NCLB reaches 12 years. Is it still an operative law?
Under the No Child Left Behind law (Public Law 107-110, 2001) 100 % of
students were to achieve
proficiency in math and reading by 2014.
The law was due for re-authorization in 2009. It has not been re-authorized. Education
Secretary Arne Duncan responded to criticism by granting waivers. At the time, he said, "America's most sweeping
education law—the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, also known as No
Child Left Behind—is outmoded and constrains state and district efforts for
innovation and reform. The smartest way to fix that is through a reauthorized
ESEA law, but Congress has not agreed on a responsible bill. “
By Valerie Strauss, The Answer Sheet.
It’s the year that all U.S. public schools were supposed to reach 100% student proficiency. It didn’t happen, of course. The law under which that was mandated, No Child Left Behind, has crashed and burned, but, unfortunately, its worst ideas haven’t. Writing about this is Lisa Guisbond of The National Center for Fair & Open Testing, known as FairTest, a non-profit dedicated to ending the misuse of standardized tests.
By Lisa Guisbond
It’s 2014, the year all U.S. public schools were supposed to reach 100% student proficiency, so said No Child Left Behind (NCLB).
No, you didn’t miss the fanfare. One hundred percent proficiency didn’t happen. Not even close. In fact, our classrooms are making even less progresstoward improving overall educational performance and narrowing racial test score gaps than before NCLB became law.
The problem is policy makers are still following NCLB’s test-and-punish path. The names of the tests may have changed, but the strategy remains the same. As the late, great Pete Seeger sang, “When will we ever learn?”
It’s not that the law’s proponents haven’t acknowledged – repeatedly — the law’s vast unpopularity and negative consequences, including the way it made schools all about testing. Back in 2007, Congressman George Miller, an NCLB co-author, said, “No Child Left Behind may be the most negative brand in America.” The retiring congressman said recently that the results from the federally mandated tests were intended to measure school progress and drive improvements. Instead, he said, “the mission became about the test.”
Aug.13, 2013.
SACRAMENTO—State
Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson today issued the following
statement after the U.S. Department of Education announced conditional approval
of No Child Left Behind waiver applications by eight California school
districts:
"All California schools
deserve relief from the unworkable mandates of No Child Left Behind, so it's
noteworthy that a few districts have—temporarily at least—managed to navigate
the complex waiver requirements imposed by the Administration," Torlakson
said. "I continue to believe that Congress should make it a priority to
revise NCLB, and that relief from the failings of federal policy should not be
reserved only for those prepared to provide Washington an ever-expanding role
in the operation of California's public schools."
Congress hasn't reauthorized the law. Congressman
George Miller, one of the authors of the law says “chances are “slim” that the current Congress will take action
on the legislation, even though it should have been reauthorized in 2007.”
Forty two states have received a waiver from the
NCLB law, and as part of that process the Education Department allowed states
to set "ambitious but achievable" achievement targets. States can
choose, for instance, to cut the achievement gap between subgroup students
(such as racial minorities) and other students in half in six years.
Sept. 2013.
Sept. 2013.
The California Legislature, by
passing Assembly Bill
484 in September, put the state out of
compliance with the federal testing requirements law of NCLB. AB 484
ends most state standardized tests, including English language arts and math
for grades 3 to 8 and 11, which are required annually under the No Child Left
Behind law. Instead, the state is requiring that all districts administer a
preliminary test in the Common Core State Standards in either math or English
language arts – but not both – in those grades. In her letter, Assistant
Secretary of Education Deborah Delisle said that offering one of the two tests
wouldn’t meet the law or provide the results that the public relies on.
“By failing to administer
a reading/language arts and mathematics assessment to all students in the
tested grades, California would be unable to provide this important information
to students, principals, teachers, and parents,” she wrote. “In addition,
because its new policy violates federal law, California now risks significant
enforcement action by the Department” – a loss of $15 million in administrative
funding for the state Department of Education plus potentially the $30 million
that the state received last year through Title I to administer standardized
tests.
Duncan’s statement
U.S. Secretary of
Education Arne Duncan released the following statement in reaction to a draft of AB 484, approved by the California’s legislature to exempt millions of students from
state assessments:
“A request from California
to not measure the achievement of millions of students this year is not
something we could approve in good conscience. Raising standards to better
prepare students for college and careers is absolutely the right thing to do,
but letting an entire school year pass for millions of students without sharing
information on their schools’ performance with them and their families is the
wrong way to go about this transition. No one wants to over-test, but if you
are going to support all students’ achievement, you need to know how all
students are doing. If California moves forward with a plan that fails to
assess all its students, as required by federal law, the Department will be
forced to take action, which could include withholding funds from the state.
“In states like California
that will be field-testing more sophisticated and useful assessments this
school year, the Department has offered flexibility to allow each student to
take their state’s current assessment in English language arts and math or the
new field tests in those subjects. That’s a thoughtful approach as states are
transitioning to new standards. While standards and tests may not match up
perfectly yet, backing away entirely from accountability and transparency is
not good for students, parents, schools and districts.
“California has
demonstrated its leadership by raising its standards, investing in their
implementation and working with other states to develop new assessments, and I
urge the state to continue to be a positive force for reform.” Sept.9, 2013.
No comments:
Post a Comment