Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd actually argue that it is not good in theory, either.
The entire notion that high stakes testing would increase performance in our schools without increasing drop out rates was predicated on falsified data.
NCLB pretty much works exactly the way a full consideration of the theory would suggest that it would, and had Houston's real information been available, I doubt it would ever have been proposed, or passed if proposed.
It's just hard to get Congress to say "we screwed up."
I meant the theory of trying to do something to improve education, not the theory of doing it through high stakes testing.
The interesting thing about NCLB is the number of Conservative and Liberally minded folks who believe that it is a failure.
My high school went from being one of the worst in the district (the district has about fifteen high schools) in the early 1980's to one of the best before the end of the Millennium. And all without the help of NCLB.
One thing about NCLB that is creepy is that it requires schools to submit the name, address, and phone number of every child enrolled to military recruiters and colleges unless the child/parents opt out.
You can imagine that this was the thinking that led to NCLB:
1) Something had to be done to address the dismal performance of American students (especially in the STEM) relative to the rest of the developed nations.
2) It was necessary to hold low-performing schools accountable.
3) The view was that low-performing schools were not doing well because the teachers were not doing their jobs.
4) And it was tought that there is nothing like the threat of preceptorship or the threat of reorganization to make admins and teachers accountable.
While I agree with (1) and (2), I think it is simplistic to assume that the teacher is the key to the problems that ails all low-performing schools.
But let's assume -for the sake of discussion- that (3) is true, our experience is that (4) does work to make changes - but the changes was in teaching to the test to artificially increase student performance.
Since we understand that student performance is not necessarily equivalent to student learning, the question I have then is: why couldn't we develop better assessments so that student performance on test IS equivalent to student learning?
If teachers (as a result of NCLB) are going to teach to the test, then let's make the test truly representative of learning. If we do this, the theories of NCLB might actually work in practice.
Take a look at any question in any sample NCLB test. I think you wil agree that these questions are either: (a) something a student can memorize without understanding, or (b) something that can be solved using a protocol - which the student memorizes and practice the heck out of, but don't necessarily have to understand the principles behind the protocol.
So, let's make tests that require the students to THINK. This will then require (if teachers are forced by NCLB to teach to the test) the teachers to teach students how to think - not memorize or practice protocols.
Test performance then becomes truly representative of the students' learning. And NCLB may still work. Or at least, American students will be thinkingcitizens.
We'll probably keep it b/c of the "sunk cost theory." That is, we already spent a bunch of money on it, so we ought to try to make it work. I call it the "no child gets ahead" law.
The way I see it public education was failing before the testing and failing after the testing. It came about as a solution to the failing public schools really as a way of trying to save them.Like most government programs it fails but who knows what otherwsie may have happened to public schools in many areas.Like many programs it was meant to get funding to the areas that needed it most. The courts have long ruled that public educastion funding was unconstitutional as it concentrated funding in schools unequallly.Rememeber when federal dollars were actually federal AID and districts; states provided most of the funding.
I think it's a big failure. I hope Obama does away with it
It's my understanding that he will have it rewritten because NCLB is written into law.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
