ASCD Poll: NCLB

In the ASCD Poll, we asked you to tell us how No Child Left Behind (NCLB) has negatively affected your school or district? If you haven't taken the poll yet, please vote now.

Earlier this year, we polled readers to find out how NCLB had positively affected their school or district, and 60.65 percent responded that it had not had a positive effect. To read some of their stories and to see the rest of the poll results, check out "A Firsthand Look at NCLB."

Do you have something to add? Share your thoughts on how NCLB has affected your school or district.

Comments

[Rosemarie Morris]

I would have hoped for a better question from ANYONE even remotely involved in research - honest research, anyway. Your question pre-supposes that NCLB has had negative effects and poses no options or consideration that it might possibly have some positive impact.

[Alfredo Medina]

I believe that Ms. Morris is not seeing the big picture. That there are at least two sides to controversy, and NCLB is controversial. The over emphasis on testing, and consequently "teaching to the test", stifles both student and teacher creativity. The true factors that affect student achievement are more closely linked to their socio economic status, than rigorous preparation for a test. It seems to flow easier for those students that come from a better economic position, that usually have better oportunities and access. Those students that haven't achieved as we hoped, are minimally better because of NCLB, but the true factors that have them at a disadvantage, i.e., technology, employment opportunities, and general economic development in their communities is the same as it ever was.
I am not saying that Ms. Morris is wrong in stating that your survey question is over-simplistic, but if we are truly going to grab this bull by the horns, we must be cogniscent that it has two horns, and ignoring the other will probably get you gored!

[Paul M. Rutherford, Ph.D.]

With the emphasis on testing whether it is standardized or at the conclusion of instruction within a national curriculum, the creativity is disappearing within teachers' pedagogical toolbox. Even when a teacher with a v ery strong record of excellence knows better, they are locked in to a 'teacher-proofed' curriculum.

[Clay Watkins]

Can you think of a better way to get bad results? Have you taken a page from the pollsters and advertising managers for the Democrats or Republicans? If you can answer these questions - you too can post a survey question on the web. To answer your question as opened discussion in our school about teaching and learning and how it is measured - what it looks like. Certainly there are the naysayers - "I have more important things to do" "Do I really have to do this?" "I don't get it, why do we have to do this?" It has asked us the hard question about whether what we are doing works and if it is really worthwhile. So, the only negative effects of NCLB have been for us to focus on the small 10-15% of the kids who don't get it - who don't score a meeets ot above on the standardized tests. But funny, these are the same kids who score at the bottom of the class in my classes too. So if I have to spend time looking at subgroups and kids who don't meet the standards and working to create lessons and instruction that taps in to what they know and helps them achieve success in my class. it is not a negative - it is a positive.

[Linda Bender]

One negative consequence of NCLB has been that superintendents who do not like a certain principal load that principal's school with special education students. Another negative consequence has been that administrators latch on to every new program or gimmick they can in an attempt to prove that they are doing a good job. Then the principals threaten the teachers with losing their jobs if the students do not make adequate yearly progress. However, all the new programs only add more paper work for the teachers while contributing to a fragmented and confusing approach to pedagogy. More paper trails do not address the social and academic needs of the students, and do not provide teachers with more time or inspiration to meet the specific learning needs of their students. Another consequence has been that the administrators latch onto any pitch from professional development providers that seems new or exciting. Most of these professional development workshops rehash the same tired approaches that have been around since I started teaching 33 years ago. But they don't show teachers how to teach students how to read and do math any better because they do not address systemic problems such as overcrowed classrooms, 100 year old schools and dangerous, anxiety inducing living environments where our students are exposed to threats, disease and abuse every day and night.

[Joanne Cape]

As with the other comment, your poll is invalid and biased. How about a little more scholarly effort from an organization that has been noted IN THE PAST for scholarly research.

[Frank Romano]

NCLB is another example of good intentions gone astray. Public education has been plagued with this type of political interference thoughout its history. There are pros and cons to the law. However, your poorly designed poll question also reflect the sad state of our education community. It is this type of poorly design surveys and polls that distort data and then is used to support educational action. That,in turn, fails to address the orginal problem. So, as educators, we stumble and bumble our way to ineffect "reform". There is a song from the sixties with the following refrain, "When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?". While LEARNING is the focus of our profession, we never seem to get it right. The use of poor research, failure to utilize good research and failure to address the root causes and issues leading to ineffective learning, appears to be the way we have always done it and will continue to do it. ASCD should be lead the way, not following the blind.

[laura]

A note to Rosemarie and Joanne--If you go to the archived ASCD Polls:

http://www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/menuitem.7d14e3fe9d83ff5ccb6a7210e3108a0c/

. . . and scroll down to the April 25, 2006 question, you'll see that we did previously ask for positive feedback on NCLB. Both positive and negative effects of NCLB are also printed in the November issue of Educational Leadership magazine (See "A Firsthand Look at NCLB").

[Anne E. Levin Garrison]

The poll does not give an adequate opportunity to respond in a meaningful or significant manner. Obviously, if you check one box, you lose the option of checking the others. The problems with NCLB are serious and complex. It would seem like this organization could and would do better to stand up for teachers and their students in the face of this disaster.

[jim pfeiffer]

Parent and advocate seeks best practices on how to approach school boards and administration to get them to focus on how they intend to improve math scores for the bottom 25%. Real basic tactical stuff.

These are nice people and caring people but my work experience in business and involvement tells me the situation in "year #2 on the list" has not improved and as a stakeholder I have concerns about further interference and sanctions.
Seems we are in a war of sorts and ill prepared; any best methods/practices from schools who have had success.or total failed attempts as well?
thanks