A "Partially Failed Experiment"

That's Joel Packer's, manager of Elementary and Secondary Education Act Policy for the NEA, take on NCLB.

This month, Education Update newsletter looks at NCLB a year before it is set for reauthorization, and dishes pros and cons from the education policy wonks.

Packer's criticisms of NCLB, mainly that the law

• Judges school performance on math and reading scores only
• Limits how test scores can be used
• Is drastic with respect to how it measures "failure" in certain subgroups
• Does not fully fund the resources needed for compliance

. . . are countered by those, like Kati Haycock of The Education Trust, who defend the law because of it's attention to underserved students. "These are the poor kids, the ESL students, the underperforming kids who for years have been swept under the rug," says Haycock.

Do you agree with Haycock, that NCLB is putting "wind in the sails" of people trying to make positive changes for students?

Members, log on to read the full issue.

Comments

[Sharon Smith]

NCLB is not putting any winds in any sails other than those who can profit from the law monetarily. Working in the school system daily, I have not seen any positive impact of NCLB on the students I teach. None of them transfer to better schools, our district/state keeps changing the criteria for what is deemed "highly qualified" and conveniently doesn't communicate these changes to teachers, and all eyes are on the test scores. Through NCLB we have lost sight of our mission as educators and become pawns to politicians. During the last presidential election, Rod Paige was in town supposedly to address concerns over NCLB to parents, community leaders, teachers, and students. He used this platform instead to praise Bush and his administration , which of course included him, and touted NCLB as the best piece of legislation that has passed in the United States since the signing of the Civil Rights Act. I could not believe he made that statement. He obviously did not make the rounds in our district to see how NCLB had not really changed the academic opportunities of economically disadvantaged children. He skirted the issue when questions such as these were asked, joked about having his attorney right there by his side, and never did answer any questions of relevance from the audience. Most people left as confused about NCLB as they were before they arrived.

Just imagine, if NCLB money could go to classroom teachers and we could use these funds to acquire resources, materials, and technology, attend conferences, increase professional development that is relevant to what we teach, and even go back to school if necessary, what improvements in the achievement levels of our students could be reached?

[Teresa Snyder]

NCLB is reductionist legislation. It reduces learning to extremely limited measures, which are artificially called "standardized". With such measures, there will always be a statistical spread (or the measures are not very good)--the spread has little to do with instruction and much to do with sociology. These measures also do not necessarily indicate learning and, certainly not mastery, of material--they pretty much indicate how one performed on a specific measure on a specific day. There is no generalizability--if there were, there would certainly be more consistency between how a child performed in fourth grade and how they performed in eighth grade--but we don't see consistency. They do not predict academic success, even in the areas they purport to test. Further, they do not demonstrate how well students think or whether they can function in problem solving situations. NCLB does nothing for the disenfranchised, and it does nothing for the enfranchised.

[Betricia Forde]

The NCLB is indeed the best legislation. It gives each child the opportunity or access to suitable educational environment that will foster their growth.
Our community structure in the US is of such that it permitates poverty or wealth on a perpetual basis for individuals who live within the boundaries.
Unfortunately for many of our children they live in the poor communities in poor homes from poor families and attend poor schools with poor resources. Without NCLB these children are invisibly bonded to these communities and the perpetual poverty is encouraged.
Education has proven to be the single most successful social structure that has the capabilities to bring about social mobility. Without the chance to experience an effective educational environment children continue in this cycle that their parents and grand parents have grown to accept.
The NCLB act has the capability to break this cycle by providing educational opportunity that will assist these children to go beyond their poor boundary. Children has the opportunity to all educational resurces to foster their growth and develop their full potential.
Let us make NCLB work for these innocent kids who did not choose to be born in these communities. Give them a fair chance!
The challenge we face in our education system is - there are too many teachers who do not teach and there are too many administrators who do not supervise. The bottom line is; to be successful students must meet the standards which are influenced by the needs of society. The most effective way to ascertain if students are measuring up is through standardize testing. Help the kids to meet the standards thus pass the test!
I am so annoyed with my child's district. He was attending a math summer camp that is funded by NCLB; quess what he was doing? computer generated busy work. Now tell me if NCLB will benefit him? definately not! Did they pull his scores to see where his weakness is and plan a course to assist him to meet the standards he has not met? No! As far as I am concern it was a waste of time and money so I pulled my child out. This is what is happening in many schools and many districts. This is a major problem for NCLB.
We need to have some radicals in our classrooms and education system who are motivated by research and who believe that all children can learn and must learn.
NCLB is insignificant to a leader/teacher who will push for success for each child; but it is a most needed structure for especially disadvantaged children.

[Helene Bon]

Clearly, the problems in U.S. education are rampant and need to be addressed. However, the most recent attempt to do so through legislation, NCLB, is ill-conceived, has been poorly implemented, and has done more harm than good. Now, instead of trying to educate our students in a comprehensive manner, politicians and big money testmakers have made it OK to limit the scope of what students can learn in school just so they can get fatter on the futures of our children. The narrowing of curriculum in answer to NCLB is a tragic oversight that, if unchecked, will certainly have far-reaching consequences for us and our prodigy. NOW is the time for those in the know to SPEAK UP!