No Child Left Behind Act: Good or Bad?
As it is mentioned in Sleeter's chapter entitled Democratized Assessment, the No Child Left Behind Act is receiving mixed reviews: "While some find standardized testing to be a very useful lever to improve teaching and learning, especially for students from historically underserved communities, others find it punishes those very same students. Nationally, there is tremendous controversy over whether standards-based reform by testing promotes or undermines equity" (p65).
The NCLB act requires accountability through standardized testing of students. Every student in the school is tested, including Special Education students, students who have English as a second language yet with little comprehension yet of English, etc. The schools are then ranked regarding their progress toward achieving passing test scores for all students. The No Child Left Behind Act requires schools to achieve 100% proficiency by the 2013-2014 school year, and each year until then the proficiency requirement increases. Limited accommodations are made for special circumstances. Test scores for immigrant students are not counted during their first year of U.S. school. Students with learning disabilities can receive certain special accommodations such as extra time, but only 1% of total students may take an alternative test for special education students, even if the student population of special education students is 5%, 10%, 15% or more.
What is your opinion regarding this Act? Do you think the No Child Left Behind Act provides a well-rounded education to students or intrudes the educational process requiring teachers to teach to a test?
The NCLB act requires accountability through standardized testing of students. Every student in the school is tested, including Special Education students, students who have English as a second language yet with little comprehension yet of English, etc. The schools are then ranked regarding their progress toward achieving passing test scores for all students. The No Child Left Behind Act requires schools to achieve 100% proficiency by the 2013-2014 school year, and each year until then the proficiency requirement increases. Limited accommodations are made for special circumstances. Test scores for immigrant students are not counted during their first year of U.S. school. Students with learning disabilities can receive certain special accommodations such as extra time, but only 1% of total students may take an alternative test for special education students, even if the student population of special education students is 5%, 10%, 15% or more.
What is your opinion regarding this Act? Do you think the No Child Left Behind Act provides a well-rounded education to students or intrudes the educational process requiring teachers to teach to a test?
posted by Lyn Park at 4:22 PM
4 Comments:
From what I’ve read (and more importantly) from what I’ve learned from first-hand accounts of teaching experiences, No Child Left Behind seems to have placed a large amount of undue pressure on teachers across the nation. I’ve heard all sorts of stories and I just can’t imagine how teachers are coping with the stress and pressure they are faced with on a daily basis.
On the other hand, from what I’ve read on No Child Left Behind, original intentions do seem to have been honorable and in the interest of all children. I don’t doubt that at all. However, it seems that the execution (from theory to practice) has failed to translate and has consequently failed to advocate for equality among all students. Clearly, there is too much focus and pressure on teachers and schools, rather than on what the NCLB was intentionally implemented to do—close the achievement gap. In fact, in many ways, it seems to have done the opposite.
Clearly, the NCLB case is a complex and controversial one. With this, I’ve grown to disagree with what the NCLB act has done thus far. I think that it is definitely intruding on daily teaching and learning and I believe it’s time to step back and review what affect NCLB is having on today’s children. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lot of controversy on the effectiveness of the NCLB, which obviously indicates that something is not working, and until there’s unanimous agreement that the NCLB is helping teachers and students across the nation, I think we are running a profound risk of negatively effecting the long-term education of today’s youth. The longer we allow NCLB to dictate teaching, the more we increase the chances of big-time regrets that may not come to the forefront until years to come. And the only ones who will end up paying for these mistakes are the children, not the adults.
According the lattest news about NCLB I've encountered the other day, new modifications have been worked out, whcih would make following NCLB more attractive to more schools. Apart from the increased financial supports, the schools that follow the NCLB Act will have the chance to enjoy an extension of the 2014 deadline up to 4 years. However, the same time, the standards are made more rigid.
I think the most criticized aspect of NCLB is that the Act does not allow any consideration for both disabled students and those whose first language is not English even though the results of the assessments will be recorded disaggregated by ethnic group. In addition. The goal has been set too high, undoubtedly. If you consult to those evaluation researches, the mojority of them have indicated that NCLB does not do a good job in pushing students' academic achievements so far. To some extent, they serve as an indicator for necessary and reasonable modifications of NClB in order to make the Act more realistic and implementable. A re-evaluation of current situation of schools may help the creation of such changes.
All in all, I think the original goal of NCLB is intended to be beneficial and effective, however, there are something wrong with its implentability, such as the allocation of financial supports, and its practice of immigrant students as well as disabled ones, which jointly make the original goal unrealistic and standards over-rigid.
What is your opinion regarding this Act?
My opinion is that national standards based training speaks to only a certain culture and background of students who ultimately pass tests with flying colors (white, middle class students). Questions are written for students that come from a certain background and often times have underlying questions beyond just reading and math.
Also, some companies in Texas who happened to afiliated with the Bush family is making a lot of money.
Do you think the No Child Left Behind Act provides a well-rounded education to students or intrudes the educational process requiring teachers to teach to a test?
I don't think that assessment is created to provide education. It is created to test the education that students recieve in school.
Highstakes testing is never a good tool to test how much a student truly understands or has learned. Portfolios of student work and their own response, I feel, is the most effective tool to show how much a student understands.
When I hear the No Child Left Behind Act, I think money. There is a lot of money being made which all can be followed to Texas where Bush calls home. The creators of the test are affiliated with the Bush family. I don't think that this is an accident.
I believe that national testing is required but there is not way to make a test so broad that it effectively can evaluate all students in the US. The United States is made up of many cultures, many understandings and many standards. I don't think that high stakes testing is a fair way to evaluate students or their teachers. High stakes testing creates frustrations and anxiety for all of those involved.
There should be a national exam but also an effective portfolio program which tracks students individually as they grow. I think that they people who created tests should make their kids take the tests since private schools are usually exempt from these types of torture.
Post a Comment
<< Home