NCLB: Our students Should not Have to Wait any Longer

We are pleased the Administration is calling for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. (ESEA, NCLB)

We all know that 12 years under a broken No Child Left Behind system has failed students and schools by neglecting to close the achievement and opportunity gaps as promised. Our students, especially those most in need, should not have to wait any longer.14952255037_f829491e7d_z
We are looking forward to working with Republicans, Democrats, the civil rights community, educators and other partners in ensuring that all students have equal educational opportunity—the original focus of ESEA. Our focus is on providing equal opportunity to every child so that they may be prepared for college and career.

A child’s chances for success should not depend on living in the right zip code.

In order to do this, we must reduce the emphasis on standardized tests that have corrupted the quality of the education received by children, especially those in high poverty areas.

Parents and educators know that the one-size-fits-all annual federal testing structure has not worked. We support grade span testing to free up time and resources for students, diminish ‘teaching to the test,’ expand extracurricular activities, and allow educators to focus on what is most important: instilling a love of learning in their students.

We must give states and districts the flexibility to use assessments they feel are best for identifying achievement gaps, rather than forcing them to live with a one-size-fits-all approach that often ignores high needs children.

And we should move toward a smarter accountability system that looks at more than just a test score, but focuses on the many factors that are indicative of school and student success, and highlight gaps in equity that must be addressed.

Share Article:Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

8 Responses to “NCLB: Our students Should not Have to Wait any Longer”

  1. Sue Helms

    Here! Here! Well said and so true!

    Reply
  2. Sue Scott

    In addition, the CSET (Mulitiple Choice) requirement for a teacher that teaches Moderate/Severe Special Education students is a JOKE!!! How does it apply to these students?

    Reply
  3. Kizzy Nicholas

    Truly, our students with disabilities are repeatedly having their rights trampled on. They are identified as working below level and rather than having assessments at or near their levels, they are forced to take test that are above they ability. I would love for the administration and test makers to take a test in an area they know they struggle in and then make it three times harder than they possible can do. Accountability and progress monitoring, yes. Data that is meaningful and useful to my instruction, yes. A test that reminds my 6th grade students that read on a second grade level (SLD, ID) that they are behind their peers, as if they didn’t already know.

    Reply
  4. Rick Eachus

    Will you run for President of the United States? Well said, and I have felt–for a long time–that the biggest problem in education is that the Federal government is involved in it. It’s been a while since I have taught social studies or have been a student in a social studies class, but I thought education was reserved for states’ control. Though there are probably other things, behind the scenes, of which I am unaware that has changed that.

    Reply
    • carol lowe

      the problem rick is that over the years the state and fed. governments have known teachers are struggling to get the job done. and so they offered money to make things better. but, with that money came conditions, expensive programs, rules, testing, and standards (which has become a bad word in my mind). oodles of money was spent on educational development, workshops, and many, many companies got rich sending representatives to schools touting the ‘latest thing’ which came with lots of money spent on their product and professional development to teach us how to swallow the bill of goods. state and fed. government then needs to justify the money, so paper work was tripled and time to be involved in teaching became shortened and weighed down. from that we found we were being told how to do our job by people that had absolutely no qualifications in education. now we’re at the phase that if you don’t do it our way, you will lost your job. personally i don’t think any good in guiding children’s learning has come out of all of it. if all the money wasted had been used to greatly reduce class size so the opportunity to know and offer what each child needed to move to the next step we would have been ahead of the game.

      Reply
  5. carol lowe

    no child left behind should not assume they are all going to be in the same place at the same time. no child left behind is a relative thing. it should imply that children will move from one spot on to the next spot on the learning scale.

    Reply
  6. Tom Young

    I think Carol Lowe should run for president. Well said!!

    Reply
  7. Larry DeHeer

    It should be no surprise that the Kennedy Bush theory/practice of top down centrally managed education is a clunker and bites the hands that for so many years have fed it. Is it a stretch to see that the same is true of top down centrally managed anything and everything (agriculture, energy, environment, VA, health care, transportation, etc.)? Not likely. Liberals just can’t let the idea of the great centrally managed utopia slip away in a sea of failures, and they will always be saying that we just did not spend enough money and let’s try again with more money this time.

    Reply

Leave a Reply