Why NCLB Must
be Repealed
The following is from Fairtest.org
http://www.fairtest.org/nclb%20flaw%20fact%20sheet%201-7-04.html
For a even more reasons check any of these links
especially the Just
Say No.
"NO CHILD LEFT
BEHIND" AFTER TWO YEARS:
A TRACK RECORD OF FAILURE
The increasingly visible flaws of the "No
Child Left Behind" law and the growing, bipartisan
criticisms of its provisions demonstrate that the law will
do more harm than good. NCLB's test-and-punish approach to
school reform relies on extremely limited, one-size-fits-all
tools that reduce education to little more than test prep
programs. It produces unfair decisions and requires
unproven, often irrational approaches to complex educational
problems. NCLB is clearly underfunded. But fully funding a
bad law is not the solution. If the nation's goal really is
to leave no child behind, the federal government must
overhaul NCLB to ensure that assessment and accountability
genuinely improve learning for all students.
* NCLB is based on false assumptions and
therefore offers false remedies. The façade that was
created to portray Houston and "the Texas Miracle" as
national models is crumbling. Independent researchers have
shown Houston failed to close the race-based achievement
gap, inflated test results by pushing out low-scoring
students, and failed to adequately prepare the few who
actually graduate for college-level work. Similar
high-stakes approaches in other states, such as Alabama and
Mississippi, have left students mired at the bottom of
national rankings. The U.S. cannot test its way to better
schools.
* Nearly all schools will eventually be
rated "In Need of Improvement" because of the way Adequate
Yearly Progress statistics are calculated. A recent
California study confirms the findings of other researchers
that the more diverse a student body, the more likely
schools or districts will fail to make sufficient progress
in test results to avoid NCLB sanctions. While diverse,
high-poverty schools will fail and be punished sooner, the
consensus among researchers is that almost every school will
eventually fall short of the arbitrary improvement
requirements.
* NCLB's obsessive focus on raising test
scores will mean an increasing emphasis on test preparation,
undermining the higher order thinking skills all students
need to succeed in work and life. Overwhelming pressure to
meet test score targets makes schools focus on drilling
students for the exams. "Teaching to the test" narrows the
curriculum, forcing teachers and students to concentrate on
memorizing isolated facts. As a result rising test scores
will not mean academic improvement. Fewer students will be
prepared to be successful citizens in our society.
* Demanding that disabled and limited
English proficient students reach "proficiency" on
standardized tests sets those students and their teachers up
for failure. Rather than provide resources so schools can
offer individualized approaches these students need to
succeed, NCLB offers the pretense that if we hold them to
the "same standards," they will magically rise to the
occasion. NCLB is already causing many students to be
scapegoated for dragging down average test scores, tempting
some schools to drive them out. The failure to provide high
quality comprehensive assessments for all these students
endangers both the students and their schools.
Tutoring provisions take money from
schools that most need it and turn public funds over to
private entrepreneurs. Based on the simplistic, faulty
premise that low test scores are caused primarily by
inadequate or lazy public school teachers, NCLB paves the
way for private firms to reap huge profits. Meanwhile,
strapped districts will see their budgets pinched further
and be forced to lay off staff and cut back on services to
students who most need extra help.
* Transfer provisions make matters worse
at both the home and receiving school, while diverting money
from education to "busing." This provision has been a giant
bust, with some receiving schools overwhelmed by transfers
and ill-equipped to handle them, but most parents saying,
"No thanks." Parents increasingly view this so-called choice
provision as a hoax, recognizing that better performing
schools are tantalizingly out of reach, either in
neighboring districts that say no to their kids, or exam
schools within their districts that are also off limits.
* Many of the best teachers will flee
schools where they are most needed. As experienced and
excellent teachers recognize that schools with society's
most vulnerable students are destined for failure and
punishment, those who can will transfer to higher performing
schools. The abandoned schools will be hard-pressed to
recruit replacement teachers of any quality.
* NCLB funds fall far short of what would
be needed to make every student in every public school
proficient. The failure to fully fund NCLB is the clearest
example of how it leaves many children behind. However, even
with more adequate funding, the law's assumptions and
methods are so deeply flawed that it cannot work without
fundamental change.
* NCLB ignores the real reasons many
children are left behind. The failure to address factors
outside of school that influence academic achievement
guarantees NCLB will not succeed. The best school, the best
teachers and the best curriculum can make a huge difference
in the lives of disadvantaged children, but basic needs like
housing, health care and nutrition must also be addressed to
truly close the achievement gap between poor and rich
children.
* The law's remedies for "failing"
schools do not work. A series of studies demonstrates that
most attempts to "reconstitute" troubled schools fail to
improve student performance. Moreover, few if any states
will have the capacity to intervene in the large numbers of
public schools that will eventually be identified for NCLB's
ultimate sanctions.
* Last, but not least, better
alternatives exist to improve troubled schools. Educators,
researchers, and engaged parents have worked to create and
use far better assessments that meet the primary purposes of
assessment - improving teaching and learning while informing
the public about school quality. This requires rich
assessments, from tests and quizzes to projects and
portfolios, rooted in ongoing classroom work by students and
teachers; professional development for educators and time
for them to plan improvements in curriculum and instruction;
involvement by parents as real partners not just consumers
of test scores; annual reports on student learning and other
vital data that the community needs to help improve their
schools; monitoring by the state to ensure schools are
equitably serving all students; and targeted assistance for
those schools which really need it.
For more information about NCLB's flaws
and better assessment alternatives that will help improve
academic performance for all students, see:
Leaving Children Behind http://www.fairtest.org/nattest/Kappan.pdf
FairTest National Testing Home Page
http://www.fairtest.org/nattest/bushtest.html
FairTest: National Center for Fair &
Open Testing
342 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139
phone- (617) 864-4810 fax- (617) 497-2224
web- http://www.fairtest.org
|
