should work toward. But it is unrealistic to believe that this program will reach its goal by 2016 or any other year that the government should adopt. There are just too many variables, eg. race, ethnicity, school funding, teacher preparedness...not to mention that population of students who just don't want to succeed! I think that NCLB will continue on as long as G.W. is in office, and shortly thereafter become just another failed government education program. However, the I hope that the ideals of the program will be retained. Pat Johnson
I agree that NCLB is a good idea in theory but wholly impossible and unrealistic in practice. I was a student teacher in Athens, Georgia at a school that was deemed "underperforming" and the teachers were told by the government EXACTLY what they could and could not teach. It was very George Orwell-ian. Of course, the reason for their underperforming scores was because a small percentage of students were absent on the day of the testing. Ridiculous standards and measurements like this cause schools to fail, and cause teachers' creativity to be stifled. --David Roth
I recently heard a rather cynical perspective on this issue. A friend of mine referred to NCLB as “No rich white Chile Left Behind.” This made me laugh, but then it made me sad. What are we doing with education today? –J. Blanken-Webb
I recieved this story years ago, at the start of the NCLB movement. It pretty much sums up my feelings -S. Sheahan
The Animal School Once upon a time the animals decided they must do something heroic to meet the problems of a "new world," so they organized a school.
They adopted an activity curriculum consisting of running, climbing, swimming, and flying. To make it easier to administer the curriculum, ALL the animals took ALL subjects.
The duck was excellent in swimming -- in fact, better than his instructor; but he made only passing grades in flying and was very poor in running. Since he was slow in running, he had to stay after school and also drop swimming in order to practice running. This was kept up until his web feet were badly worn, so then he was only average in swimming. But average was acceptable in school, so nobody worried about that except the duck.
The rabbit started at the top of the class in running, but he had a nervous breakdown because of so much make-up work in swimming.
The squirrel was excellent in climbing until he developed frustration in the flying class, where his teacher made him start from the ground up instead of the treetop down. He also developed "Charlie horses" from over-exertion and then got a "C" in climbing and a "D" in running.
The eagle was a problem child and was disciplined severely. In the climbing class he beat all others to the top of the tree, but insisted on using his own way to get there.
At the end of the year an abnormal eel that could swim exceedingly well and also could run, climb, and fly a little had the highest average and was named valedictorian.
The prairie dogs stayed out of school and fought the tax levy because the administration would not add digging and burrowing to the curriculum. They apprenticed their child to a badger and later joined the ground hogs and the gophers in order to start a successful private school.
[edit] References and other links of interest
- Information on the No Child Left Behind Act.
McQueen, Anjetta. Organizations Urge Major Changes for 'No Child Left Behind'. 21 October 2004. National Education Association. 9 March 2005.
Moffit, Casey. "District asked to join suit vs. 'No Child' act". Pioneer Press Countryside Reminder. February 24, 2005.
Moffit, Casey. "School hopefuls assess impact of No Child law". Pioneer Press Countryside Reminder. March 31, 2005.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Secretary. February 2005. No Child Left Behind: Expanding the Promise, Guide to President Bush's FY 2006 Education Agenda, Washington, D.C. Retrieved on March 23, 2005 from http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget06/nclb/index.html
