No Child Left Behind: A Divergence of Views
Essay Preview: No Child Left Behind: A Divergence of Views
Report this essay
No Child Left Behind: A Divergence of Views.
In 2001 the No Child Left Behind Act was passed as a solution to the national problem the United States of America was facing. American educational performance was low compared to other rivals countries, threatening a decrease in the U.S. international economic power. NCLB was implemented to encourage standardized testing, and to provide measurable standards, and to increase educational outcomes and student performances. Although every state is responsible for setting its own standards, the government wanted to hold schools accountable for students progress through evaluating the test scores. The government evaluation process put a lot of pressure on state officials to achieve the standards. Additionally, teachers qualifications were under question as well, thus putting their employment at risk. Consequently, the teacher qualification issue stirred a national issue about whether the NCLB is the right solution. Many critics feared states had started “dumbing” the tests, and that, consequently, the rise of “teaching to the test” became prevalent when national math and reading scores showed low performance across the board.
The funding of an education public institution relates directly with the yearly standardized test scores. The yearly scores are used to determine the schools accountability, thus affecting the amount of funding and support the school gets from the government. According to supporters of NCLB, punishment and reward are useful strategies to make teachers and state officials understand the gravity of improving students performance and the impact education has on a nation. Meanwhile, opponents to this law believe that this strategy doesnt help students improvement but only worsens it by punishing schools. NCLB education reform affects all members involved, from teachers to parents to the economic standing of the U.S. However, the greatest impact is on the students lives and the curriculum which students are taught.
NCLBs process of reward and punishment has shown to have a great impact on teachers performances. Teachers have started teaching to the test and many have evolved their lesson plans around the standardized test. Schools started designing after school programs for reviews and activities to ensure students improvement on these tests. Ultimately, the pressure to meet higher scores in the standardized tests resulted as critics of NCLB argue, in a low education standard, leaving no room for other concepts that could help in higher education readiness. Furthermore, NCLB dictates that all schools must provide an annual detailed report on the progress of all children from the three subgroups: Children with English as a second language, children with disabilities, minority children. The consequences of this report are far reaching. Real estate agents may use these reports to answer customer questions about school districts, which will then affect the population of a certain neighborhood. Meanwhile, teachers may consider these reports before applying for a teaching position. Additionally, in many case, superintendents use the information within the reports to decide which principles are successful and which are not. Also, voters will examine these reports when evaluating school boards. Overall, NCLB not only affects teachers, students achievements, and lessons curriculums but it also seems that it has a significant effect on communities.
NCLB has created a national controversy and elicits different opinions among scholars. Among these viewpoints is Robert Maranto, a 21st century chair in leadership at the Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas. In a recent blog Maranto discusses wrote his almost positive view of NCLB. On the other hand of the spectrum is Diane Ravitch, a historian of education, who has expressed her opinion on NCLB. In a recent article titled “The Big Idea–its bad education policy,” she points out what she believes to be many of the flaws of education reforms. Alternatively, Michael J. Petrilli is the vice president of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and a research fellow at the Hoover Institution. Petrilli wrote a viewpoint article, titled “No Child Left Behind Should Be Reformed,” in which he admits that he has come to the conclusion that NCLB is flawed. Nevertheless, Petrilli believes that its ideals are very important and that it should be reformed at the hand of state governments rather than at the federal level. These three viewpoints represent the spectrum of varying views about NCLB among scholars; some of these reforms are rich of reform ideas to perfect NCLB.
Using evidence of students who play football and participate in extracurricular activities, Robert Maranto defends his viewpoint that NCLB has succefully covered the ideal way of teaching. Moreover, Maranto dedicates his blog to defend the NCLB because he believes that the critiques the act is receiving are due to a mere misunderstanding in the teacher-student interaction and the way the two parties perceive the standardized test. Maranto points out that American teens are not lazy, stating that “our students work hard everywhere except school,” because of the way students are taught to think that school is hard work (Maranto 1). Maranto believes that there is a direct correlation between the situation of playing football on a team with the aid of a coach, and the situation between students, standardized tests, and teachers. Maranto claims that the difference between the two is that teachers “set the standard and prepare students to meet the standard,” instead of following the standards given to them by NCLB. Meanwhile, a coach “helps students meet the standard set by the other team” (Maranto 1). Maranto concludes that the coach and the football players are on the same side, while students and their teachers “are on opposing sides” (Maranto 1), which causes teachers to lower the standards of the education they are offering leading to portraying NCLB as a “failure” (Ravitch 1). Maranto believes that teachers should embrace the standards set by NCLB instead of fighting it off because it loses the sense of unity that Maranto portrays through the metaphor of the football coach and his players.
According to