Fwd: Congresswoman Lois Capps on NCLB Overhaul

[Susan Harman <susanharman@igc.org>]

Sorry this is late; I was away. Anybody in Santa Barbara who can meet  
with her?
Susan

Begin forwarded message:

> From: James Crawford <jwcrawford@COMPUSERVE.COM>
> Date: Fri Jun 22, 2007  1:10:43 PM US/Pacific
> To: ELLADVOC@asu.edu
> Subject: Congresswoman Lois Capps on NCLB Overhaul
> Reply-To: James Crawford <jwcrawford@COMPUSERVE.COM>
>
> Comments from another critical Democrat...
>
> http://www.independent.com/news/2007/jun/21/its-time-reevaluate-no- 
> child-left-behind/
>
> IT'S TIME TO REEVALUATE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND
>
> Santa Barbara Independent -- June 21, 2007
> by Lois Capps, congressmember for the 23rd District of California.
>
> As a mother and grandmother, I know one of the greatest gifts we can  
> give our children is a quality education. It opens the door to a rich  
> life, full of opportunity. This gift can’t be taken for granted, and  
> it’s one we must work hard to preserve and ensure is available to all  
> our kids.
>
> In 2002, the federal government made a huge effort to improve the  
> public education system by passing, on a bipartisan basis, the No  
> Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). It was the biggest overhaul of federal  
> involvement in public education in decades. The goal of NCLB was to  
> improve education for all children by requiring higher standards for  
> our kids and more accountability for results from our schools. The  
> legislation relies on standardized testing in math and English  
> language arts in grades 3-8 and 10; in effect, it grades our schools  
> along with our children.
>
> When NCLB was first passed, President George W. Bush promised to fully  
> fund the bill in order to help states and local schools meet these  
> costly new requirements. Unfortunately, this promise was broken as  
> funding for NCLB has fallen short by $55 billion, resulting in  
> burdensome mandates for our states and local communities. Fortunately,  
> one of the top priorities for the new Democratic-led Congress is to  
> rectify that situation. Yet improving how NCLB works requires more  
> than just increasing federal funding.
>
> I’ve had my own ideas about how NCLB is working, but I wanted to hear  
> the views of the dedicated educators and concerned parents throughout  
> the Central Coast. So I recently visited a wide variety of schools,  
> some that are meeting all of the NCLB requirements and some that are  
> meeting very few. Interestingly, I heard several common  
> recommendations for improving the law, regardless of the school’s  
> status.
>
> First, teachers and administrators assured me they welcomed  
> accountability, but said we need a better system of measuring  
> “accountability.” They questioned the fairness and accuracy of the  
> accountability system that NCLB currently provides. For example, under  
> NCLB, if a single class of fourth graders does not reach the math  
> requirements, even while meeting the English requirements, the entire  
> school is deemed to be failing.
>
> Second, several parents and educators told me that more flexibility  
> was needed in the law. They expressed concerns that NCLB’s “one size  
> fits all” approach sets unrealistic requirements for student learning  
> and provided an incomplete picture of the overall quality of education  
> a child obtained. Some noted that while their schools were currently  
> meeting NCLB requirements, they were concerned they would soon slip  
> into the much-maligned “program improvement status,” the label applied  
> to schools and school districts failing to meet proficiency  
> requirements. Proficiency requirements steeply increase every year,  
> eventually requiring schools to certify that 100 percent of students  
> are grade-level proficient by 2013.
>
> Other school administrators said they were currently not meeting all  
> proficiency requirements, yet questioned the “failure” label ascribed  
> to their school. And almost everyone I heard from expressed concern  
> that NCLB proficiency measurements do not accurately reflect students’  
> learning and achievements in the classroom. The law very narrowly  
> focuses on students’ grade-level proficiency in math and English  
> language arts, as measured by one annual standardized test. But there  
> is no effort to measure students’ academic progress. For example, a  
> sixth-grade special education student who brings his reading level up  
> from a third-grade to a fifth-grade reading level throughout the  
> course of one school year is still deemed to be failing. No attention  
> is paid to the student’s tremendous growth and progress throughout the  
> year.
>
> I share many of the concerns expressed by these parents and teachers.  
> I believe we need to reevaluate NCLB’s accountability system, focusing  
> more on growth models that measure improvement throughout time and  
> rewarding students and schools for the progress they make. I would  
> also like to see increased flexibility in the assessment process for  
> special subsections of students tracked by NCLB, such as English  
> language learners and special education students. Students learn in  
> many different ways and would benefit from alternative testing methods  
> that better measure their academic success.
>
> Clearly, we all want to ensure all our kids have access to an  
> excellent education. And while states, local school districts, and  
> parents must lead the way, the federal government can and should lend  
> a helping hand. Addressing the underlying weaknesses in NCLB and  
> funding it appropriately are essential if we are to keep providing the  
> priceless gift of a quality education to all our kids.
Vote in the National Cheney Impeachment Poll
http://www.usalone.com/blogvoices.php?Cheney%20Impeachment%3F
Add this text to your own email and blog signatures!