Children are taught many new concepts and ideas in a variety of different ways. It is every teachers dream to give each child a quality education. Children attending school deserves a quality education and should be inspired by a great teacher. With thousands of American schools labeled as “failing”, could the No Child Left Behind Act be a law that every school needs in order to be successful.
The purpose of this paper is to elaborate on the No Child Left Behind Act, and how the accountability of testing subgroup provisions may play a major role on the responsibilities of a student’ education. The paper also focuses on what information parents are receiving to actually know how their student(s) are performing in class and whether each student’s performance is within state compliance with NCLB.
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) is a federal social program that was signed
into law by former president George W. Bush. This program was designed to improve
every students education as well as their achievements within the American school
system. With so many children test score continuing to be low, The No Child Left
Behind Act is proving not to be an effective tool for students. Many parents feel like
this law is narrowing, teachers are not providing the necessary resources that children
need, and the program is not meeting the expectations that were set out to improve
students grades. The goals for all student learning should be on the same level but seems
to be unattainable. With this being said, there are some who don’t believe that the No
Child Left Behind Act has proven to be beneficial. However, there are some who
believe that this program will improve their child’s ability to l...
... middle of paper ...
...hanges made to improves the quality of education children will continue to suffer. The NCLB act was created with good intentions, but I questions the commitment to ensure all students receive an opportunity to achieve. Once those who have the authority to make the necessary changes to the program commit to improving the education system, the test scores of students who are in schools who support the program should begin to see improvement. This should not be an option, whether or not to fix a system that has the ability to provide children across America the chance to succeed. The most important task at hand, is to make sure that we are moving forward in education so that we are able to compete with those who are thriving education wise, such as children from abroad. Children deserve a fair chance at a bright future and education is the key to that success.
Even with the negative and positive functions of No Child Left Behind, there are many areas that still need to ironed out. Under the Obama administration several states have received a waiver from No Child Left Behind, “with this waiver students will still be tested annually. But starting this fall, schools in those states will no longer face the same prescriptive actions spelled out under No Child Left Behind” (Feller & Hefling, 2012). Since 2007, the law has been up for review, but due to opponents of the law there has not been an agreement reached and the law continues to stress our schools and children out. We can only hope that when this law is reviewed and agreed upon that it really is in the best interest of our children and the nation as a whole.
The implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act applied a market approach to school reform as a way of improving the school system. This new law promised an era of high standards, testing, and accountability in
The policy “No Child Left Behind (NCLB)” is a policy where Federal legislation has mandated that children be tested, and where there is compliance with standards. Simply means, that all children must meet standards. The standards are defined by the states, and all children will be subject to testing, starting from as early as third grade. The students will be tested annually, in order to ensure that they are getting the type of education that they are entitled to, as determined by their performance on standardized tests.
Intelligence has begun to define individuals globally, but the goal of the minimum grading system is fairness and equality. Fair share grading is when all students in the class take an intended exam, but the class average score of the test is given to every student. Each student will receive the same grade even if one did better or worse than the average score. That being said it could reduce dropout rates, test anxiety, and competition between students. On the other hand, students could be affected negatively because it could lead to false self-value and unfairness to those students who study harder in order to earn higher grades. The debate continues about whether students should be separated by intelligence or be given equal grades in order
While this report card focuses on how the NCLB act affects all subgroups in education, it is important to look at one group in particular; the special education students. President Bush?s NCLB act is forcing special education students to perform on statewide assessments that are above their intelligence level and are often requiring them to pass the assessments in order to receive a high school diploma. This often causes teachers, such as Lindley Corcoran, a special education teacher at Sheppard Pratt private school for students with severe disabilities, to teach to the test rather than teach practical functional skills which she believes will be ...
...erformance. The biggest issue seems to be accountability, which is an important aspect to students, teachers, and school boards. The final issue deals with the goal for 2014. To predict that 100% of students would be college-ready by this year is impossible. Some students will always need help- this is a simple statement that must be first understood before setting realistic goals. Additionally, some students will always be ahead. The goals of this act were farfetched, and should have been viewed as impossible from the beginning. Governer Rick Scott believes these misunderstandings provide a chance to gain “more local control” (2012, Armario) which he is very “enthusiastic about” (2012, Armario). The No Child Left Behind Act was started with high hopes that were never fully accomplished, but I believe that it can be successful after modifications and reevaluations.
Ravitch justly describes No Child Left Behind as failed law. She notes that, though the intentions were good and well meaning, the results were just the opposite. Why was this? Well, as ravitch puts it, NCLB was a “punitive law based on erroneous assumptions about how to improve schools.” It assumed that reporting test scores to the public would be an effective lever for school reform, changes in governance would lead to school improvement, shaming schools that were unable to lift test scores every year (and the people who work in them) would lead to higher scores, low scores were caused by lazy teachers and lazy principals, and that higher test scores are synonymous with good education. So, what is the solution? Let us look to New Orleans.
The No Child Left Behind Act, a federal social program that tries to encourages after school programs should be eliminated and the extra funds given to schools to decide where it goes.
Students use grades as a factor to show what they could be successful at in the future. If one is giving minimum effort and grades are all just “pass” it is hard to give comparison to one class over another. “Without an accurate representation that a traditional letter grading system provides, there is no easy way of knowing a student’s level of performance and knowledge” (8 Principal). If a student has no way of knowing if he or she has more success in math than in english, he or she will have a harder time picking a career.
The achievement gap is greatly evident and impacts the low-income, minority students the most. Although the federal government attempted to resolve this problem with No Child Left Behind, the social problem is still evident. As there is still much pressure on standardized tests and annual reports, reformation is needed. No Child Left Behind has proven to be inadequate and rather highlights the urgency for education reform. Although the act is called “No Child Left Behind,” an appropriate title would have been “Education Left Behind.” More than focusing on test scores, education should prepare students in how to contribute to
No Child Left Behind Providing American children with the best education as possible is definitely a goal of the United States. In 2002, the No Child Left Behind Act was created to set high standards for schools and students to help improve the education system. Although the idea of the act seemed promising, the goals and standards were not easily attainable and actually did not greatly improve education. The No Child Left Behind Act failed to meet the goal of closing the achievement gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students, encouraged teachers to teach to the test, and neglected the importance of each student’s individual needs.
Rather than helping the country’s future, the government’s input is becoming damaging to the US’s education system. President George Bush enacted the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001 with the help of American voters. The Act creates a level playing field for all students in order to produce greater success in the classroom. With the use of standardized testing and regulated curriculum, the American Government has insight to see which schools are more justified to receive education funding, but this fails our forefathers. The American Dream gives equal opportunity for success, but letting the government control the school systems in place of the state takes away from that dream.
The No Child Left Behind Act, standardized testing, and the large use of technology are some of the reasons why the United States is falling behind in educational rankings. The No Child Left Behind Act was set into place with the goal to improve student performance in school, and close the achievement gap between students; as Stecher, Vernez, and Steinburg state, “When Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), it established an ambitious goal for the nation’s states, districts, and schools: All children will be proficient in reading and mathematics by the 2013-2014 school year” (1). While the No Child Left Behind Act was implemented with good intentions, the act itself is one of the main reasons the United States is falling behind in educational rankings. One of the most common complaints from parents surrounding the No Child Left Behind Act is the weakest link factor: the weakest student sets the pace in the classroom. The weakest student takes attention away from children whose learning level is above theirs....
As Rodney Paige, former Secretary of Education, said, “We have an educational emergency in the United States of America” (Hursh, 2007). The American ideal of egalitarianism essentially states that individuals should have an equal opportunity to pursue their dreams, and an important part of being able to achieve this is attaining a quality education. Students of differing racial, cultural, socioeconomic, and ability levels should all have the same opportunities in receiving a high-quality education. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is seeking to change this. The NCLB is the current authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) (Houston, 2007), which was passed during President Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration. Every five years the ESEA is renewed. It is currently due for renewal in 2014.
Everyday school systems lose children’s attention and enthusiasm. When compared to National data, the No Child Left Behind law can be successful, but in the long run, it fails from the lack of creativity. In The Impact of No Child Left Behind on Students, Teachers, and Schools, the article states, “using data from a low stakes exam fielded in seven states over a 4-year period, identify the achievement consequences of NCLB” (Ballou & Springer, 160). Some of these consequences is only taking scores from certain grades and putting them towards the schools credibility. For instance the NCLB could take fourth grade reading scores, but not take fifth grade scores. This would not only leave a gap in the schools data, but could also potentially harm the schools reliability. Overall the NCLB is not accurate, nor is it credible. With all the gaps in data and the scores being lower than other international scores, the No Child Left Behind law needs to be