NCLB act

[teach64angel]

i was just wondering how everyone felt about the "no child left behind" act. the teacher i worked for did not like it at all and said it was one of the reasons why she decided to teach at a private school.

i'm just wondering how you all feel about the progam. is it really that bad???:idontknow:

[David]

Would you be able to tell me a little more about the act please?

[dsmms]

Would you be able to tell me a little more about the act please?

I think you may prefer a good poke in eye with a sharp stick!

[lynn bambusch]

David, basically, this is a new federal law in the United States. It says that teachers must be Highly Qualified to teach their subject area. This sounds good, but the truth is, many of us, older teachers, received minors in certain subjects (mine being sociology and English) and I am suddenly not qualified to teach those areas. Also, it says that "all children will be functioning at grade level by 2011", or around then. The problem is, this law was not written with Special Education students in mind. Students with disabilities are expected to be "at grade level", even if their disability says they may NEVER get there. I work with students with the disability of Emotional Impairment (or Emotional Disturbed, depending on your state). The definition of this disability is: Student do not achieve at the level expected (by their IQs) because their behavior interfers with their learning". So, according to No Child Left Behind, if my students achieve at grade level, I must have cured them! I wish I was that good! They must take state assessments without accomodations, except in their disability area. So, if I have a 6th grade student, who is reading at a 2nd grade level (do to his inability to learn because of behavior), he still has to read the test written at a sixth grade level.
So it is a law, written by non-educators, full of hoops we have to jump through and even though the intention was good, it is flawed beyond belief. They have taken away subjects I used to be qualified to teach, many teachers who were working in their minor areas, for as much as 20 years, suddenly had to retire, or shift to major areas which they had never taught, and it throws Special Education students to the wind.
At least that is my opinion of it. I hate anything that makes my students' self esteem crash!

[dsmms]

Lynn, your response was waaaaaay better than a poke in the eye! When I was an intern, No Child Left Behind was introduced synonomously with No Teacher Left Standing.

I posted the following awhile back. I think the comparison is thought provoking.

No Child Left Behind: The Football Version
Author Unknown*

l. All teams must make the state playoffs, and all will win the championship. If a team does not win the championship, they will be on probation until they are the champions, and coaches will be held accountable.

2. All kids will be expected to have the same football skills at the same time and in the same conditions. No exceptions will be made for interest in football, a desire to perform athletically, or genetic abilities or disabilities. ALL KIDS WILL PLAY FOOTBALL AT A PROFICIENT LEVEL

3. Talented players will be asked to work out on their own without instruction. This is because the coaches will be using all their instructional time with the athletes who aren't interested in football, have limited athletic ability, or whose parents don't like football.

4. Games will be played year round, but statistics will only be kept in the 4th, 8th, and 11th games.

5. This will create a New Age of sports where every school is expected to have the same level of talent and all teams will reach the same minimal goals.

If no child gets ahead, then no child will be left behind.

I thought you all would enjoy this! I did!

[David]

wow what a law. What does highly qualified mean? I know here in Australia there are subject areas where you can't get qualified people so some teachers are just forced into that subject area. It would be lovely if every child could be brought up to grade level, but also impossible. How unrealistic are the makers of this law?I know who should be poked in both eyes with a stick.

[SiobhanMarie]

Hehe. This has made me outrage and laugh at the same time. Thank-you for sharing this! I do indeed remember teachers, such as my high school drama teacher not being qualified but we just simply didn't have anyone else to do it so she was it... same with my Home Economics teacher too.

In all honesty, I think that a law that generalises all people in one category isn't right, because there will always be exceptions and other people that won't 'fit', and I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing.

[Brit]

ah, so that's what all the fuss is about. We in canada seem to be following the path of the US a few years behind...I shudder to think what the NCLB act will look like when it gets here...

highly qualified, my foot. I have a BA honours majoring in both English and history. Neither makes me even remotely a better primary teacher in either area. just because I have the piece of paper that says I know all about literature doesn't mean I know how to toeach reading. And honestly, curriculum has very little corrispondence to what I studied in university -- I'm learning all new things for everything that I teach! Well, except for our little unit on desconstruction in the media. I'm a little sick, thinking that we're actually expected to be teaching deconstruction in grade 2 (seriously...it's the media literacy piece of language arts...go check it out)...

and really, what do they think we're TRYING to do in the classroom, as it is? are we not TRYING to get all kids to grade level? Hanging a sword over our heads isn't going to make us do a better job. It's just going to make us move out of the way. Then where will the states be? great big sword, no teachers.

[teach64angel]

wow...i didn't realize the NCLB was like that. i wonder if obama is going to do away with it??

i'm curious if it anyone could make changes to it, what would they be??

[Clearly Canadian]

Our assistant principal went to a conference at our head office last month, and one of the associate superintendents quoted research he had found. I can't tell you what the source was, as I only got the information 2nd hand, but generally the research showed the following: If you take teachers who have poor to average teaching skills, but who have amazing rapport and connections with students, and compare their results to teachers who have average to superior teaching skills, teach with all the bells and whistles, the students with the poor to average teachers will do as well and in some cases better than the students paired with the "amazing" skill set teachers. The relationships teachers have with students are just as if not more important than their knowledge base or their teaching skill. Our principal, often reminds us we are in a "human industry" we are not cranking out widgets, nor are we as educators the ones to decide who are the winners and who are the losers. Those who create policies like NCLB have either never been in a classroom or have been out of one for so long, they have forgotten the impact that people can have on one another, and that numbers, grades, standardized testing, don't reflect that. It's shameful, actually.

Brit, you are right, there are shades of NCLB appearing in different provinces to different degrees. Education here is run by the province, not by a federal department, so the direction for ed. is set by the provincial gov't. Here in Alberta, the focus has been on establishing best assessment practice, with lots of discussion about how students can demonstrate their learning. The focus our school division is taking for the next three years is 21st century learning, planning, assessing. Lots of buzz words, but the money is lacking (as always). This is all part of our AISI (Alberta Initiative for School Improvement) program. Dribbling down from that, we have now had to assign a comment to our English and Math programs, outlining whether students are "at", "above" or "below" grade level in those two subjects. As well this year in our school division we had to give all grade 7 students in our division a standardized skills/apptitudes test, which was then marked at our Head Office, but I have yet to see the results of.

I wondered too if Obama would undo some of the damage caused by NCLB. Was it part of his campaign promise? Are there parts educators would choose to keep?

[Brit]

yes, in Ontario, we're going the way of Standardized testing, too. We have the EQAO, a standardized test for grades 3 and 6 which no one likes, and there's a huge push in literacy and numeracy. You can see how each school and each board ranks online, and whether their scores have gone up and down each year, and how they compare with the province. One of the big complaints is that we're comparing cohorts, though, and they're not necessarily comparable. Another is the adminstration and marking of the EQAO. it's not really as standardized as it ought to be. There's also a push for data collection, especially in reading. I like the system, but to do it properly, we really need more time, and for the data collection, I feel as a new teacher that I want my numbers double-checked by someone with more experience. It seems odd to me that we teach and we assess and we hand in our numbers, and no one ever checks our numbers. I'd like to KNOW that I'm accurate, based on outside information, not just doing my best with a system that I feel is full of judgement calls. I'm too new to know if my judgement is on or off in some cases! Beyond that, I could hand in any numbers I liked. An unscrupulous teacher could hand in any numbers to make themselves look good, and no one would ever check them.

But whatever. there's no money to support those of us who are still learning, and there's no time for admin to check these things, and I guess that once you feel sure of yourself it's nice to be trusted like this...

now I'm just blabbering. Yes, shades of NCLB are showing up in Ontario,too.

[Daddyman]

I'm wonder if education would be a lot better off without the federal government sticking their nose in? It would be impossible to keep a child who has no interest in learning on the same level with a child who absorbs knowledge. Perhaps G.W. should have spent time in the class room before launching this legislation?

[Clearly Canadian]

The standardized testing and the regimented legislation that all students will be at grade level by whatever year, really leaves out those students who will shine in non academic professions. School is not for everyone, and although we want our students to walk away with the basics of reading, writing and numeracy, the reality is that not all of them will. Not because we aren't interested in making sure they know it, but because for some, formal education is not going to be their route. Others will walk away with the basics, and then follow their passions in other venues. I'm trying not to rant, because standardized testing gets under my skin for a number of reasons. Two things though, standardized testing with strict educational legislation makes for a very narrow view of school and it's purpose. I want my kids to have literacy and numeracy skills, but more importantly I want them to be passionate about something that they can pursue, I want them to be life long learners and life long problem solvers with thinking skills to help them make decisions. This is incredibly difficult to establish with the pressure to assess. And finally, what a money maker standardized testing is! You can't escape the quick fix, send your money now advertising that has blossomed.

Okay, hopefully not too rantish. I'm out for summer holidays and I'm still on my soap box. Good heavens. :cool2:

[Flower Child]

For those of us who have been teaching for awhile, we know that as sure as the sun rises, the requirements in education will change! In the US, the states have been in charge of their own educational systems forever. (Our Constitution says whatever the Federal Government does not cover shall fall..'by default' to the state.) But somehow, Gee Dubya thought he could do a better job and originated NCLB in Texas when he was governor. And we all know (hopefully Canada, better than us) what has become of good ole Cowboy George.
I am an elementary teacher, but my biggest concern about NCLB is that there are students who are not college material and will inevitably go into a trade. But they are forced to carry on in the same roles with the students headed toward Harvard. Their frustration levels will peak and they eventually drop out of school. Thanks to George, this stat does not show up because all that is recorded (apparently) is that the total of students who were in school have graduated. The drop outs are not on anyone's roster because they have left school!
And...(now you got me started) I agree with the hilarity of accomodating special needs students all the way through school to help them feel successful (read them their tests, give them calculators, discount spelling, grammar and punctuation,) but assess them on the same level with their grade level peers without the accomodations. Then we are held accountable for their failures. (Has anyone heard about the merit raises?)
That's insane!
I'm not sure what a Highly Qualified Teacher is, but what I learned in school had little to do with what I actually do in the classroom. My Bachelor's Degree and Master's Degree got me the job, but it certainly does little in helping me understand these crazy programs to which we have to comply!
Believe it or not I LOVE TEACHING! I love the kids and seeing the lights go on in their eyes, but I feel more like an assembly line worker meeting a quota these days. I'd like to hear more from teachers from other countries. The educational systems are held at higher standards in some places. Tell us what you think.

[Spectre]

Hello everyone.

The notion behind NCLB was a noble one. :yes:

What was it they said about the road to perdition being paved with good intent? :jaw-dropping:

In fairness, NCLB wasn't solely the brain child of GW Bush. I am told that Ted Kennedy wrote the actual legislation and that many of the ideas were spawned from literature like "A Nation at Risk' and initiatives like goals 2000, something developed during the Clinton years.

So this effort was, indeed, a bipartisan one.

Sadly, like many things spawned by politicians and non educators, it lacks understanding of basic child psychology and development, focuses on statistics and theory and not really on substance. Children are emerging people, NOT products rolled off an assembly line. Each of them has specific needs. A scatter gunned approach like NCLB does not meet most of them. It is based on test scores and contrived "standards."

I initially liked the "highly qualified" requirement, because a lot of math & social studies licensed teachers were being forced to teach science as well, at least at the middle school level and were doing violence to the science field. They knew very little and cared even less, in too many cases, about teaching any science. "Science class" sometimes consisted of an occasional worksheet and when the teacher found "time" to do it. But I swiftly found out that such practices were the result of poor administrative guidance more than formal qualification. Some of the most effective science teachers were actually those who had little to no training in how to teach science. Some had almost no background in the sciences themselves. I, for example, came from a language arts/social studies licensure background. I took very few high school or college science classes and, in truth, loathed science while in school myself. Then, out of the blue, I was assigned to teach science to grades 7 & 8, in my third year in the classroom and given a fully stocked science lab to do it. It was a regular epiphany for me! And you most likely know about the zeal of the convert. Had I been subjected to rigid, uncompromising rules concerning teaching science, that transformation, which has defined my career ever since, would never have taken place. :soapbox:
I sometimes think the feds ought to back out of the education field too and leave it to the states, but who is to guarantee that the state governments will do things any better? Instead, I just wish the educrats would go find something else to do with their time and energy and let us do the job we are trained and experienced enough to do.
I've no problem with some form of standardized testing. It is what has been done with the results of those tests and the high stakes nature of it that I see as detrimental. Is the focus of education on children or on stats that are intended to make the "higher ups" look good and garner votes for self serving politicians. :loser:

We need to decide.

[herdgrad]

Very well stated spectre.

Flowerchild, the drop outs do count towards the high school. It is somehow a negative part of the "formula"

[hweber]

Well stated spectre. I think that they should ask teachers, parents or administrators to draft, or at least provide advice to politicians. After all, we are the ones in the trenches, and working with their laws.