NCLB was just a trojan horse to deem all public schools as "failing." When they're deemed as "failing," the anti-public schools forces would demand they all be defunded.

Then, children would be free to work in factories again.

NCLB should be completely scrapped. It does nothing good except give money to standardized testing companies. Meanwhile, the tests both destroy time-tested instruction methods in favor of teaching to the tests while also depriving children of subjects like art and physical education.

It's indefensible. There's nothing good in it at all. It was a waste of money just another G.W. Bush Administration program to force governments to give money to cronies. Follow the money.

by Cavan on Oct 27, 2011 3:51 pm  

I don't think anyone would argue that ALL of the elements of the law be tossed (you mention some good points, to be sure) But it's reliance on standardized tests as the end-all, be-all of the educational experience is highly problematic and ultimately doesn't really do anything to contribute to a child’s education. It doesn’t give us better schools or better teachers, or better educated kids. It gives us test taking factories, test overseers, and kids taught to take a test. What good does that do?

Accountability is fine but we have to get away from nonsensical notions that we can quantitatively measure the whole breadth of the educational experience, and then reward or punish the overworked, underpaid people who are part of the system based on those results. Kids learn in different ways. Teachers teach in different ways. It's not a bad thing.

When I was in fifth grade (public school) our teacher had a fantastic program to teach about explorers and exploration. She had a "time machine" (a really cool cardboard box with aluminum foil) and each student was assigned an explorer. We had to come to class dressed as the explorer and then interact with the class (after the appropriate amount of travel through the space-time continuum, of course). It was awesome and super fun and we all learned a lot (I still remember my explorer—Cortez). Guess what? She doesn't do that anymore. No time. Now it's all test tests tests. Hours and hours of teaching to tests, more like it. Reading books and discussing them takes time; instead why not just have kids recite vocabulary words ad nauseum for hours on end. Sounds like so much fun.

What's the point in knowing what a word means if you never get to enjoy the raw power of language as conveyed through literature? To borrow from your analogy above, what good is it if you are quarterback with a rocket for an arm but you lack the creative thinking needed to know where to throw the ball, or how to react to the chaos of a broken play? Where is creativity, critical-thinking, or problem measured in those standardized tests? Yes, those skills might not be something that is directly taught, but it something learned/acquired through the educational experience. Or at least they used to be. Now it’s about reciting by rote vocabulary words and multiplication tables. Great. Now can you do anything with that?

Learning is more than teaching kids to be cogs in some standardized-test crazed factory. It's about critical thinking and problem solving…and there’s no reason it can’t be accomplished in a fun, challenging, exciting way. Maybe in our society of lies and illusions, saying all of our kids score well on a test is enough to let us continue pretending that the deep problems of poverty, racism, wealth inequities, lack of jobs and opportunities, etc, aren't that big of deal. I think our democracy suffers because a lazy, uniformed populace lacks either the desire or intelligence to hold those who claim to act on our behalf accountable. Maybe teaching kids how language works (or, more importantly, engaging with kids in the learning experience, since real learning is always an interactive process between teacher and student), and how to see through its manipulations, is more important than knowing the antonyms of every word in Webster’s Dictionary.

I'm not saying all of the aspects of the law are bad, and I can agree that minority communities especially have a right to demand more from the schools that claim to serve them (especially safe schools—my God…I know a school can’t control the streets around it but how hard is it to maintain a safe environment within the school?) But I think any law that relies so much on the flawed premise that a standardized test is the measure of success or failure really, really needs to be re-considered.

I'm also highly skeptical of the laws demands of "accountability." I see the law as a sly means to break a core Democratic constituency (teachers unions) which is why it is all the more egregious that Teddy Kennedy allowed himself to be used as a pawn by the Bush administration to sell the law. The law should not have allowed to be put in place without the necessary funds to see it through, period. So now we get the measures we can use to bash teachers without giving them any of the tools they need to meet the (however absurd) mandates of the law. Great. Yes, there are bad teachers. Yes, educational bureaucracies are often bloated, waste-filled chasms, and we as a society shouldn’t accept that. But there are also generational cycles of poverty that no amount of standardized testing is ever going to solve. Poor test scores not the cause of poverty, or the lack of jobs, or income disparity, just another sad piece of evidence of their existence.

The law is bad, even if it might have a few good points. We should not be sad to see it go.

by drk5 on Oct 27, 2011 4:56 pm  

NCLB has done nothing to increase the likelihood that schools use methods that will lead to greater success. instead, we get teaching to tests (if not cheating) and a continuation of the faddishness that has always been typical of American education (public and private). Parents, educators and administrators all share in the blame. Frequent testing actually undermines what you test and changes in test scores have to be considered in relation to what happens in the schools. Teacher evaluations, like those of most white collar employees don't have the kinds of inputs that allow really close attention to what individual teachers do well or need where they need remediation. NCLB only makes sense if the education process is treated as something other than a blackbox that somehow will get fixed by harrassing teachers' unions and greenlighting charters whose ideas (and outcomes) are no better than regular schools and support isn't provided to actually implement what works.

by Rich on Oct 27, 2011 11:16 pm  

Two words: growth models.

NCLB naively equated student performance with school performance. You have to separate the part of student achievement that was affected by teachers and students in the most recent year from all the other stuff that teachers and schools can't control. Using growth instead of proficiency rates would be a huge improvement. You can still report proficiency rates and do it by subgroup, but for accountability of adults you need the growth measure.

by Ward 1 Guy on Oct 28, 2011 9:04 am  

I understand the need for accountability, and fair, accurate measurements implies standardized, scientifically grounded assessments. While I understand that no one likes taking tests, I think credit should be given to those states and districts who have worked to bridge the gap between accountability testing and classroom instruction. There are several states that have begun using computer adaptive testing. These tests take less time for students, and they give teachers instant data on their students' performance. They students can take three short tests throughout the year so that teachers can track performance and adjust instruction. Some of the companies that make these tests also link the results to instructional resources that teachers can weave into their daily instruction if they want to. I like this approach to accountability--to make tests as short as possible and to provide data feedback to teachers, not just administrators and policy makers. I think these are good examples of how an accountability system should work: you can have good tests that can help teachers and still have plenty of time for instruction of all subjects. Unfortunately, not every state (or district that should be a state) has been able to implement such systems.

I think we should also be careful about attributing NCLB to the Bush administration. While it was passed during this period, the research and political foundation for NCLB began during the Clinton years. I know it's handy to equate something we don't like to a president we may not be that fond of, but NCLB probably would have come to pass no matter who was in the White House--it had backing from both sides of the aisle.

by Austin DC on Oct 28, 2011 9:57 am  

@Austin DC: well said.

by Ward 1 Guy on Oct 28, 2011 11:44 am