Fundamental Flaws That Plague the No Child Left Behind, Essay Example

Background

No Child Left Behind was initially created to ensure that every child was getting the best education possible. This act held teachers and schools accountable for the progress of each child. This was done to raise standards in public school systems. Although NCLB attempted to guarantee that each child has access to standard quality of education. The major problem with NCLB is that each child is expected to learn on the same level within the same time frame. This fact is very unrealistic because children learn at different rates and different times. The Act operates on a one size fits all policy not taking into regards lower income schools and urban schools. NCLB was supposed to close the educational disparity between poverty stricken areas and school districts in flourishing districts. An achievement gap persists between black and white students between 2000 and 2007 according to the NAEP grade 8 math assessments. The data was collected from 10 states that had school poverty stratum. Educational analysts want to determine if the achievement gap has grown smaller since the implementation of the NCLB legislation. Their findings suggest that the gap is still large and the implementation of the NCLB has had very little impact on the achievement of black students. The final recommendation was that educational policy reform must be implemented to see a greater achievement in students’ overall educational gain.

Changes To Meet NCLB

Each state is being held accountable for student education due to The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Part of the requirement of this act is that schools must make Adequate Yearly Progress. This has led many districts to switch from managerial style leadership to teacher focused leadership to increase student achievement. The leadership style of principals can impact student achievement either positively or negatively. Traditionally, principals have been the primary decision makers, as a result, teachers are reluctant to challenge or even share.  Teaching is one of the most demanding and stressful jobs one will ever willingly choose.  Students who are preparing to become teachers often only have about four months of hands on experience with a veteran teacher. Some veteran teachers can be territorial and this will adversely affect the amount of hands on experience the student receives. Veteran teachers often see student teachers as secretarial assistants. They allow them to grade papers, escort students to lunch, P.E. or other places, and other leg work they may have grown tired of.  After this four month period, novice teachers are given a classroom with students and expected to maintain their sanity. Novice teachers become overwhelmed and are too unfamiliar with the learning community to seek help from appropriate professionals.  These facts coupled with other laws that make the literal teaching of teaching nearly impossible. According to Wang, Beckett, & Brown:

“The NCLB Act of 2001 sets unprecedented forceful provisions on using state-mandated assessments to hold schools accountable for their students’ attainment of prescribed performance standards. The act ambitiously aims to close the achievement gap among all children regardless of their race, class, or disability status, and attaches high-stakes consequences to the assessment outcomes. Such unique features of the act garnered overwhelming political and public support, and mandatory state assessment programs have come to dominate the public school landscape”.

Teachers are left feeling like magicians rather than educators. They are moving from one act to the next before enough time is spent discerning if the first strategy worked or not”.

College Ready

Many educators are wondering if students are actually being prepared for college or are they just being taught to do well on test so that schools can make AYP. Accordingly, about 75 percent of college students in the United States are placed in remedial math and English classes, while another 28 percent do not have the skills needed to successfully complete college level work (Howell, 2011). Howell adds:

“I focus especially on those factors influencing remediation need that are potentially under public policymakers’ control, namely, attributes of students’ high schools and teachers. Because minority and low socioeconomic status college students participate in remedial course-taking in greater proportions than their representation in higher education would suggest (Attewell, Lavin, Domina, & Levey, 2006; Ignash, 1997), Some blame students’ under-preparedness for college on the short- comings of the public schools that are the primary supplier of college- bound students (Howell 2011).

Clearly, students are not being properly prepared for college under the NCLB.

The Data

Since the implementation of NCLB, several studies have been conducted to determine if this Act has realistic goals.  In 2012, a review of NCLB after a 10 year run indicates that NCLB has failed at reaching its goals. Results show that NCLB has neither increased academic or reduced achievement gaps across America. Because NCLB functions on a one size fit all frame work, it has obviously missed gains that some schools have made because it did not test in those areas. The data was collected from schools across the United States. The study concluded with the need for alternative strategies that would improve school performance in areas with needy students. While Schul (2011) adds how NCLB standards prevent literacy teachers from being innovative and original because the guidelines are too strict. NCLB provides elementary school teachers with prompted guidelines as to what they should say and how they should respond to students when teaching reading. Schul believes that this does not allow for genuinely learning to take place. Strategic teaching must be implemented by using the best pedagogical practices for the type of students the teacher is teaching.  These findings are reported by many veteran teachers and their experiences in the classroom using the NCLB mandates. Finally, NCLB attempts to remove certain cultures from the classroom because of the way the prompts do not acknowledge certain cultural differences. For example, “The idea that all children in the United States have the right to a publicly supported education regardless of race, social class or religious beliefs is an American value. Not only access to a public education, but the expectations of a common educational experience, is part of the American culture. This common school idea is based on the view that education should be an equitable, assimilative, and inclusive institution designed to prepare students to be future productive citizens” (Meyer, 2006).

Conclusions

According to research and statistics, NCLB has failed miserably to close the educational gaps between public and private schools.  Sadly, NCLB seems to have created more detriment than success because a greater number of students are unprepared for college. Educators believe that too much focus is being placed on test, rather than learning skills that can be applied throughout the student’s educational life. Teachers play a dominant role in student learning. As a result, teachers should be involved in decision making choices that directly affect student outcomes. Likewise, teachers must be able to teach their students according to their individual needs.  Nonetheless, the role of the teacher directly depends upon NCLB and other state mandated policies.  Teachers and other stakeholders want to see improvements in policy making  by allowing teachers to take on leadership of producing favorable gains in their classrooms.

References

Comparing private schools and public schools using hierarchical linear modeling. National Assessment of Educational Progress. Retived from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2006461.pdf

Howell, J., S. (2011). What influences students’ need for remediation in college? Evidence from California. Journal of Higher Education. (82)3. 292-314.

Left behind: Low-income students under the no child left behind Act. (2008). Journal of Law & Education. (37)4. 589-596

Schul, J., E. (2011). Unintended consequences: fundamental flaws that plague the no child left behind affiliation: Ohio Northern University. (1) 2-2.

Wang, L., Beckett. G. H., & Brown, B. (2006). Controversies of standardized assessment in school accountability reform: A critical synthesis of multidisciplinary research evidence.  Applied Measurement In Education. 19(4), 305-328.