No Child Left Behind Cited Script 3/18/08 Max, Megan, Jessica Nearly every citizen of the United States has heard those four special words: No Child Left Behind. Many people have heard of this complicated law, but few understand what it means or how it works. This paper will take a look into how this bill came to be, how it works, how it has affected teachers and schools so far, and its tentative future.
History
What many people don’t realize about the No Child Left Behind Act is that when it was signed into law by President George W. Bush on January 8th, 2002 it was not a brand new law that the public had never seen (Anderson 3). It was actually a reauthorization and renaming of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that was originally enacted by Congress in 1965 (Anderson 3). The ESEA was divided into six sections that were labeled as Titles I-VI. The most scrutinized aspect of this law was Title I: “Financial Assistance to Local Educational Agencies for the Education of Children from Low Income Families” (Anderson 3). This section of ESEA, along with its organization into six titles set the precedent for the law that would come later, entitles the No Child Left Behind Act.
What is NCLB?
As stated earlier, the No Child Left Behind Act was a renaming and reauthorization of the earlier 1965 law entitled the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. NCLB retains many of the same themes as its earlier predecessor, such as the emphasis on improving the academic performance of disadvantaged/poor students (Anderson 3). Yet, it sets itself apart from the ESEA because it added “significant accountability requirements for all schools and school districts that require federal funds, not just those with high concentrations of poor children” (Anderson 3). These accountability requirements include having schools make yearly progress through scores on national standardized tests and having teachers be highly qualified in the subjects they teach.
Like the ESEA, NCLB is divided into titles, only this time, it goes all the way up to VIII. Also like the ESEA, the focus of NCLB is Title I, which is aimed at improving the academic achievement of impoverished schools by mandating states to define standards and create assessments in reading and math throughout grades 3-8 (Anderson 3). These assessments have taken the form of national high stakes testing that enable states to monitor yearly progress. Schools that do not make sufficient yearly progress based on their systems of measuring accountability are identified as being ‘in need of improvement’ (Anderson 4). School districts as well as states can then be flagged for improvement based on aggregate test scores (Anderson 4).
If a school does not improve, then its district is mandated to take a series of corrective measures such as allowing students to transfer from one school that is not improving within the district to another (Anderson 4). Schools that continue to struggle will face increasing consequences such as “supplemental services (e.g., subsidized tutors) for students in identified schools and, later, reorganizing the school (or local educational agency) that remains in need of improvement,” (Anderson 4). The rest of the titles are defined as such:
Title II - “Preparing, Training, and Recruiting High Quality Teachers and Principals,”
This section of NCLB details teacher training and recruitment programs as well as specialized curriculum programs (Anderson 4).
Title III - Discusses how to approach teaching immigrant children and children with limited proficiency in English (Anderson 4).
Title IV – “Reauthorizes several school-level programs such as ‘safe and drug-free schools and communities,’ and ‘21st century community learning centers’” (Anderson 4).
Title V – Promotes informed parental choice through the use of charter schools, magnet schools, and voluntary public choice of school programs (Anderson 4).
Title VI – Establishes new degrees of flexibility and transferability of the federal funds available to schools (Anderson 4).
Title VII – Organizes programs for Native American, Native Hawaiian, and Alaskan Native education (Anderson 4).
Title VII – Covers “funds for school systems impacted by the presence of non-taxpaying federal installations” which are known as impact aid (Anderson 4).
Anderson, L. W. (April 4, 2005). The No Child Left Behind Act and the Legacy of Federal Aid to Education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(24), 2-18.
Impact on Education
It’s been over five years since the NCLB was passed. At this point today, the federal government is threatening to withhold funds to any state or district that does not comply; it seems as though the NCLB has become a monster (Houghton 1). Mike Petrilli, a former high-level Bush administration education official, states “I've gradually and reluctantly come to the conclusion that NCLB as enacted is fundamentally flawed and probably beyond repair, it’s a race to the bottom”. Mike isn’t the only one who seems to have this opinion about NCLB.
There are numerous reasons as to why the No Child Left Behind Act is failing. States must increase the number of students who pass their tests each year, eventually requiring all students to achieve “proficiency” by 2014 (Ladner 1). NCLB, in essence, will require all students to pass all tests, or else the federal government will sanction those schools. It seems as though the act is working against the schools rather than with them. To avoid those sanctions, states have already begun to lower their standards when it comes to testing students (Houghton 1). Most states have simply lowered their expectations for testing. They do this by reducing the number of questions students have to get right in order to pass.
For example, the Georgia Department of Education released data showing that 16 of 40 questions on the third grade reading test were fairly easy, and about 75 percent or more of the students got them right. Though, students only had to answer 17 of 40 questions correctly to pass and advance to the fourth grade. In Texas, students need to correctly answer only 29 of 60 questions in order to pass the math section of the accountability exam (Ladner 1). With statistics like this, how accountable will this act be in another five years down the line? If school standards continue to drop, what other standards in society will be affected as well?
This act has already had a major impact on school personal. Each area of teaching and grade level teachers must meet the criteria in their classrooms. Some examples include all K-3 teachers must teach all children how to read. If the student isn’t learning, the teacher must find a new way of teaching the student. The teachers also must use research based methods of teaching, but many states do not require this, so only under the NCLB act is this required. Teachers teaching elementary grades must teach math, reading and science at higher levels of learning. Middle school and high school teachers must meet the new “highly qualified” ways of teaching (Heath 1). These are just a few examples of how the NCLB act is affecting teachers. Some feel it will help the teacher’s be more qualified for their job, while others disagree. Many people are against this act, and as of right now there is no plan for the bill to be renewed in the future.
Future of the Bill
Five and half years after the NCLB was enacted, it is going through Congress to try and get it renewed. The changes that have been made in the bill according to George Miller Hon chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor U.S. House of Representatives include: “a new direction by six key things: Provide much-needed fairness and flexibility, encourage a rich and challenging learning environment and promote best practices and innovation taking place in schools throughout the country, support teachers and principles, continue to hold schools accountable for student’s progress, join the effort to improve America’s high schools and lastly invest in our schools”( Hon 4).
“As of right now the bill has not been passed, but government officials believe, that President Bush will try and get it renewed before upcoming the fall election” remarks David J Hoff of Education Week (Hoff 2). When and if the bill does get passed it will affect all future teachers. There will be more requirements and stricter policies involved in hiring new teachers along with the increased competition to get teacher positions (Hoff 2). Also according to the Civil Rights Groups and Teachers Fight NCLB Renewal website, “Pay raises and bonuses would be directly related to improved test scores”. All of the changes are going to have a great affect on our jobs as future teachers.
Bibliography
Anderson, L. W. (April 4, 2005). The No Child Left Behind Act and the Legacy of Federal Aid to Education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(24), 2-18.
“Civil Rights Groups and Teachers Fight NCLB Renewal” .11 Sep 2007. http://educationportal.com/articles/Civil_Rights_Groups_and_Teachers_Fight_N CLB_Renewal.html
Hon, George Miller. “Chairman miller remarks in the future of the no child left behind education law”. Committee on education and labor U.S house of representatives. 30 July 2007. http://edworkforce.house.gov/micro/nclb.html
Cited Script
3/18/08
Max, Megan, Jessica
Nearly every citizen of the United States has heard those four special words: No Child Left Behind. Many people have heard of this complicated law, but few understand what it means or how it works. This paper will take a look into how this bill came to be, how it works, how it has affected teachers and schools so far, and its tentative future.
History
What many people don’t realize about the No Child Left Behind Act is that when it was signed into law by President George W. Bush on January 8th, 2002 it was not a brand new law that the public had never seen (Anderson 3). It was actually a reauthorization and renaming of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that was originally enacted by Congress in 1965 (Anderson 3). The ESEA was divided into six sections that were labeled as Titles I-VI. The most scrutinized aspect of this law was Title I: “Financial Assistance to Local Educational Agencies for the Education of Children from Low Income Families” (Anderson 3). This section of ESEA, along with its organization into six titles set the precedent for the law that would come later, entitles the No Child Left Behind Act.
What is NCLB?
As stated earlier, the No Child Left Behind Act was a renaming and reauthorization of the earlier 1965 law entitled the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. NCLB retains many of the same themes as its earlier predecessor, such as the emphasis on improving the academic performance of disadvantaged/poor students (Anderson 3). Yet, it sets itself apart from the ESEA because it added “significant accountability requirements for all schools and school districts that require federal funds, not just those with high concentrations of poor children” (Anderson 3). These accountability requirements include having schools make yearly progress through scores on national standardized tests and having teachers be highly qualified in the subjects they teach.
Like the ESEA, NCLB is divided into titles, only this time, it goes all the way up to VIII. Also like the ESEA, the focus of NCLB is Title I, which is aimed at improving the academic achievement of impoverished schools by mandating states to define standards and create assessments in reading and math throughout grades 3-8 (Anderson 3). These assessments have taken the form of national high stakes testing that enable states to monitor yearly progress. Schools that do not make sufficient yearly progress based on their systems of measuring accountability are identified as being ‘in need of improvement’ (Anderson 4). School districts as well as states can then be flagged for improvement based on aggregate test scores (Anderson 4).
If a school does not improve, then its district is mandated to take a series of corrective measures such as allowing students to transfer from one school that is not improving within the district to another (Anderson 4). Schools that continue to struggle will face increasing consequences such as “supplemental services (e.g., subsidized tutors) for students in identified schools and, later, reorganizing the school (or local educational agency) that remains in need of improvement,” (Anderson 4). The rest of the titles are defined as such:
Title II - “Preparing, Training, and Recruiting High Quality Teachers and Principals,”
This section of NCLB details teacher training and recruitment programs as well as specialized curriculum programs (Anderson 4).
Title III - Discusses how to approach teaching immigrant children and children with limited proficiency in English (Anderson 4).
Title IV – “Reauthorizes several school-level programs such as ‘safe and drug-free schools and communities,’ and ‘21st century community learning centers’” (Anderson 4).
Title V – Promotes informed parental choice through the use of charter schools, magnet schools, and voluntary public choice of school programs (Anderson 4).
Title VI – Establishes new degrees of flexibility and transferability of the federal funds available to schools (Anderson 4).
Title VII – Organizes programs for Native American, Native Hawaiian, and Alaskan Native education (Anderson 4).
Title VII – Covers “funds for school systems impacted by the presence of non-taxpaying federal installations” which are known as impact aid (Anderson 4).
Anderson, L. W. (April 4, 2005). The No Child Left Behind Act and the Legacy of Federal Aid to Education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(24), 2-18.
Impact on Education
It’s been over five years since the NCLB was passed. At this point today, the federal government is threatening to withhold funds to any state or district that does not comply; it seems as though the NCLB has become a monster (Houghton 1). Mike Petrilli, a former high-level Bush administration education official, states “I've gradually and reluctantly come to the conclusion that NCLB as enacted is fundamentally flawed and probably beyond repair, it’s a race to the bottom”. Mike isn’t the only one who seems to have this opinion about NCLB.
There are numerous reasons as to why the No Child Left Behind Act is failing. States must increase the number of students who pass their tests each year, eventually requiring all students to achieve “proficiency” by 2014 (Ladner 1). NCLB, in essence, will require all students to pass all tests, or else the federal government will sanction those schools. It seems as though the act is working against the schools rather than with them. To avoid those sanctions, states have already begun to lower their standards when it comes to testing students (Houghton 1). Most states have simply lowered their expectations for testing. They do this by reducing the number of questions students have to get right in order to pass.
For example, the Georgia Department of Education released data showing that 16 of 40 questions on the third grade reading test were fairly easy, and about 75 percent or more of the students got them right. Though, students only had to answer 17 of 40 questions correctly to pass and advance to the fourth grade. In Texas, students need to correctly answer only 29 of 60 questions in order to pass the math section of the accountability exam (Ladner 1). With statistics like this, how accountable will this act be in another five years down the line? If school standards continue to drop, what other standards in society will be affected as well?
This act has already had a major impact on school personal. Each area of teaching and grade level teachers must meet the criteria in their classrooms. Some examples include all K-3 teachers must teach all children how to read. If the student isn’t learning, the teacher must find a new way of teaching the student. The teachers also must use research based methods of teaching, but many states do not require this, so only under the NCLB act is this required. Teachers teaching elementary grades must teach math, reading and science at higher levels of learning. Middle school and high school teachers must meet the new “highly qualified” ways of teaching (Heath 1). These are just a few examples of how the NCLB act is affecting teachers. Some feel it will help the teacher’s be more qualified for their job, while others disagree. Many people are against this act, and as of right now there is no plan for the bill to be renewed in the future.
Future of the Bill
Five and half years after the NCLB was enacted, it is going through Congress to try and get it renewed. The changes that have been made in the bill according to George Miller Hon chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor U.S. House of Representatives include: “a new direction by six key things: Provide much-needed fairness and flexibility, encourage a rich and challenging learning environment and promote best practices and innovation taking place in schools throughout the country, support teachers and principles, continue to hold schools accountable for student’s progress, join the effort to improve America’s high schools and lastly invest in our schools”( Hon 4).
“As of right now the bill has not been passed, but government officials believe, that President Bush will try and get it renewed before upcoming the fall election” remarks David J Hoff of Education Week (Hoff 2). When and if the bill does get passed it will affect all future teachers. There will be more requirements and stricter policies involved in hiring new teachers along with the increased competition to get teacher positions (Hoff 2). Also according to the Civil Rights Groups and Teachers Fight NCLB Renewal website, “Pay raises and bonuses would be directly related to improved test scores”. All of the changes are going to have a great affect on our jobs as future teachers.
Bibliography
Anderson, L. W. (April 4, 2005). The No Child Left Behind Act and the Legacy of Federal Aid to Education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(24), 2-18.
“Civil Rights Groups and Teachers Fight NCLB Renewal” .11 Sep 2007.
http://educationportal.com/articles/Civil_Rights_Groups_and_Teachers_Fight_N CLB_Renewal.html
Heath, Suzanne. “No Child Left Behind Act: What Teachers, Principles and SchoolAdministrators Need to Know.” 2008.
http://www.wrightslaw.com/info/nclb.teachers.admins.htm
Hoff J, David. “2007 NCLB Prospects are Fading”. Campaign for the Civic Mission Schools, Educating for Democracy. 6 Nov. 2007. http://civicmissionofschools.org/site/news/civiclearningnews/11.6.07.edweek.htm
Hon, George Miller. “Chairman miller remarks in the future of the no child left behind education law”. Committee on education and labor U.S house of representatives. 30 July 2007. http://edworkforce.house.gov/micro/nclb.html
Houghton, Kristen. “NCLB Five Years Later”. 2008.
http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art36261.asp
Ladner, Matthew. “No Child Left Behind: Reform in need of Reform”. 28 Jan. 2007.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,247322,00.html