Here is the big question: Should President Obama reform the No Child Left Behind law? The simple answer is yes-but the longer answer is that the law should be done away with completely.
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act was proposed by former US President George W. Bush on January 23, 2001-immediately after he took office. It was coauthored by Representatives John Boehner (Republican, Ohio) and George Miller (Democrat, California) and Senators Judd Gregg (Republican, New Hampshire) and Edward Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts), and signed by President Bush.
The NCLB act aimed to improve education in several ways. It wanted to:
- Increase accountability for states, school districts and schools
- Give parents flexibility in choosing schools
- Ensure that 100% of the children are proficient in English and math by 2014
- Schools are also required to give student information to military recruiters, unless the parents opt out. If a school does not provide this information, it loses funding.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is used to ensure that these goals are met. Students are split up into subgroups, and these subgroups are measured in math and communication arts by assessments. If a school does not make “adequate progress” in one of these areas, it is deemed as a “failing school” and students have the option of moving to a different school if this continues. (http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/nclb/QandA.html#What_is_adequate_ yearly_progress_(AYP) )
So it sounds good in theory, doesn’t it? The thing is, when something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. There is a major flaw in the No Child Left Behind act-and that flaw is that it never stood a chance. It was bound to fail from the beginning for many reasons, which include the following:
- Under the NCLB act, each state is allowed to define their own standards. Thus, if a state sets low standards, they will likely be met. States with higher standards will almost always fail.
- It does not take into account children in the special education system. There are children out there that will never have the mental capability to pass these tests. Progress for them might be measured by simple tasks such as tying a shoelace-not test-taking.
- On the other end of the spectrum, it does not take into account gifted children. Gifted children may perform well on the tests, but if the teacher is forced to teach solely to the test, gifted children will not receive enough stimulation and will suffer as well.
- States with a high number of students that speak English as a second language suffer under this act.
- Many teachers are required to teach to the test, and are forced to cut activities such as art and music.
- Children that are moved from a failing school by concerned parents often aren’t the ones that are struggling.
- If a school does not meet its goals, it does not receive all of the funding. This gives the school no chance to recover from it. Struggling schools should be helped, not punished.
- Schools do not have adequate funding to implement this program.
So basically this is an act that cannot do well because of fundamental reasons. Almost every politician agrees that it needs to be fixed-the big question is how? Should it be reformed, or should it be abolished all together so that it can be completely rewritten?
First, let’s see how President Obama plans to reform it. In his agenda for education, there is a section under K-12 entitled “Reform No Child Left Behind.” He states that the goals that him and Biden share are:
- Funding the law
- Improve assessments used to track student progress so that they measure readiness for college and/or the workplace.
- Improve the accountability system so that struggling schools are supported and not punished.
For the K-12 system, President Obama has several additional goals, including:
- Support high-quality schools and close low-performing charter schools
- Make math and science education a national priority
- Address the dropout crisis
- Expand high-quality after-school activities
- Support college outreach programs
- Support English language learners
- Recruit teachers
- Prepare teachers
- Retain teachers
- Reward teachers
These are all fantastic goals-but there’s a major flaw in this as well. There isn’t enough funding for this. Even Obama’s 2-year stimulus plan cannot do this-it is too short-term for schools to use the money to hire more teachers. There is also the fact that many states are facing a budget crisis and may even have to cut the school year short as it is.
So what else can we do? Personally, I think the No Child Left Behind act requires enough of a change that it would be simpler to throw it out and start over again. Unfortunately, standardized testing is probably here to stay. However, it should be approached differently this time around.
- There needs to be a national standard rather than a state standard. When each state determines their own standards, states with easy standards will always do better than those with difficult ones. A national standard would cut the need for this.
- That does not mean that every child in a grade level must take the same test. In middle and high school levels, tests should be determined by the classes the student is in, rather than their grade level.
- Special education students should be assessed based on progress reports rather than testing. This could be done by a different test, or a neutral party can assess the children at several points throughout the year to determine improvement. Goals can be set for these children if applicable.
- Students that have limited English skills should be assessed by their progress in English until they have caught up to their peers in terms of language skills.
- Schools should be awarded based off of student improvement/ progress. If a 3rd grade child reads at a kindergarten level and progresses to a second grade level throughout the course of the year, she still made more improvement than her peer that remained at grade level.
- Struggling schools require more assistance. It may or may not be a case of funding-struggling schools need to be given adequate training on improvement.
There will be arguments to that plan as well. If different groups of children take different tests, how can we tell if one group slips through the cracks? We can’t, but that it is preventable with the current system. The teachers, the school, the state, and the federal government will have to hold accountability.
We must all work together to ensure that each child has the best education possible.
SOURCE LIST
Source Note 1 (Institutional #1)
Source Note 2 (Journalistic #1)
Source Note 3 (Journalistic #2, Multimedia #1)
Source Note 4 (Journalistic #3, Multimedia #2)
Source Note 5 (Journalistic #4)
Source Note 6 (Journalistic #5)
Source Note 7 (Institutional #2)
Source Note 8 (Citizen #1, Blog #1)
Source Note 9 (Institutional #3)
Source Note 10 (Institutional #4)
Source Note 11 (Academic #1)
Source Note 12 (Academic #2)
Source Note 13 (Citizen #2, Blog #2)
Source Note 14 (Journalistic #6, Multimedia #3)
Source Note 15 (Academic #3, Still Image #1)
Source Note 16 (Academic #4, Still Image #2)
Source Note 17 (Academic #5, Still Image #3)
Source Note 18 (Citizen #3, Blog #3)
Source Note 19 (Institutional #5, Still Image #4)
Source Note 20 (Citizen #4, Multimedia #4)
Source Note 21 (Institutional #6, Multimedia #5)
Source Note 22 (Citizen #5, Still Image #5, Blog #4)
Source Note 23 (Citizen #6, Interview #1)
Source Note 24 (Citizen #7, Interview #2)
Source Note 25 (Citizen #8, Inverview #3)
Source Note 26 (Journalistic #7)
Source Note 27 (Journalistic #8, Multimedia #6)
Source Note 28 (Academic #6)
Source Note 29 (Journalistic #9)
Source Note 30 (Journalistic #10)
Filed under: Assignments for Gateway II Tagged: | Assignments, Gateway, Gateway II, No Child Left Behind, politics
