Re: NCLB after 6 years - and escalating track record of failure

[aburke5054@aol.com]

NCLB creates urgency in addressing needs in schools where the average 
African-American 12th grader achieves at the 20th percentile of White 
students and where half of minority students drop out.  It also imposes 
on states the responsibility of supplying help to schools where 
children have fallen behind.  You don't even pay lip service to that 
fundamental and noble goal and to the requirement that states act in 
their schools.  If some schools have chosen the easier outs of teaching 
narrowly to the test, or hiding kids on test day, or ignoring children 
with the greatest needs, or gaming promotion rules - and if states are 
playing games with AYP instead of improving their schools, that tells 
us something about public education, not just something about federal 
education law.

There are people working in schools who shouldn't be there and many 
schools need to be changed in ways that people working in them won't 
like.  That's the painful truth and that's the political pitfall.  
Better tests and more money won't change those things one bit.

Art

-----Original Message-----
From: monty@fairtest.org
To: arn2-strategy <arn2-strategy@yahoogroups.com>; ARN-L 
<arn-l@interversity.org>; ARN-state <ARN-state@yahoogroups.com>; CARE 
<care@yahoogroups.com>; NDSG <ndsgroup@yahoogroups.com>; DC joint 
statement list <rethinkaccountdc@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 8:58 am
Subject: [arn-l] NCLB after 6 years - and escalating track record of 
failure


  An update of FairTest's popular two-page fact sheet on nclb is now on 
the FairTest website at 
http://www.fairtest.org/NCLB-After-Six-Years[1]. It is available on pdf 
- scroll down to the end of the article and click on the pdf link. 
Monty


“NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND” AFTER SIX YEARS: AN ESCALATING TRACK RECORD OF 
FAILURE


  After six years, there is overwhelming evidence that the deeply 
flawed “No Child Left Behind” law (NCLB) is doing more harm than good 
in our nation’s public schools. NCLB’s test-and-punish approach to 
school reform relies on limited, one-size-fits-all tools that reduce 
education to little more than test prep. It produces unfair decisions 
and requires unproven, often irrational "solutions" to complex 
problems. NCLB is clearly underfunded, but fully funding a bad law is 
not a solution.


Public recognition of the law’s ill effects has produced a growing 
consensus in favor of a fundamental overhaul. It’s time for a new 
conception of the federal role in education—beyond standards, tests and 
punishments—in order to strengthen schools and truly leave no child 
behind.


* NCLB rests on false assumptions—e.g., test scores equal educational 
quality, and sanctions based on low test scores drive school 
improvement. As a result, it offers false remedies that are not 
working. Since NCLB was signed, reading scores on the National 
Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) have stagnated, and the rate 
of improvement in math has slowed. The neediest children in our nation 
continue to receive an unequal and inadequate education. In Texas, for 
example, the “achievement” gap narrowed on the state test but widened 
on NAEP. The façade created to portray Houston and “the Texas Miracle” 
as national models crumbled. Similar problems are surfacing in other 
states. The U.S. cannot test its way to better schools.


* State tests are extremely weak measures of high-quality standards. 
NCLB’s obsessive focus on raising test scores causes an increased 
emphasis on exam preparation. “Teaching to the test” narrows the 
curriculum, particularly in low-scoring schools, and forces teachers 
and students to concentrate on memorizing isolated facts and practicing 
rote skills, ignoring higher order thinking. Arts, foreign languages, 
social studies, physical education and recess have been squeezed from 
the curriculum, especially in schools with high numbers of minority and 
low-income students. In the past six years, these effects have been 
documented in dozens of reports by reputable, independent researchers. 
When fewer students are prepared to be successful citizens, rising test 
scores do not mean academic improvement.


* Thirty percent of the nation’s schools failed to make "adequate 
yearly progress" (AYP) in 2005-06. Diverse schools are more likely to 
'fail' simply because they serve children from more demographic groups, 
all of which must meet NCLB’s mandates simultaneously. Independent 
researchers agree that nearly all schools will eventually be labeled 
"in need of improvement" (INOI) and sanctioned under NCLB. This will 
happen because of the way AYP statistics are calculated, not because 
all schools are actually in need of major improvement (though some 
schools clearly do need help).


* Demanding that disabled and limited English proficient students reach 
“proficiency” on standardized tests sets many schools up for failure. 
The tests are grossly inadequate and invalid measures of these 
students' learning. Rather than provide resources and guidance so 
schools can offer the individualized approaches these students need, 
NCLB claims that by holding them to the “same standards” they will 
magically rise to the occasion. Nevertheless, those groups 
disproportionately fail to meet AYP targets.


  * Transfer provisions make matters worse. Some receiving schools are 
overwhelmed by transfers and ill-equipped to handle them. Most eligible 
parents are saying, "No thanks." Parents increasingly view "choice" as 
a hoax: their children cannot attend elite exam schools within their 
home districts or better-performing schools in neighboring districts. 
Communities need improved schools for all, not limited extra options 
for a few children.


  * Tutoring provisions divert money from classrooms that most need it, 
giving assistance to the few at the expense of the many. Tutoring 
focuses on test preparation and rarely connects to the curriculum. 
Student attendance is often low. NCLB paves the way for private firms 
to reap huge profits but does not hold the firms accountable.


  * As experienced, high quality teachers see schools with society's 
most needy students get labeled instead of helped, they transfer to 
higher performing schools or leave the profession. Stigmatized schools 
have a hard time attracting new, skilled teachers.


  * Funding for Title I, the core provision of the law, has barely 
increased in the last several years. NCLB funding is tens of billions 
below promised levels and tens of billions more from what is needed to 
help all children reach meaningful educational goals.


  * NCLB fails to address key reasons many children are left behind. 
The best school, the best teachers and the best curriculum can make a 
huge difference, but basic needs like housing, health care and 
nutrition must also be addressed. These gaps continue to widen. By 
blaming schools and focusing attention on boosting test scores alone, 
NCLB dampens the political will to address the real needs of children.


  * The law's remedies for "failing" schools do not work. Most attempts 
to "reconstitute" troubled schools fail to improve student performance 
significantly. Few if any states have the capacity to intervene in the 
large numbers of public schools being identified for NCLB's ultimate 
sanctions.


  * There are better ways to help troubled schools. Improvement 
requires rich assessments, from tests and quizzes to projects and 
portfolios, rooted in ongoing classroom work by students and teachers; 
collaborative professional development for educators and time for them 
to plan improvements in curriculum and instruction; involvement by 
parents as real partners, not just test score consumers; monitoring by 
the state to ensure schools are equitably serving all students; and 
targeted assistance for schools that really need it. Only if schools or 
districts demonstrate they cannot or will not improve should more 
serious sanctions be employed.


  * Nearly 150 education, civil rights, religious and other 
organizations have signed the Joint Organizational Statement on 
NCLB[2], calling for an overhaul of the law away from a focus on 
testing and punishing and toward helping schools improve their capacity 
to serve all children well (available on the FairTest Website at 
www.fairtest.org). The Forum on Educational Accountability, chaired by 
FairTest, has provided detailed recommendations for overhauling the 
federal law (www.edaccountability.org).


Links:

------

[1] http://www.fairtest.org/NCLB-After-Six-Years

[2] /joint-organizational-statement-no-child-left-behin


-------------------------------------------------------

Unsubscribe ARN-L:

http://interversity.org/lists/arn-l/subscribe.html






________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail ! - 
http://webmail.aol.com