Sat 14 May 2005
I am sitting in a room with three children. These children are 17 years old. One does not speak English, and when we give her a Gujarati dictionary, she does not seem to know how to hold it, but she smiles pleasantly and looks at her test book studiously as I read her the test questions. Another spends over half an hour painfully struggling to read a one and a half page story in order to answer questions on it. She slides her finger under the words, and frequently looks up in frustration. I nod at her encouragingly and she returns to work. The third is finished in under 15 minutes but he does not appear to have actually read a single one of the questions. Every one of these children is classified with a specific learning disability (and in the case of the first, also as an English language learner). Every one of these children must pass the rigorous three day state test that I am currently proctoring. Otherwise, it means we’ve left them behind.
Behind WHAT?
A brief primer in No Child Left Behind. NCLB was the education plan on which Bush campaigned in 2000. It was based upon the success of a similar plan in Texas, affectionately known as the “Houston Miracle” - which by the way NEVER HAPPENED (for more information see this article). NCLB was the first piece of domestic legislation passed after 9/11, and it was passed with bipartisan support because it sounded so appealing.
While there are certainly many admirable provisions in this law (most of which were never funded, but that’s a cry for another day), the most notable provision is the testing provision. By the year 2015, every child is to be passing a state level test at every grade level. There are gradual benchmarks set up for each year that passes. Currently, schools must maintain pass rates of 85%. That may not sound difficult. However, the schools are required to reach that benchmark in ever subgroup. Subgroups include, but are not limited to: children with disabilities, English language learners, and students with low SES. This means that 85% of ESL students must pass the state tests. 85% of special ed students must pass the state tests.
Now I am not a special educator, nor do I teach ESL. And as I look around the room at this group of students, there is not one of the three of them who I would be willing to leave behind. But as I watch them struggle through this test which is entirely beyond their cognitive capacity, I have to ask myself how this test can possibly be keeping them on track.
The very name “No Child Left Behind” is an artifact of the spin upon which this law was based. Born out of Rod Paige’s own lies and deceit, this law purports to help children by increasing accountability. The underlying assumption is that teachers, by default, are doing something wrong. Personally I find this insulting. More significant than my personal reaction, though, is the inherent lack of logic in this argument. Even if teachers are doing something wrong, increasing the accountability of teachers can only be done by observing, assessing, and educating teachers, not by testing children. How can a child’s test scores accurately assess a teacher’s performance when there are so many other variables which affect the test score? And this assumption that positive results on a three day test once a year will somehow prove that children are being better served is absurd. Good teaching involves working with students to meet their individual needs, based on their goals and abilities. Good teaching is not one size fits all.
This is not a measure designed to help children. This is a measure designed to punish teachers, to punish schools, and ultimately it will punish children. This is a law designed to label schools as “failing” when they are unable to achieve the stated goal with the available resources. Logic would indicate that such schools need more resources. The law would give them less.
The children in the library with me, like all children, deserve more than more tests. They deserve functional career education, character development, civics education, divergent thinking, socialization. The project of public education is developing an educated citizenry, helping to build a population responsible for its own democracy.
Unfortunately, I’m afraid, these days that is what’s being left behind.
May 15th, 2005 at 9:34 pm
I know little about the details and intricacies of NCLB. But I suspect the entire legislation is nothing more than a ruse. For what purpose? So Bush/Republicans/Etc. can claim that they passed legislation to help our educational system (with a soft and fuzzy Orwellian name they can repeat over and over again). It is an accomplishment they can read off on 30 second ads and campaign stops devoid of criticism. Thus, no need to actually fund the program and raise taxes.
Once we get into the lack of funding and the need to raise governmental revenues (or reappropriate them) to support NCLB, the conversation gets too long and complex for corporate media to discuss. There are too many issues. First, NCLB itself has serious problems (as raised by this article), but I’m sure a talking head can blabber good things about it for several minutes on CNN. Accountability? Good. We shouldn’t waste money on failing schools, we owe it to the children, etc etc. Then the Democrat can either raise excellent (and fairly obvious) criticisms or, in many cases, agree. Secondly, the Democrat or journalist will ask about funding NCLB. That opens the door to finger pointing between Democrats and Republicans. The Republican will say it is possible to cut more taxes and still fund education. Democrats will say we can’t cut anymore taxes, but won’t dare say that we need to raise them (and will instead criticise tax cuts already made), and then say that NCLB is an unfunded mandate. And since the corporate media prefers to report on politics as strategic battles rather than as debates on policies, this finger-pointing will be encouraged. Then Jeff Greenfield will talk about how interesting it is that the Republicans take X strategy and the Democrats take Y strategy. He’ll then speculate about how the American people will react to parties’s stances on the issue, rather than provide meaningful analysis of the policies and facts behind the debate.
Jeff Greenfield and his ilk are simply sports commentators, treating political parties like teams. There could be a role for this commentary, if success in politics was an accurate reflection of a party’s ability to apprise and address the real needs and desires of the people. But when success in politics is the result of PR (propaganda) and ignorance, then we cannot treat politics like a sporting event, as parties may be successful because of their ability to dupe people or make them apathetic.
But in the end, the Republicans get to say they passed legislation to reform and save our educational system. Kids may learn less because of it, but knowing why takes analysis. I we figure it out before the consequences on our society make it clear.
May 15th, 2005 at 11:27 pm
People are a lot easier to control when they all think the same.
May 16th, 2005 at 12:23 pm
Just came across this-
“Buried deep within the No Child Left Behind Act is a provision that requires public high schools to hand over private student information to military recruiters. The purpose of this invasion of family privacy is to allow minor students to be recruited at home by telephone calls, mail and personal visits. If a school does not comply, it risks losing vital federal education funds. The only way to keep your children’s contact information from military recruiters, is to submit an “opt-out” letter in writing to your school district’s superintendent.
This provision known as section 9528 was inserted with almost no debate into the No Child Left Behind Act by Rep. David Vitter of Louisiana, who learned from the Pentagon that many public schools had strict privacy policies protecting student information from being released to any outside parties, thus preventing aggressive military recruiting.”
June 15th, 2005 at 12:22 pm
The NCLB uses STATE REQUIREMENTS for education. If a school is failing, then they are failing in the state requirements.
The NCLB monitors progress based on what the state expects. If you want federal funds, change the state requirements or get different educators.
June 15th, 2005 at 8:56 pm
Ah, it’s funny that you say this. It’s funny because in my particular state the state test is significantly harder than it is in some states. And we’re saying, why are we working our butts off on this when other states are practically having kids play candyland and getting federal funding. We should just make our tests easier, right?
Well, is that really what you want us to be doing? Standardized tests were not designed for everyone to pass them. They were designed to generate certain stastical truths. If 100% of students pass a test, technically that means it’s a really bad test. Education statistics 101.
Besides, “change the state requirements” is certainly easier said than done. I’m not a state government, last time I checked.
And if this continues, getting different educators may be what the people in charge have to do. Although, I have no idea where you’d find them.
June 15th, 2005 at 9:10 pm
And just to be clear, while the state designs the test and sets the standards for “passing” vs. “failing,” the federal law itself indicates the benchmarks of progress and establishes the 100% pass goal
July 17th, 2005 at 10:45 am
The NCLB provisions are well written and to the media sound wonderful. I know some of the provisions are meant to be good, too. One in particular is the flexibility of funding this sounds wonderful…one question though, where do you think it will all be put? Toward the subgroup populations that do not have the background, experiences, or abilities to think like the tests are designed to think like. Ensuring that every child can read by third grade—Yes a wonderful goal to attain. Once again what about the limited English students that move in during first grade. Yes they get the three year exemption however they are still a year and a half behind. If you have ever tried learning a second language you know the older you are when learning it the more difficult it will be and guess what IT TAKES LONGER! I am a teacher in Texas in a grade where the passing standard must be met in order to be promoted to the next grade. I am also very much for ALL students reading at or above grade level by the third grade. I am also smart enough to know EVERY child does not and WILL NOT EVER learn at the exact same pace regardless of the teacher or school. Therefore holding schools and teachers accountable for the one day, exam results is not a precise accountability measure for either. Nor is it fair to the students. So lets create an education plan that lets teachers teach! The students hate school because it’s testing, testing, testing! Come in my classroom at any time and I promise you will not see a game of Candyland going on at any time and you will find my students like learning because because they know I care about ALL of them and want ALL of them to succeed in life NOT just on a test! NCLB wants the students to prove they can read a scenario and answer some higher order thinking type questions that in my opinion says nothing about them out in the real world! There are so many other ways to hold teachers and school accountable!
August 3rd, 2005 at 7:45 pm
[…] I wrote a long comment with a similar sentiment under Melissa’s excellent post on No Child Left Behind from back in the infancy (a few months ago) of this blog. I dig on Jeff Greenfield (in a hypothetical manner) instead of Bill Schneider, but either will do. I also point out how such reporting tends to support PR-driven, contrived, and empty policy, as well as PR-driven, contrived, empty politicians. Here’s what I wrote in full (though not very well written… hey, it was just a comment): I know little about the details and intricacies of NCLB. But I suspect the entire legislation is nothing more than a ruse. For what purpose? So Bush/Republicans/Etc. can claim that they passed legislation to help our educational system (with a soft and fuzzy Orwellian name they can repeat over and over again). It is an accomplishment they can read off on 30 second ads and campaign stops devoid of criticism. Thus, no need to actually fund the program and raise taxes. […]
December 21st, 2006 at 5:22 am
just test soft-a
)))
March 14th, 2007 at 10:35 am
Good site! I found in google.com +
April 13th, 2007 at 11:49 am
hi nice site.
May 1st, 2007 at 9:28 pm
May 2nd, 2007 at 9:28 am
May 31st, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Frankly, the way things are right now, I’m not sure I’d want to play myself in my very own movie of the week.
http://lesbi.blogcu.com/2916509/ Anal lesbian ass
June 6th, 2007 at 8:22 pm
What a good site! I think it wasnt easy to post here so much information. Thank you, I will add it to my bookmarks
June 14th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
hi all.
April 28th, 2008 at 2:43 am
Wow, cool man, big thanks! http://jfxsukceoigbi.com