Many Children Left Behind? Article Review Example

When it comes to learning, some children are more educationally advanced than other children, and they all learn differently and on different levels. This is why it is important that all children are given the opportunity to be successful in learning and to receive a quality education, regardless of their learning levels, particularly those from lower income families. This is the task put forth by the concept of No Child Left Behind (FEBP, 2014). Not leaving any children behind in education requires providing to them productive learning environments as well as adequate tools and resources, such as textbooks. These requirements are often lacking in school systems outside of the United States in countries such as Kenya in Africa, and this often affects students’ text scores.

Statement of Purpose

The focus of the article, “Many Children Left Behind? Textbooks and Test Scores in Kenya,” is examining whether textbooks increase students’ text scores in Kenya. And if so, is it true for students on all levels or only students on higher levels of learning.

Review of the Literature

The article examines how increasing spending in education has little effect on “distorted” school systems; however, economists believe that providing disadvantaged schools with textbooks will result in raising student performance and increased test scores for those students. This was the idea when Kenya was provided funding from the World Bank to implement a textbook supply program. This program was a randomized trial for rural primary schools in Kenya. With this program, the expectation was that all students’ text scores would increase due to having access to textbooks. However, the article states that having the textbooks had little effect on the test scores of the average student, though having the textbooks did raise the scores of the students who were already academically advanced and on higher levels who scored higher on pretests.

The authors of the article explain that an “interaction term between pretest scores and assignment to the textbook program has a highly significant positive impact on post-test scores” (Glewwe, Kremer, & Moulin, 2009, p. 113). In other words, the strongest students who received textbooks and did well on pretests did well on post-tests. For weaker students, however, the article reports that having the textbooks had not impact on their scores, nor did having the textbooks reduce the incidence of some of them dropping out of school or having to repeat grades.

The article identifies the main reasons for the textbooks not impacting the test scores of most children in the program, which includes the fact that instruction in Kenyan schools are mostly taught in English. However, English is the third language of many of the students. This, in itself, is part of the problem because many of the students struggle to read and comprehend textbooks in English. In addition, the article states that there is a high absence rate among both students and teachers, which causes manys students to fall behind, regardless of having textbooks. Furthermore, it is stated that Kenya’s school system favors those students who are most advantaged, likely due to the “legacy of colonial education and the political economy of post-independence Kenya” (p. 113). The article goes on to describe the implementation of the textbook program and discusses school selection, texts, and comparison schools for the benefit of implementing the program.

Conclusion

The authors of this article did a thorough job of explaining the No Child Left Behind concept in the Kenyan school system textbook program. In addition, the article goes in-depth to examine and explain each aspect of the program and provides relevant research data to justify its claims. These are strong points in the article. The outcome of the research, according to the authors, shows that although having access to textbooks should improve learning, it often does not for the most disadvantaged students. Furthermore, textbooks written in English were not suited for the typical student in the Kenyan school system, but are more suited for academically strong students, who are favored. The research included data from comparison schools and from schools in other regions besides Kenya, so it was very broad and covered a significant representation of the student population in Africa, which is another strong point of the article.

However, a weak point of the article is that it did not account for research beyond a set period, which could possibly account for different results. Perhaps the academically disadvantaged students could benefit from studying with the textbooks and have raised test scores, over a longer period. The study does not account for the possiblity that the lower level students can improve but do so at a much slower pace, beyond the time limits of the study. This is a significant observation. Additionally, a weak point of the article is that it does not offer any suggestions for future research, which could possibly include following the lower level students for a longer period of time.

References

FEBP. (2014, April 24). No Child Left Behind – Overview. Retrieved from Federal Education Budget Project: http://febp.newamerica.net/background-analysis/no-child-left-behind-overview

Glewwe, P., Kremer, M., & Moulin, S. (2009, January). Many Children Left Behind? Textbooks and Test Scores in Kenya. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(1), 112-135.