NCLB: it is not progressive legislation.

I've seen and participated in some discussion here about candidates' stands on NCLB; I see a great deal of misunderstanding that I would like to clear up. This is not a thread for or against a particular candidate. All 9 candidates need to speak up on where they stand here.

If you read about HR1, "No Child Left Behind," it says some really great things. It makes some really great promises.

So does a lot of legislation with hidden triggers and agendas. You should know that the really great things it promises are not forthcoming, and we in public ed don't expect them to. Ever. You should also know that we hear "NCLB" on a daily basis at our school sites and in our staff meetings. It's all about what we have to do to comply, and what will happen to us if we don't.

The problematic piece is the "accountability" portion of NCLB; the "high-stakes testing." It's the way the legislation is written, and the fully intended consequences; to label every american school as "failing," and open the door to vouchers and privatization.

I've got reams of information on this. At the bottom of my post, I will include links to threads here on DU with more information. And I will keep sending the info. Whoever you are supporting...NCLB is not a good talking point! Here is an amusing metaphor; what's not amusing is that this is exactly the way this legislation works:

No State Left Behind

Year after year, we pour money into our government, elect officials, and yet society is still struggling; crime is still rampant; the economy is abysmal, to say the least. What we need is accountability. The solution is simple. Standards that each and everyone in a state must attain. I believe that passage of the No State Left Behind bill will guarantee that all people receive the best possible government. We are a country of diversity; this bill will apply equally to all citizens (we are, however, looking for loopholes for the wealthy; rules don't typically apply to them anyway). Under the No State Left Behind (lovingly shortened to NSLB), all states will have to demonstrate Adequate Yearly Progress by the end of the current legislative term or face dire consequences.

Components of the bill are numerous, but may be synthesized as follows:

* All individuals will make significant social and economic progress
toward minimum salary standards. There will be no exceptions or excuses: prisoners, migrant workers, homeless, gang-members, non-English speaking persons all will have to achieve the minimum standards. If states do not develop programs to guarantee that each state resident achieves the minimum salary standard, the individual state government will be placed on a list of Deficient States. The state will then have two years to raise the salary levels of all of their citizens or the next higher government agency will step in and take over the government. In extreme cases, the State may be shut down and all residents of the state sent to neighboring successful states.

* Furthermore, testing of all citizens will be done on a yearly basis. Testing will be in areas of health, safety, economic security, and standard of living. All citizens will be judged on a high standard set by the wealthy businessmen and all governments not achieving this standard for each and every person will be deemed a failure. Once a state has been deemed as inadequate, all flyers, publications and web sites produced by that state must bear the words "Deficient State." Citizens who choose to leave the deficient state may be reimbursed for moving expenses to a state that has met the standards. If, surprisingly, a High-Achieving State cannot be found, the citizen may then request transportation to a neighboring country, preferably one with a little sanity remaining.

* All citizens will have the right to be represented by a highly
qualified politician who has met all the requirements for this
certification, including obtaining a Master's Degree from a private
institution (points will be lost for public school degrees), and passing a basic competency test in the areas of National Defense, Homeland Security, Domestic Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Personnel Affairs, Economic Issues, Educational Issues, Cultural Diversity, Transportation and Race Relations (to name a few). Politicians who do not receive the status of a Highly Qualified Politician will have one year in which to achieve this status before being removed from office.

* In keeping with the high standards, all staffers working with the
politicians will have a four-year degree, obtained at their own expense. Pay will not be commensurate with education.

* If any state refuses to take part in the No State Left Behind
program, funding for that state will be taken away and will be sent to a neighboring state.

* The federal government will fully fund (at a fraction of the total
cost, of course) all costs of this program. States who, in this time of budget deficits, cut their own contributions to education and subsidize this cut with federal No State Left Behind money, will be looked upon with disdain. That clearly is not the intent of this law. Shame!

This is ridiculous, you may say. What chaos! How much money will be
wasted on record keeping? What about those people who cannot make the
minimum wage no matter what? Will punishing a state make that state
better?

Send a copy of this to your legislators and they will say, "You cannot hold us accountable for the ills of society. You cannot judge us or punish the state if each citizen cannot earn a minimum salary level. There are other factors involved societal factors, motivational factors, ability factors you cannot judge us based on a result over which we do not have total control."

Far fetched? For states, yes; but unfortunately, this is what is being thrust upon public schools. I, admittedly, am not proposing a serious bill; however, if any part of the above sounded ridiculous to you, please know that this is exactly what the No Child Left Behind bill is requiring of schools. I do believe in high standards; I do believe in giving each and every child the best education possible. I believe that this law is not only rigid and punitive, but that it discounts factors that we know play a major role in academic achievement and holds schools accountable for factors that they cannot control.

Links:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=5578

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=5575

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=117&topic_id=319

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=117&topic_id=338

of seniors and personal data about them to military recruitment offices unless the parents specifically opt out.

NCLB is a great act, it was how the Bush Administration Zeroed out important programs and messed around with Title 1, that was the problem.

Read some truth from NALEO:

http://www.naleo.org/AC2003/Nabe/NABE_files/frame.htm

http://www.naleo.org/AC2003/NHC/NHC.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------
ON HELPING LEP STUDENTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------

. The requirements of No Child Left Behind, however, should not deter a school district from accepting foreign exchange students. First, many foreign exchange students from non-English speaking countries have enough command of English to benefit from regular classroom instruction in English and, for that reason, would not be considered limited English proficient under No Child Left Behind. Second, even if a foreign exchange students is limited English proficient, No Child Left Behind does not mandate a particular type of instruction for that student, but gives school districts the flexibility to select, consistent with State law, an appropriate method for serving that student. Finally, assessment results for foreign exchange students who are enrolled in a school in the United States for less than a year, even if they are limited English proficient, are not to be included in the school-level measurement of adequate yearly progress required by No Child Left Behind.



No Child Left Behind does not prevent or make it more difficult for school districts to participate in foreign student exchange programs. A school district’s decision on whether to participate in a foreign student exchange program, therefore, should only be based on the educational value of that program. I urge you to do all you can to support foreign student exchange programs and encourage school districts in your State to participate.



If you have any questions regarding this letter or any other issues relating to foreign exchange students in your schools, please do not hesitate to call me.



Sincerely,


Maria Hernandez Ferrier, Ed.D.

Director

----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATURE OF THE REAL PROBLEM WITH NCLB
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nature of the Problem

•Many Gaps, Not One

•A Multi-level Set of Phenomena

•Primacy of Literacy

•Role of Non-Educational Factors

•Indicators/ Quantitative Measures –Drop outs, transition to college, college completion rates, collegiate attainment, academic performance, professional degrees

Contributing Factors

–Pre-School Educational Experiences

–Time Devoted to Learning

–Maximizing Intellectual Rigor

–Teacher Preparation/Experience/Qualification

–Learning Resources/What Works

–Social Organization of Schools

–Academic Choices and Transitions

–Enabling Hispanic Parents

---------------------------------------------------------------------
REFORMS to NCLB
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Recommended Actions vs. NCLB•

Report Addresses each contributing factor vs. NCLB policies and programs, e.g.

, –Pre-school Education vs.

–Early Reading Title I

–Professional Development Title II

–Language Instruction for LEP Students Title III

–Foreign Language Assistance Title V

The intent was good. But this law is horrible and will have perverse effects in some of our most vulnerable schools. In city schools it will ofter require the replacement of 'unqualified' science and math teachers (who often have degrees but are missing some technical requirement) with a revolving door of subs (five days in the class room at most) which may have taken one or two classes of college level math or science. In other words you could cause a class to lose its teacher who has a Masters in Physics and have it replaced by me and a bunch of others who last took physics in high school. Some rural schools may have to shut down upper level science and foreign language classes all together due to these requirements.

In the case of class room aides it is even worse. There are no poor to middle class districts which will be able to afford aides under this plan. For no discernable reason they are now required to have a 4 year degree. They just aren't able to be paid enough to justify that level of education in most districts. These aides are god sends in places like kindergarden rooms and SBH rooms. They also let the autistic attend regular schools. This will be an unmitigated disaster.

Then there is the testing requirements on students. Often these tests end up being taught to in order to inflate the scores at the expense of teaching real knowledge that is useful.

How can you tell someone whose been teaching for 30 years that they need to go get a degree.All of the candidates have called for reforms in the NCLB act, but there are so many good things it like the changing of Title III and title IV and LEP students. It also was SUPPOSED to have provided more money than ever to the education system; but we know where Bush is on that issue!

the actual implementation and consequences of NCLB. Did you read any of the links?

I did not find anything that addresses the point of my post; the high-stakes testing portion.

HR 1 was not written to address "foreign exchange" students or LEP students. And in my state, the two are not necessarily synonymous.

You seem to be pretty well aquainted with "fallacious."

So which "argument" are you calling fallacious?

That NCLB holds schools accountable for factors they have no control over?

That they use mathematically corrupt formulas to determine scores?

That,if you do the math, they have written legislation setting up schools to fail?

student provision. I was watching the debates and reading all about the debates in CQ and on RollCall.com. They didn't have enough support to pass it in the Senate until the GOP made consessions on providing more money towards LEP students and dropout programs. Drop out programs he ZEROED out! He canceled the entire initiative!!!

And high stakes testing is supposed to of been paired up with the money to actually achieve it; ie billions of dollars for entire states to improve the education system.

As far as the mathamatical scoring goes; "how to lie with statistics" is a great book. Statistics can be used both ways which is why we need a Democrat president to make sure that those formulas are in the favor of the child and not the budget. And the schools are directly responsible for factors they have control over, scoring in those tests. Its a state by state basis on how this program is iniatated but many school districts have already labeled schools "failing" and now the point was to then send millions of dollars in staff and teaching into those schools to help improve them.

I will agree with the conservatives on this, local control is probably better than any bill passed by D.C, but wheres the money to come from? It must come from D.C. The bill's premise is great. You find the failing schools who most likely have been failing because of outside factors, not the teachers themselves, though i'm sure occasionally its the administration, you can probably find the local teachers can point out each failing school without a damn test btw.

But the premise is a great one in my opinion. If you want to spent billions on education, why spent it on a upty upty rich school in Gross Point, Michigan when the money is actually needed in inner detroit. These tests are only a measureable way to prove that the schools in the inner cities are doing worse than the suburbs. Though some perhaps not?

The Point of all this is the billions were supposed to flow right into these "failing" schools, but the money isnt there because a tyrant is holding the money back, so he can give it away to his rich cronies to bolster the Swiss economy, rather than Americas'.

Who do you think knows more about how best to educate our children, legislators or teachers? I don't know ONE teacher who supports this law. I couldn't care who voted for what, because no politician knows squat about what really goes on in a classroom. NCLB is the worst law on the books. Kids lose EVERY DAY because of this law. Don't fool yourself, it has nothing to do with it being unfunded. The implementation is awful. Let's start by fulling funding special ed, giving needy kids more needed resources, and reducing class size. Those are the two basic things needed to significantly improve public education.

NEA helped write the law and so did most teacher unions. It was a compromise. If we want more money they want to know where it is going and they want measurable results. The Hispanic Congressional Caucuss pushed it over the hump with the LEP consessions, but most of the bill was great except for Bush betraying us and un-funding it.

The only teacher union against it is the National School Boards Association. NEA is against the funding and some quirks they found wrong when the final passage went through, but since the budget will be coming up in 2004, the battle will be up for it again. Lets see if the president funds it this time. But, don't hold your breath.

http://www.nea.org/columns/rw030806.html

"The National Education Association has always been dedicated to the goal of leaving no child behind. We have tirelessly advocated for measures that would improve student achievement. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that we support the stated intent of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). "


The school boards association by the way are exactly whats wrong with the education system. Bloated Bureacracies that have way too many generals and not enough workers.

http://www.nea.org/esea/eseaamend.html

As a long-term member and dues payer, I feel justified in saying I don't know any teachers who feel the love flowing from the NEA out here in the trenches. My district employs close to 800 teachers; there are about 2000 total in my area.

Even so, we can applaud them for lifting their head and noticing that there might be a few little problems with NCLB, 2 years late and billions of $$$ short.

Now, I'm generally considered to be competent in my district. My test scores are as good or better than the rest of the district, I'm fully qualifies with a few extra specialization certifications, I mentor beginning teachers, write curriculum, serve on a couple of district committees, and have one of the best attendance records in the district...for 20 years. My parents return their kids to me year after year and line up to lobby to get their kids into my room. My boss assigns many of the most difficult kids to my class, because he knows I will fight for them and support their efforts every step of the way. The last 2 years I've been a "demonstration classroom," and have had teachers from my local area, my state, and other states as well as school board members come in to see what was going on, and go out talking about how impressed they were by what they were seeing. And guess what? NCLB has not offered me an iota of support in my efforts. It has imposed restrictions and some "one-size-fits-all" programs that impede the great things we're doing in the room. In complying with mandate after mandate, the joy has gone out of the learning. Kids aren't excited about showing up, and meeting the demands can be a chore. Teachers who used to love their jobs and do their best to make a difference with every kid are now complying, and they dread the school day, too. It has raised the level of stress on our campus to the point that principals scream at everyone and kids cry during testing periods. And I spend more and more valuable instructional time testing instead of teaching every year. All those extra tests are part of the mandated "improvement plan" implemented when you reach a test score plateau.

So, if we the teachers don't give the NEA enough credit to suit, I won't apologize. We need the general public to stand up and fight, because public ed is going down. It doesn't matter what great things are written into NCLB; the bottom line is that the testing portion is fraudulent, it is intended to label schools "failing" to drum up more support for vouchers and privatization.

I'd invite you to come on down to my classroom; spend a few days there and see what NCLB is really doing for our schools and our kids.

but washington money. The problem is how to combine those two. I think the premise of NCLB is good, though not neccisarily the details. As Im sure you teach your children, the devil is always in the details.Read my reconciliation post below, i think we might agree.

taken away from schools that don't meet the testing goals. And the goal isn't just to achieve good test scores. It is a goal of continual improvement. No matter how high your test scores already are, if they don't meet the improvement goal next year, you're labeled. And the goal goes up the year after that, and the year after that....

Bush may not have gotten the legislation passed without senators and congress people pulling strings and adding their particular items into it...but the basic law is based on his ed program in Texas, administered by Rod Paige, which is now under fire. Read the links.

I can give you plenty more; let me know if you're really interested. I can give pm you a week or two's worth of reading on the subject.

I did in fact read about 3\4 of them, but i browsed the last two.

I would agree with you on that premise. I don't think it should be a continious thing. I think its a good idea for perhaps the first year or two to find the schools with serious problems, even though we know where most of them are and so do most teachers in the surrounding areas and they are not homogenious. We spend money to help those schools specifically.

BUT, a continious thing is not needed, or perhaps expanding it wouldn't be so bad. But I mean no school is going to test at 100% simply because our testing methods are flawed and some kids can over excell at tests given orally and bomb them written and vice versa. There are so many quirks in reading and writing and learning that no test is perfect, though I think a generic test can slow structural flaws in a system. But I do agree that there are flaws, as NEA has pointed out as well and Kerry and Edwards and Dean.

Anyway we slice it, when NCLB Act comes up for budget again in fiscal '05, we need more funding and when we re-take the WH, we need Ted kennedy to push for a addendium to the current bill and re-do the faulty parts.im sorry about the falacious comment, i mustundertood your point.

I personally would like to repeal NCLB. We can write a better plan that would provide the support needed to really help meet those needs without the Bush taint. Or, we could at least repeal the accountability portions.

After living with this crap for a few years, I find myself cringing at the term "accountability." You'd think I didn't want to be accountable, but it's not true. It's just that "accountability" has become political doublespeak for something else entirely. I'd like to toss the whole thing out and start again, from a true desire to help kids learn.

and put some stuff in while he wans't even looking and just placated him. its really too bad we can't reverse time and bring back a younger uncle Teddy and revive JFK