No Child Left Behind
Against
No Child Left Behind or NCLB is a well planned educational reform that stresses both reading and mathematics. However, being well planned doesn't make the program an effective solution. To quote Milton Friedman “The government solution to a problem is usually as bad as the problem.” I am going to show you that this program places too much emphasizes on testing, too much stress on teachers, and creates an ineffective teaching environment for the students.
According to the National Education Association, for the first time in the Department of Education's history, a bill has set a federal requirement that all students be tested in math and reading - annually in grades 3 through 8 and at least once in grades 9 through 12. The new requirement has the potential for disrupting the more comprehensive and tailored student and school assessment programs developed by individual states over the past 15 years. The No Child Left Behind bill requires for states to develop annual standardized tests for students in third through eighth grade in both the subjects of math and reading comprehension for the purpose of determining academic progress on the state and federal level and to ensure that no child falls between the cracks.
A Federal Education Program?…
While this may seem like a good idea at first glance let's take a closer look. Individual states each require a different curriculum to be taught in different grade levels and at different educational levels. For example: In Texas the average third grader can read at what would be considered the average Alabama fourth grade level. Therefore the Texas third grade would actually be working on what would be Alabama fourth grade reading level. With this in mind, it would not be possible for the federal government to decide what to consider true academic progress on the federal level without first standardizing grade level performance for all fifty states. It would be nearly impossible for the fifty states to come together and agree on standard educational and testing issues and against states rights for the federal government to set specific national guidelines for education.
On the state level, states are suppose to set clear and high academic standards for what students in each grade should know and be able to do in the core academic subjects of reading, math, and science. Annual testing tells parents and teachers how much progress students have made toward meeting the academic standards. Well let's face it. A normal chapter test on division will tell parents and teachers just as much about their child's ability in division as an annual standardized test. Perhaps even a little better because then it is easier to see exactly where the child's problem with division lies.
It's all for the parents…
While NCLB states that one of its purposes is to provide more information on progress to parents, the truth is that any parent who pays attention to their child's education and stays in contact with their child's teachers will know how their child is doing academically. What's more, one annual test can not possibly gauge the full extent of what a child has learned.
Below Average Children
Another issue that arises from this emphasize on testing involves students with special needs. The National Association of State Boards of Education states that NCLB allows states to develop alternate standards for what students with “significant cognitive disabilities” should learn in reading and math. States then will develop alternate achievement tests based on the alternate achievement standards they perceive adequate for their special needs students. Such alternate assessments could include out-of-grade level assessments. But again these tests are standardized and will not take into account the individual needs of special education students - the very students who need their individual cognitive abilities taken into account the most. We must ask our selves is it fair to mentally retarded children to ask of them what they may not be capable of doing? Is it ethical to put them under unnecessary pressure?
One further problem is that there are many other students with cognitive disabilities who do not fit category of “significant cognitive disability” and yet also are not functioning at the same level as other students in one or two required subjects. These students are often referred to as the “gap kids.” These gap kids are also required to take the annual standardized test. But because they lack a “significant cognitive disability” they are required to take the same one as the students functioning on grade level. These students generally do very poorly in the subject in which they are behind in. However, their grades are factored into the class average for the test. This class average is supposed to tell the academic progress towards state standards for the entire class.
I know! Let's Blame the Teacher!
According to the National Association of State Boards of Education, No Child Left Behind places greater accountability on teachers, principals, and school administrators than ever before; perhaps, a little too much accountability. There are other problems that need to be addressed in our school systems for any teaching program to become effective.
According to the Dallas County School Administration the average class size in 2006 for elementary schools was 24 students. The National Education Association recommends a student-teacher ratio of 15:1. Teachers with small classes can spend time and energy helping each child succeed. Smaller classes also enhance safety, discipline, and order. It is common sense that when qualified teachers teach smaller classes in modern schools kids will learn more. In 2007, three teachers were laid off in the Dallas County School System due to budget cuts - raising the student teacher ratio.
My mother is a “highly qualified” fifth grade teacher. In 2006 she had a class of 27 students - including 2 special education students, 1 student who suffered with OCD , and 6 students who would be considered gap kids. It was her responsibility to teach these students Mathematics, Reading Comprehension, English, Science, Social Studies, and Creative Writing. If you factor in the seven hour school day, minus the 30 minutes for lunch, and divide by the students and the number of subjects. Each student could get a little over two minutes individual time per subject throughout the day. That's about 12 minutes individual attention during the course of the seven hour day. This is not taking into account the time that the teacher actually spends teaching the subject at hand nor does it take into account the time spent during recess, bathroom breaks, and P.E.. Try as the teacher might in such a teaching environment it is difficult to give each student the individual attention needed to address and solve problems. Yet, NCLB's solution for the failure of classes is to hold the teacher responsible. Teachers, Administrators, and Principals generally do the best they can under the circumstances.
So who do we hold accountable?
So who is at fault for the failure of students? A large majority of the time I would say the students themselves. Of the twelve 2nd – 5th grade teachers I asked, 10 said that they had to get on to students for talking or playing between 10-20 times a day and the other 2 teachers said than they had to correct student conduct more than 20 times a day. Admittingly, this is a small poll and isn't inclusive of the entire state. However, how can teachers be expected to teach effectively when students are disruptive? NCLB penalizes teachers, principals, and administrators without taking into consideration the students.
You've confused me…
I am going to explain to you a little about how No Child Left Behind works in this example:
Let's say the state has created a standardized test that judged what they considered to be standard college level for ENG101. And I hate to break it to you, but it's mandatory for you to take this exam. Tell me, would you do well? Could this one exam judge better what you know than the other tests you have taken in this class? What about the individual opinion of the instructor on your progress? Is it possible for this one exam to be able to learn more about your individual progress than he is? Of course not, with NCLB you wouldn't even have individual progress. While this exam wouldn't affect your grade it would tell the instructor and everyone else how close you as a class are to the state's college level standards in this subject. That's right as a class.
We're going to say that you scored in the 80 percentile and Billy Joe Bob, who is a little slow in reading and slept or talked through most of the class, scored in the 20 percentile. To make things easy I'm going to say you are the only 2 people in your class. That makes your class average on this exam 50%. Hate to break it to you, but that doesn't meet the state's standards. Come to find out this is the second year that the students taught in this class have failed to meet the state's standards.
So what are your options now? This exam will not affect your grade, but the school will now face an intervention. This will have little effect on you since upon completing this class will never have to take it again. However, this will severely affect the instructor, the school administration, and all incoming students. Since this school has now been identified for corrective action it now has to take such actions as extending the school year or school day, instituting and implementing a new curriculum, and/or replacing the school staff relevant to the failure. Sorry, Mr. Instructor, regardless of how good of a teacher you may or may not be; you just lost your job.
In a college setting, No Child Left Behind would be considered ridiculous. College students are held responsible for their work and conduct. Elementary and High School students should be no different. In Elementary and High School, teacher responsibly should be balanced with that of the student and the parent.
Well, then you come up with a solution…
I have. In any given classroom, there are students who do well in certain subjects and students who don't. When students do not do well, it can hold the class back while they wait for others to catch up - leading to boredom in the students who understood the material in the first place. With the amount of curriculum that must be taught within any given year, the class must eventually move on and students who do not understand the material get left behind.
I feel that students would do much better if they could advance individually instead of as a class. I was home-schooled my last three years of high school. Three years I completed in less than two. I learned to work on my own and ask for help when I needed it. I feel that this form of education would be more beneficial to students. They would be more in charge of their own education. They either do the work or they don't. If the work is not understood or completed, you do not advance to the next chapter until it is. This gives students the chance to advance at their own pace. It's a form of education that works.
In conclusion
Under current circumstances, No Child Left Behind is a program doomed to failure. It doesn't take into full account individual needs of special students. It doesn't hold individual students responsible for their own actions but instead penalizes those who try to help. I fail to see how all this testing will help the students. I feel that the government could find a better solution to the current academic problems facing our nation. Some first steps on this road would be to treat and recognize students as individuals, provide funding for lowering class sizes, and increase and encourage working with parents. With these steps, I am sure that each child will grow to their maximum academic potential - which is the goal of all education.
Last Updated: December 29, 2007