NCLB Outrages
No Child Left Behind law may be flawed, but it should not be abolished
Ohanian Comment: Hey, I don't know that I was ever denounced in an editorial before.
Join the revolution. Expose the corporate fat cats who are ruining public education. Here are specific things you can do.
The $71.40 Plan to Take Back Our Schools
Sign the Petition!!
Contribute $10.40 to help pay for the New York Times ad denouncing NCLB.
You can use PayPal or send a check.
Buy a CD and Sing Out in Resistance!!!
Send an anti-DIBELS book to Rep. Miller and one to Kennedy too.
Members of VSSE will receive a free copy of my new book attacking the state department of education sell-out to Reading First. Just about every state ed department in the country did this. They need to be exposed. Here's a model for doing it.
Subscribe to Substance. Write for the resistance. I am the National Resistance Editor. Tell us what's happening in your district.
And now about this editorial. I'm reluctant to give much time to this but here are a couple of points. The editorialist asserts,"All children should be reading at least at grade level."
"Grade level" is more a political concept than a legitimate educational one. And this assertion sounds surprisingly like Lake Wobegon, where all children are above average.
As long as we continue to educate English learners and students with emotional, cognitive, and other problems, ALL children aren't going to read on grade level.
The editorialist brags, "Four out of five Tennessee public schools, including the ones in Sevier County, have met the requirements of the federal law." Are they ever in for a shock. Here are the projected targets for Tennessee in Reading/Language Arts,Determined by the Percent of Students at the Proficient or Above Levels
School Year Reading/Language
2002-2004 77.1%
2004-2007 82.825%
2007-2010 88.55%
2010-2013 93.1%
2013-2014 100%
They have to jump 18% between now and 2014
Editorial
Before we admit failure and chunk all that is good and worthy about No Child Left Behind, maybe we ought to step back and see just what that would mean. The intent of the federal law pushed by President Bush was to improve standards and performance in our public schools. Who among us could argue that is not needed? Test scores have dropped and colleges are forced more and more to offer remedial courses in their core curriculums.
No Child Left Behind set as a goal to have all children reading at grade level by 2014. All children should be reading at least at grade level. Four out of five Tennessee public schools, including the ones in Sevier County, have met the requirements of the federal law. It can be done.
So what's the problem? Susan Ohanian, a senior fellow at the Vermont Society for the Study of Education, said during a recent Nashville conference of educators that teachers ought to sign a petition urging that No Child Left Behind be abolished. She says it is setting up schools for failure.
Schools that can't teach children to read at grade level are failures. They are failing the students entrusted to them to teach. Setting reasonable standards and making teachers and administrators work hard to meet those standards is neither unrealistic nor unfair.
However there are flaws in the No Child Left Behind law, to be sure. It makes little distinction between regular and special-education children. It does not allow flexibility for children with established reading and learning difficulties and disabilities. And it sets the guidelines for what degrees and experience teachers must have to teach certain subjects. It's not always easy to find good math and science teachers these days.
Those legitimate concerns should lead to reforms of the law, not the killing of it. To destroy the law sends the signal that public schools cannot be improved, that children are doing the best they can and can do no better, and teachers should not be held so accountable for their students' performance. That is not the signal that should be sent out to a public already skeptical about the quality of our public schools.
Fix the law's weaknesses. Allow for some distinction among students. But don't destroy a law whose intent is good. Susan Ohanian is wrong.
— Editorial
Mountain News
2006-11-25
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1211&dept_id=169692&newsid=17509425&PAG=461&rfi=9
INDEX OF NCLB OUTRAGES
