NRCLB: No Rich Child Left Behind

Democrat & Chronicle: Essays

Question #1: Mrs. Smith and Mr. Jones both teach fifth grade. In May, only 40 percent of Mrs. Smith’s students passed the state’s standardized reading test, while 97 percent of Mr. Jones’ students passed the same test. Who is the better teacher? A) Mrs. Smith. B) Mr. Jones. C) More information is necessary. If you picked “C,” you understand the inherent complexities of education.
Question #2: Mrs. Smith works in a high-needs district. In September, most of her pupils read at a second-grade level, but through brilliant pedagogical strategies and dogged determination, she brought all of her class to a fourth-grade reading level or higher. Some of her students managed to pass the state reading test; all of them showed tremendous growth. Mr. Jones works in a more affluent district. In September, all of his students read at a fifth-grade level and by May most of them read at the sixth-grade level. Who is the better teacher?

According to the No Child Left Behind act, Jones is wildly successful as his students have demonstrated adequate yearly progress. Smith is not so fortunate. According to NCLB, she is an abysmal failure; her students have not shown AYP (adequate yearly progress) and her school will lose funding if this continues.

Both teachers are successful teachers, but only one is recognized because she lives in an affluent school district. It is important to have standards, but accomplishments for growth also need to be recognized as successful AYP.

Research has found a direct link between wealth/poverty and achievement test scores. The authors of NCLB just would rather have No Rich Child Left Behind, because they are the only ones that will accomplish the 100% of proficient students in the school. The standard of 100% reading on grade level (What is the cut-off score for grade level? How valid is the grade level score?) ignores the forces outside school that affect students in school.

Grading Schools on Poverty

The Bush Administration and the legislature, after months of lobbying, arguing, wrangling, dealing and agonizing, has given us the A-Plus Plan with its School Accountability Report Upon analysis, this Report turns out to be merely an elaborate and expensive way to grade schools on the poverty or affluence of their students.

The focus on high-stakes testing does the opposite of what is seeks to do. Rather than raising to free-reduced lunch sub-group closer to the average white middle-class students, NCLB labels as failing the schools with high numbers of free-reduced lunch students and then punishes them for having those students. It is a no-win situation for many schools.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Technorati Tags: NCLB, high-stakes test, poverty, achievement gap

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.

no comments yet.

Edubuntu Thin Client Update »« Memorization, the mind, and making connections