Strong Iowa Editorial on NCLB

[Bob Schaeffer <bobschaeffer@earthlink.net>]

AT LEAST GIVE KIDS MORE HELP BY FULLY FUNDING "NO CHILD"
Des Moines Register Editorial -- January 8, 2007

It's been five years since President Bush signed the No Child Left 
Behind law, and there's little evidence Iowa students are better off 
overall. Nor has there been much progress in closing the state's 
minority-white test-score gap, which is also slow-going nationwide.

The best changes the law has brought about - more focus on helping 
low-achieving students and school accountability - could have been 
accomplished without Washington imposing complicated and often absurd 
rules on public schools.

Most absurd is the expectation that all students will be proficient in 
math and reading by the 2013-14 school year.

Second-most absurd is punishing schools for not making enough progress, 
even when progress is considerable.

Congress will consider reauthorizing the law this year. Repeal would be 
our preference, but that is unlikely because of bipartisan support for 
the misguided assumption that a poorly designed, underfunded program 
will eventually succeed.

At least Congress should send states more funding for tutors and other 
instruction to assist youngsters who are struggling.

The biggest danger created by the law is that teachers will spend too 
much time teaching to standardized tests at the expense of teaching a 
rich, challenging curriculum that will prepare U.S. students to compete 
with students around the world. Iowa Department of Education Director 
Judy Jeffrey said teachers have told her the curriculum is being 
narrowed. Jeffrey is concerned that the brightest students are being 
shortchanged.

Since the law took effect, Iowa's average reading scores have risen 
slightly in fourth- and eighth-grades and have stayed fairly flat in 
11th grade. Because reform was under way in Iowa before No Child Left 
Behind, it's unclear whether the law deserves any credit for the small 
increases.

Jeffrey would like to see the law revised to reflect more realistic 
expectations for children with significant learning disabilities. Rather 
than require proficiency on standardized tests, measure success by how 
well students accomplish goals in their individualized education plans, 
she said.

And instead of counting standardized test scores for children learning 
English as a second language after their first year, allow more time for 
children who need it, she said.

Those revisions make sense.

Everyone can agree that no child should be left behind, but five years 
after the law took effect, it is more apparent than ever that this law 
is the wrong approach to strengthening American education.

   
http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070108/OPINION03/701080303/1035/OPINION