Always searching for inspiration…

In our educational system No Child Left Behind is a very serious topic as of right now. Not only are educators starting to voice their opinions about the social complications of this legislature, but government officials are as well. In an article I found with The Grand Rapids Press U.S. Representative Peter Hoekstra wants to create a new legislation that would give the responsibility of what happens in our educational system back to the government and essentially making NCLB impossible to use.

Hoekstra doesn’t believe his legislation has a chance, but wants to make a point. “Education has always been under local and parental control. We want to empower the states so they can say, ‘We’re going to be responsible for the state education,’” Hoekstra said Thursday.

I find this statement extremely ironical because maybe I am the only one who had this understanding, but I thought that the government has been responsible the whole time. Regardless, I respect the fact that someone who is within the government is finally trying to publicly recognize a need for some change with NCLB. Hoekstra acknowledges many of the issues that I have discussed such as schools are penalized or received pulled funding for situations that are beyond teacher control when trying to teach toward a yearly test. In addition, this legislature is quoted as having “little flexibility” in its measurements. Similarly, the previous story about immigrants being academically punished due to NCLB is also a reality in Holland (another place where the Latino population has grown considerably and having to deal with the same consequences).

He also discusses in this article how by teachers having to instruct and change their curriculum in order to satisfy test standards there is some level of discrimination. The reason for this is they are having students who are likely not to perform well pushed away with most of the instructor’s time being spent on the students who will do well. This occurs as a result of schools’ fears of being closed down or teachers losing their jobs. In other words, students who are supposed to benefiting from this act are actually be punished in more ways than what was earlier mentioned. Rather they are being crippled from having the opportunity to become mature thinkers who are capable of learning to read and write at a more in-depth level which occurs through creativity and thought-process.

Creating a system in which students are credited for showing growth in a subject rather than asking them to pass tests they’re not prepared to pass would be a first step, he said.

Entrepreneurial skills, critical thinking and creativity are being replaced by one goal: getting the kids to pass a test, he said.

“We’re all going to be there. The question is, is anybody going to be at the right place?” Schlemmer asked.

I agree with these men because after the test-drive of this act it is clear that what students need is a creative outlet that does not require them being forced to spend their secondary careers trying to memorize literary facts. Students will truly benefit from the opportunity to express their thoughts and creativity in a controlled environment such as a classroom. I get the feeling that many government officials think that this is unimportant and should be left for time outside of school. What they do not realize is that students respond to this, therefore making them more likely to retain information they have learned. The goal is “proficiency” so why not teach to students in a way that they do retain what they have been taught each year.

Hoekstra takes aim at No Child Left Behind laws

Nardy Baeza Bickel

The Grand Rapids Press

February 23, 2007

Complete Article

As explained in previous posts, many struggles have occurred in relation to the creation of No Child Left Behind. Though some can see that this law has possibilities and tests how students as well as teachers are performing several areas are finding that NCLB is narrow in terms of its measurement. As English teachers dealing with teaching to students from a middle-class bracket, minorities with expected improvement and the recent growth in immigration, future educators will also have to find solutions to teaching toward lower-class or possibly impoverished students as well who will also at some point be taking the same standardized test as every other student. Through searching Google News, I discovered a blog dealing with many current event issues but particularly questioned this administration’s “narrowness” in relation to testing schools when there is not much done for students and their families when they leave the buildings.

I have a question for President Bush. If he truly embraces the concept of No Child Left Behind, why does he limit such to educational performance? Why is it seemingly okay for children to be left behind in myriad ways outside the schoolhouse doors but, once they cross the threshold, it is suddenly unacceptable? If the federal government truly values this nation’s most precious resource (hint: it’s not petroleum but children), then ought there not be a commitment to the whole child, inside and outside of school? After all, doesn’t it stand to reason that a child who lags behind at home—e.g., due to poverty and its attendant ills—may as a result lag behind at school? Is the school somehow expected to compensate for such?

Like I have said before, I feel that several aspects of NCLB are not practical when it comes to our educational system. Teachers should be concentrating on instructing students who come from all backgrounds to read and write in a way that they can learn to enjoy or least appreciate, while in addition preparing them for higher levels of education or to receive their diplomas so they can earn some sort of job. If they are able to process what they are learning they will more likely retain their knowledge. This is important especially in areas in which life outside of school is more difficult because their families are in a low-income bracket. Areas such as this typically are problematic because emphasis on education is diminished and therefore performance on standardized testing is not generally as high. This makes the possibility of shutting down schools in these districts more of a reality which in turns less education to the area anyway. The author of this blog’s post quoted from The New York Times,

While no one believes that hospitals are really like “ER” or that doctors are anything like “House,” no one blames doctors for the failure of the health care system. From No Child Left Behind to City Hall, teachers are accused of being incompetent and underqualified, while their appeals for better and safer workplaces are systematically ignored.

Every day teachers are blamed for what the system they’re just a part of doesn’t provide: safe, adequately staffed schools with the highest expectations for all students. But that’s not something one maverick teacher, no matter how idealistic, perky or self-sacrificing, can accomplish.

I agree with this blog’s writer when he says that it is not teachers’ faults that students in these areas are performing below expectancy. They are challenged with trying to teach toward an annual test that determines funding, penalties and the existence of their jobs while continuing to teach students to their own curriculum that concentrates on meta-cognition which gears toward an open learning experience that children can benefit and appreciate. If performance inside of schools is all that is measured (due to not as much emphasis outside of school on educational importance) how are students going to perform anyway and why do teachers automatically get blamed? Are they the only contributing factor? I don’t think so and therefore I feel that the government should give more control back to education administrators by continuing to depart from traditional teaching requiring standardized testing. Instruct in ways that suggest an open-ended environment where the students are able to process because by doing so they will maintain facts that are mandatory on yearly tests. 

The Narrowness of “No Child Left Behind”

David Jaffe, January 19, 2007

Google News Blog Search

Complete Blog Post

With a recent stream of immigrants into the United States, those who will become English teachers will also have to struggle with not only teaching toward a test for fluent, native speakers of English but those foreign from this country without similar language capabilities. In an article found in the Washington Post, Virginia schools are being “threatened” by the government due to not testing immigrants on reading and writing because of difficulty in testing at the same level as those who are native speakers.

In a sharply worded letter, Deputy Secretary of Education Raymond Simon said he is “greatly distressed” that some school districts, including Fairfax County, might violate the No Child Left Behind Act. Simon urged Virginia to enforce the law. If it does not, he said, federal education officials could step in, possibly withholding funds.

Administration in Fairfax, Virginia believes violating this is unacceptable and educators have had “ample” time to administer an updated test that is geared toward non-native speaking students. However, their teachers continue to vote against this mandate because foreign students are unlikely to pass a traditional test, which eventually would cause schools to lose funding anyway.

The dispute began last year when federal education officials rejected the reading exams that Virginia has given to many students learning English, because the tests don’t cover the same grade-level material as those given to students fluent in English.

“No Child Left Behind says all children will be able to read and do math at grade level,” Simon said. “The whole point of No Child Left Behind is to find out what they know and don’t know and target resources. . . . We want the law to be followed.”

Though I understand that the government is determined to reach 2014’s goal of “proficiency” in English, I do not think that they understand what occurs within a classroom. They have constructed standards for teachers and students to perform on unaware that it is easy to be on the outside looking in saying, “Students need to be performing better. So either they do this and we measure their ability the way we want or we will punish and pull funding.” I can imagine that teaching toward different capabilities among native students is hard enough but now there is a whole other aspect to teach toward. Their educators say they have created a test that measures what students have learned after they know an acceptable amount of English but should not be tested until then.

If the government does not want to allow a new test and still expects immigrants to perform on a traditional test they must come to realize what actually happens in a classroom. Teaching two very different groups of students to a “proficient” performance will take away from all of these students. So in my opinion, the government is creating a losing situation with NCLB. The reality is many factors determine a student’s performance and students not familiar with English will be slower, therefore forcing them into the same testing is just not conducive. Forbid that the government pretended to listen to what actual educators are trying to tell them! All students should be able to learn to be mature readers and writers which I feel can be done through letting them thought-process what they are working on. With non-native speakers most of the teacher’s time will be spent almost completely on instruction in relation to the standardized test, not on becoming mature meta-cognitive learners which I think many teachers will agree is just as if not more important because this actually helps them become better at English. Then helps in future years of education and work as opposed to teaching facts they need to know for a test. Being prepared for the workforce when they graduate? Funny, I thought the government had already realized “children are the future.”

Va. Is Urged to Obey ‘No Child’ on Reading Test

Maria Glod, Staff Writer

Washington Post

February 1, 2007

Complete Article