No Child Left Behind criticized
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18432881
This interview was held on National Public Radio on Wed 30 January 2008. Among the criticisms of NTLB shared in the program, an economist, Richard Rothstein criticizes NCLB's most important goal: getting every single student in America to perform at or above grade level by 2014. He is quoted, "The notion that schools alone can create equal achievement for children of different social backgrounds is not based on any research. It's not based on a true understanding of what the many factors that contribute to student achievement are: [It assumes] that health doesn't matter, housing doesn't matter, that dysfunctional communities don't matter," Rothstein says. "I don't think we can make social policy on the basis of a myth."
This is a powerful statement that gets right to the basis of the Conservative and Liberal political perspectives of the purposes of public school. The Conservative and Liberal perspectives take into consideration the many factors that contribute to student achievement, and try to provide programs at the school to make everyone more equal. Note that many schools offer free or reduced breakfast and lunch, access to a school nurse and guidance counsellors. These programs promote their view that equal educational opportunity is important for all.
Our recent reading of Tyack and Cuban suggest 3 measures of the success or failure of a school reform, so let's use these to rate NCLB.
On the matter of fidelity to original design: NCLB would rate a mixed bag. Some aspects seem to be working out well, as students are taking more standardized tests for tracking progress. Other aspects of the law are considered a resounding failure; the promised funding to accommodate the requirements of the law never materialized. On the matter of meeting preset outcomes: NCLB scores poorly. As reported in the NPR program, reading scores have remained flat during the program, and math scores were seeing larger increases before NCLB was enacted. On the matter of longevity, NCLB has been around for six years, but its future is in jeopardy. Using these measures, NCLB has not been as successful educational reform. As Congress seems determined to change the law, let's consider ways we can input teacher knowledge of student learning and achievement into the revised law.
2 comments:
NCLB is like a lot of things, it looks great on paper, but the follow through kills it. If it worked the radicals would love it because all children would be getting the same education, and reaching the finish line at the same time. I dare say that is a pipe dream. South Carolina is riddled with depressed areas. The schools do not have equal equipment to even implement a fair and equal education for all, even if we could get them all to stay in school. Students are taking the same standardized tests, without the same material. Not really standard then is it?
This is a good post.
I like the idea of linking to an interview, but I have two points of consideration.
1. I think the conservative and liberal positions are a bit farther apart than you suggest. The conservative tends to downplay social factors that influence school achievement, claiming instead that individual effort is the final arbiter in determining success. Rothstein's criticisms of NCLB center on the law's disregard for social factors. Compensating students for those limiting social factors is a hallmark of liberal educational policy.
2. Deploying the ways to measure school reform to assess NCLB is a nice idea, but it's important to remember that Tyack and Cuban are critical of those methods of assessing reform. They argue those methods fail to consider the unintended consequences of reform and are thus of limited use.
Post a Comment