I know....you're shocked.
Ill-conceived, poorly timed, misdirected, unfocused, unrealistic.... The list could go on and on. NCLB is in the minds of a growing list of people and organizations little more than 670 pages of disaster pretending to the serious reform. Of course, what is to be expected from a bill which changed public education to it's core that had as one of it's key authors and creators a person who has no actual experience or background in education? Margaret Spellings, Secretary of Education under George Bush part 2, was given the power to apply all of her vast knowledge of education - which is to say pretty much none what so ever - to create and enforce sweeping change to the American educational world and the results have been rather predictable. Debated to a degree, but predictable. Spellings then spent most of her time as a public servant defending her legislative child with mixed results. NCLB has no shortage of critics. Teachers unions are strongly against it. Despite it being the brainchild of their leader, conservatives and Republicans down right hate it, and parents don't know what to make of it.
It's list of problems is relatively long and significant.
- It has a heavy dependence on high stakes testing. It creators and backers claim higher test scores somehow equate to higher achievement but they rarely if ever explain how or why this is so. We are apparently supposed to take it on faith because Margaret Spellings says it's true.
- It is unrealistic. Who, after all, actually believe ALL students will somehow be miraculously made proficient by 2014?
- It is a bill that is strong on flowery title (after all who actually wants to leave a child behind?) and weak on nearly everything else. For example it provides little in the way of actual suggestions on how schools should raise their scores. It simply demands it happen.
- It is a bill aimed at the problems that are rampant in urban schools with high minority populations and that are much less prevalent in other parts of the country and yet it has been applied with a broad and rather sloppy brush to the entire country.
- It has made teaching to the test more important that actual academic achievement
Still, according to testing results many schools appear to be making at least some progress - why complain? Because those results are deceiving in several important ways
- People are making strong connections between NCLB and drop out rates, especially among minority students. Struggling students see no reason to continue, their lower scores are removed from the overall numbers, so.......yes, test scores go up. Achievement? I don't think so.
- Proficiency rates for minorities - the ones Margaret Spelling says are the focus of the bill - remain low and the gap between minorities and white remains high.
- It imposes stakes so high - lost jobs and accreditation - that it encourages schools and teachers to cheat.
My feelings on this are obviously quite strong and I imagine there are many who can make a defense of NCLB that is as vigorous and strong as my critic. However, I think all would agree that NCLB at the least has been one of the hottest and most contentious topic in education in some time and I think a good look - and hopefully revision - of it is way overdue.
I couldn’t help myself, James. I have to respond. First, I don’t agree with your assertion that Spellings was a key author and creator. NCLB’s roots of origin come from Goals 2000.
ReplyDeleteThe authorization of Goals 2000 was based on these agreed fundamental principles:1) all students can learn; 2) lasting improvements depend on school-based leadership; 3) simultaneous top-down and bottom-up reform is necessary; 4) strategies must be locally developed, comprehensive, and coordinated; and 5) the whole community must be involved in developing strategies for system-wide improvement.
Who wrote these fundamental principals that sound so much like NCLB? Goals 2000 was developed by the National Governor’s Association. Two governors at the time who were instrumental in its development will be names you recognize…Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
Goals 2000 was signed into law on March 31, 1994 by President Bill Clinton. http://www.ed.gov/pubs/G2KReforming/g2ch1.html
NCLB is not solely a “Bush idea gone wrong.”
True, Kirsten - I stand corrected. She didn't author it. It was coauthored by Representatives John Boehner (R-OH) and George Miller (D-CA) and Senators Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Ted Kennedy (D-MA). However, she has been one of the loudest and firmest defender of NCLB. She has become it's most visual public face, so I will admit I mis-spoke and instead blame her for backing such a monstrosity with so much vigor.
ReplyDeleteI'd also note that while NCLB is based on Goals 2000, they are not one in the same. Goals 2000 laid out some rather sound principles. It did not in and of itself inflict wide spread change on the educational system. NCLB did. NCLB took rather sound principles and turned them into law that has changed education to it's core and I submit the change has not been good because the authors got it wrong. It's time to take the good from it (yes, I admit there are some things in NCLB that are positive), trash the rest, and create something that does what Goals 2000 was getting at.
As to Bush, I'm a conservative. I voted for the guy twice. I still happen to think that despite what many like to say, the guy did do at least a few things right. However, I don't include NCLB in that list. He didn't write it but he did sign it, he defended it through his presidency, and he appointed a Secretary of Education that made defending it a major part of her job. So while I never did say it was a Bush idea gone wrong, he certainly deserves a good part of the blame for it.
We are only hurting the students that are not doing well as they keep moving ahead. Some students have this notion that no matter what happen I am still not going to repeat a class. Parent and administrators support them. At times you have some students that are not suppose to be in your class, however because of no child left behind he is there with no clue. Next academic year my school will make you to move to Algebra 1B, Geometry even when you fail 1A.I have seen students move to a class where they have no clue. What this means is that we will continue to lower standard until there is no standard to lower. We need to step up and change the system to make some of these students achieve. But how ?is the question .
ReplyDeletePlease understand James I like to play NCLB has ruined schools as much as the next person, but have we not reached a point at which we need to start spending more time accepting it and trying to find ways to do our best despite NCLB?
ReplyDeleteWell, Maria, the short answer is "no, we don't". If we are working under a cumbersome, misdirected, unrealistic system that is causing problems and doing little good I see no reason to simply accept it and do the best we can. I think we should strive for change because in my mind NCLB isn't just another bad idea to be put up with - I think it is destructive.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, because we are the low folks in the pecking order and have little real chance to actually change this, we currently is the exact situation you descibed - we know it's goofed up but are trying to make the best of it because we really have no other choice.
NCLB is something that many people have strong feelings about. Personally I don't think that we have a lot of say in it so I just go along and try to do the best that I can. It is hard because we keep testing the kids and they get so tired of it. I expecially think that it is hard when the standards that we have to meet keep getting harder. I agree that it feels like we are just leaving some kids behind. My school has been very fortunate with meeting AYP every year. I can't imagine what other schools are going to be like if they are struggling to meet it now.
ReplyDeleteI will agree that Bush should accept responsibility for the role he played in NCLB. You make a good point; he signed the law, defended it and appointed a department full of people to carry out rules. He was the President, and "The Buck stops there!"
ReplyDeleteI didn't mean to imply that I believed you said it was a Bush idea gone wrong. I just get tired of too many people taking that position.
well, like I said, Kirsten, I am a conservative (NOT a republican - theres a big difference) and despite the fact Bush found many ways to goof up his presidency I still think he is a decent man and did a number of things right. I get tired of people treating him like the Anti-Christ (and someone else like the second coming) all the time. However, like you, I think he deserved blame for the mess that is NCLB.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments. I always like and apprecuate your comments
Great discussion on this blog topic. I believe the biggest mistake of NCLB was the governments inability to properly separate low-level student achievement scores from larger urban schools districts from those in rural or other school settings.
ReplyDeleteWashington D.C. is focusing on quick fixes, unattainable goals and an easy target - schools and teachers. In my opinion, we can all improve including schools and teachers. However, until we fix whats in the home, improve economic conditions so people have a realistic look at a hopeful future, we are merely running in place.
Hopefully the next great education reform bill will take into account that sweeping legislation usually hurts more than it helps. I don't recall running into any educators in North Dakota who are jumping up and down about this great reform bill called "NCLB." If Washington D.C. wants results, then streamline the bill appropriately, fund it properly, and provide schools with more tools to make a difference in students lives, both during and after school hours.
James,
ReplyDeleteI too believe that NCLB is not working for education and needs some serious tweaking. While I do believe that NCLB encouraged the nation to take a closer look at the education program and for schools to start maintaining some accountability, it still isn't the right program for education. Too much emphasis on testing and making adequate yearly progress has taken well-rounded education out of many schools. And then as Jason stated, "until we fix what's in the home and improve economic conditions..., we are merely running in place." Blame for schools not making AYP can not be placed merely on the schools. Looking back at my own experiences, while not much, has made me realize that two different schools can both have great teachers, but have totally different family dynamics and economic situations, creating a huge margin of differences academically and on those assessment tests. In the cases of communities with huge social and economic disparities, schools and teachers are probably doing their jobs to the best of their abilities. Problem is, there is so much more affecting how students assess. How is NCLB going to fix those issues?
I couldn't help reading each and every response to this topic... However debatable this topic is, it's the schools not meeting AYP and those that virtually don't stand a chance at meeting AYP that will continue to suffer. Our school has also been fortunate enough to meet AYP each year. Great teachers can help make this happen. Where the trouble lies is that not all schools serve the same profile of students. As we are aware, schools serving high numbers of minority students, students with varied learning disabilities, or low socioeconomic status-are the ones that will continue to suffer. Yes, I understand many of these schools receive larger $ amounts...though we know all know throwing money around does not fix the problem. I agree that we need to close the gap somehow and hopefully there are some reforms to come, but for the most part we need to accept it. Yes, there are students that shouldn't be in the grade they are in and in the end they pay the price. Students lose the desire to learn, teachers become frustrated, and the problems seem to get shuffled from one person to the next. Assessments are great tools to find out how our students are doing and the evolution of assessment has allowed us to better serve our students. I think if we use assessments to learn about our students and to find strategies that accommodate their learning needs, we will become a more proficient nation altogether.
ReplyDelete