AJC.com > Blogs > Get Schooled > Archives > 2008 > March > 19 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USWill flexibility improve NCLB?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings announced a pilot program aimed to differentiate between schools that need help in many areas to make Adequate Yearly Progress and schools with just a small number of students missing the mark.
Spellings described this program as “differentiated accountability.” Basically up to 10 states will have more freedom in how they sanction schools that fail to meet the performance targets required under No Child Left Behind.
NCLB says all students should perform at grade level by 2014. To meet that goal, schools must reach certain benchmarks on specific tests every year. Schools are judged on scores for all children and subgroups of students. If just one group misses the mark, the entire school can fail. Schools missing the mark for consecutive years face increasingly severe sanctions, ranging from allowing students to transfer to better-performing schools to a takeover by the state.
The law breaks down schools’ test scores in more than 35 categories. School A may fail in 20 areas, while School B may miss one. As the law stands now, both schools would be viewed as “in need of improvement” and face the same punishment.
The pilot program would change that. School A would receive extensive intervention from the state and face harsh sanctions. School B would help its few struggling students without being labeled underperforming or facing sanctions.
The change addresses criticism that the law labels too many effective schools as failing. But this isn’t the overhaul many critics hoped for. One anti-NCLB group described the program as “the political equivalent of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.”
Do you think this flexibility will improve NCLB?
Comments
By Teacher2
March 19, 2008 9:39 AM | Link to this
Sure, it’ll help—about as much as a finger in a dike.
By SAM
March 19, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this
SMOKE AND MIRRORS…. AGAIN!! Once again the EDU-OCRACY and politicians try to repair, piece by minute piece, what it has broken. And , once again, it’s like a plumber attempting to ‘fix’ a kidney infection.
By yesiamworried
March 19, 2008 10:15 AM | Link to this
It doesn’t matter.
I do wonder if Cox will apply for GA to be considered.
She has shown her self consistently to be first and foremost a party loyalist. She seeks approval from those in DC regardless of what it might mean for the citizens of GA
By Mara
March 19, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this
I think its pretty clear that the government cannot fix the school system. If we truly want to change our failing school system it’s time for privitization.
By don
March 19, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this
All students should perform at grade level by 2014?! what about the kids in the 6yrs intervening? have we given up on getting them to perform? what about kids that are behind now, are they suddenly supposed to be at grade level by 2014 despite being behind the curve now? what a flipping joke. i’m so sick and tired of these damned standardized tests that politicos keep piling on thinking they’re helping something. my son’s class has spent the past month studying for the CRCT. they’ll spend the next two weeks studying for it, that’s 6 wasted weeks they’ve spent reviewing what they’re supposed to already have learned (isn’t that the point of normal tests and quizzes??), 6 weeks wasted not learning anything new. all so the teachers and the school won’t lose any tax funds next year. what a damned joke.
By Tater
March 19, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this
Wow… It’s so great to read all these comments regarding our failing school system.
Just waiting for the pro public school folks to chime in on this one.
don you’re on it today..
By lyncoln
March 19, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this
The flexibility will certainly improve NCLB.
This particular change allows states more control of how to spend money on schools that are not passing the NCLB criteria. A state can choose to allocate more money towards schools failing in many categories (more money than currently) and less money towards schools that struggle in only a few categories.
I can hope that the law doesn’t originally state that all failing schools require the same amount of allocated funds, but I’m sure someone interpreted it that way to avoid charges about unequal treatment of failing schools.
I’m disgusted that this wasn’t originally part of NCLB and it’s enforcement. Apparently the orignal designers believed that ‘one size fits all’ is actually true and a good method of allocating funds. Thank goodness someone finally came to their senses.
By V for Vendetta
March 19, 2008 12:05 PM | Link to this
This won’t change anything because there’s still an underlying fundamental problem with NCLB …
SOME CHILDREN MUST BE LEFT BEHIND!
Call it social darwinism, survival of the fittest (smartest) or just plain common sense, but not all children can perform at or above grade level. We’ve watered down everything enough. It’s time to stand up for education and the kids who deserve it. It should NOT be a right.
The government has proven itself incapable of handling this matter for the past few decades. It’s time for a change, a change spelled P-R-I-V-T-I-Z-A-T-I-O-N.
By V for Vendetta
March 19, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this
LOL, it would have helped if I had spelled “privitization” correctly. It’s one of THOSE days apparently …
:-)
By JustMe
March 19, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this
No - just get rid of NCLB in its entirety. It has accomplished nothing except to make schools worse. A band-aide won’t fix it.
By JustMe
March 19, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this
V for Vendetta - I agree with you that NCLB should be stopped. I also agree that the federal government needs to decrease its role overall in public education.
However, I do not agree with your privitization part. We (our society) does not need to move towards a ‘separate but equal’ policy - and that is what would likely happen.
Public schools were supposed to be locally controlled. Allow the local community to do their job. If the local community is fine with failing schools (Clayton County?), then that is their choice. If the local community cares, then they will be involved.
In any case, as long as our society believes that we should provide a minimum and free education to ALL of the children of our citizens, privitization won’t work. Don’t mix public money (taxes) with private schools. There are many reasons I believe this, but won’t list them here unless requested.
By don
March 19, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this
V I couldn’t agree more on the fact that some kids just won’t/can’t/don’t cut it in school at the level they need to be. Remember back in the 80s when the focus was on doing anything possible to keep kids from quitting school, which eventually led to lowering the bar to a level where HS graduates today learn less/know less than what 5th graders were taught and expected to know 30, 40 yrs ago. I don’t agree with complete privatization, I think public schools are a necessity, but I do support the idea of vouchers/tax credits if parents choose to move a child from public to private school.
By Tater
March 19, 2008 12:54 PM | Link to this
JustMe, What do you do in Clayton County’s case? Do you believe that the State/Fed’s are any better at this?? Stop with the local community garbage. Do you honestly believe that the local community cares? The ones who do will pull their kids out of the district as soon as possible. Remember, this is not the first time Clayton County has been in hot water.
V is right. Some kids need to be left behind in order for the rest to succeed. The pulling down of the entire student body in favor of a few who have no desire to become educated is one of the main reasons for privatization.
By Just Wondering
March 19, 2008 1:04 PM | Link to this
I am curious….has anyone read the entire NCLB legislation?
There are many decisions made at the state/local level that are blamed on NCLB that are not mandates of the legislation.
I am not saying the law is perfect - far from it - but it appears as if Spellings is willing to admit that and make some changes that will actually benefit schools (provided, of course, that our state superintendent applies for the pilot program.)
Just my thoughts.
By JustMe
March 19, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this
T - The truely concerned parents in Clayton County should have been involved with their child’s education way before the BOE screwed things up. For the “concerned parents” to NOW be suddenly concerned is BS in my book. However, even now, if the concerned parents were to get involved and make the required changes to fix things, why would the federal or even state need to become involved? As always, I feel that it is a cop-out to flee from a community problem: and school failure or even BOE failure is a community problem.
Don and V What do you think of the idea of having a ‘gradutation test’ for elementary school and also one for middle school (there is already one for high school in GA)? Students would have to pass (show proficiency in content) in order to graduate to the next school level. This is kinda how they do things in many parts of the world (I think some examples are China, Japan, Germany, etc.). Would you be in favor of this?
By violasmom
March 19, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this
This may fit better with yesterday’s topic but…I just finished reading a 2004 report from Achieve, Inc. called “Do Graduation Tests Measure Up?” While I don’t agree with their research methods (I think their sample size was WAY too small, 6 states out of a possible 23 and that they had to use some of that “statistical magic” to be able to compare the exams across states), they do make a valid point, High School exit exams need to be more difficult than they are right now…Ok, now on to today’s topic, without saying so in so many words they pretty much blame NCLB for this phenomenon. Let me also say that in theory NCLB is a wonderful idea, but in practice it plain old sucks. I agree with V, there are some people out there destined to flip hamburgers at McD’s for their entire lives, not everyone is college material. I don’t think that what is being proposed is going to solve any problems, only possibly increase the amount of “dumbing down” that has to occur. Just my 2 cents worth.
By V for Vendetta
March 19, 2008 1:23 PM | Link to this
JustMe,
I, too, am a fan of the European model of education. If we were to adopt such a system, one that understands that all kids do NOT have to go to college and that technical training is not a horrible thing, then I would support such a move. I guess, if I’m being totally clear, I would say that I am for a system like the one you suggest OR the privitization of schools.
Don’t get me wrong, there are multiple solutions to our current predicament. The real question is will we ever live to see ANY solution implemented.
Wait, I already know the answer to that …
By don
March 19, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this
JM I would be in favor of an exit exam at the end of each grade level, not just elem, middle, high. IMHO if you haven’t mastered the material at the level you just completed, you don’t move on to the next level. simple as that.
By jim d
March 19, 2008 1:57 PM | Link to this
Graduation tests?
Hmm, seems I still have a problem with using a single test criteria for any type of educational advancement.
A single test may too often be flawed, for various reasons that I hesitate to be gone into here, and some students just don’t test well.
Now if you wanted to use it along with other measures such as grades earned thru-out the year I might support such a measure, but even then may be a bit hesitant.
As to the origional question?
Not no but —— Hell no, flexibility will not salvage a failed program we know as NCLB. The proper place for this legislation is the same place it came from (up Bush’s a@#)
By don
March 19, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this
jim d I agree that one standard, across the board test shouldn’t be the deciding factor, but one of several taken into account. how did the child score on tests/homework throughout the year? how well, in the opinion of the teacher (or better yet, a third party, independent evaluator) do they grasp the material needed to move on to the next grade?
By JustMe
March 19, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this
Not no but —— Hell no, flexibility will not salvage a failed program we know as NCLB. The proper place for this legislation is the same place it came from (up Bush’s a@#)
jd - upon that, we agree!
By JustMe
March 19, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this
don and jd Interesting that you guys believe that. I guess, then, that you do not think that there should be a high school graduation test? Currently, GA has that as a requirement to get a high school diploma.
By Old School
March 19, 2008 3:20 PM | Link to this
I just wish they would LET ME TEACH. I know my subject/skills area, I keep my subject matter/skills current (I’m CTAE), I love what I do and my students, I’m good at it, AND I HAVE MY OWN TEACHING STYLE. Just let me teach.
I actually like the QCC standards and find them easy to build a program around (Engineering Drawing). What I find difficult is changing my teaching style to fit the mould that some other person worked out for himself and that is now being forced upon me in the name of NCLB and because it is “researched based.”
Just let me teach. I’ll adapt my techniques to best reach my varied students and their varied abilities. I’ll rise to those coveted “teachable moments” seizing the opportunities that students gift me with and, with the students, enjoy a wonderful learning experience.
Just let me teach and I’ll work extra hard to engage as many of my learners as I can and keep them that way. I’ll ground my instruction in the real world so they can see the relevance of the lessons and I’ll give them opportunities to apply those lessons and skills in new directions.
Let me teach the way I know best; the way that comes naturally for me; the way that best serves MY students in MY classroom. I promise to share my enthusiasm with them and I’ll work to draw their own enthusiasm out.
Many of the goals of NCLB will be achieved given time, given space, given opportunity…
…if we are simply given the chance to TEACH.
By don
March 19, 2008 3:27 PM | Link to this
justme read the whole post, sweetheart. I support administering a test at the end of each grade level, every school year. I do however recognize that some kids, my daughter is one of them, get freaked out by tests and don’t do as well on them. I think the testing should be one barometer of how well the child grasps the curriculum. if, for example, a student has made A’s/B’s and demonstrated the ability to apply learned information to real world situations, but that student doesn’t do well on one test at the end of the year, then I would say that student should move forward in their education. The reverse is also true in my opinion, if a student has slacked all year, made Ds/Fs but then miraculously aces an end of the year test, that student should stay behind and retake the information.
By catlady
March 19, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this
There is very little salvagable about NCLB. It was flawed on its inception. It is flawed on its assumptions. It is flawed in its enactment. It based on the flawed Texas “success”. What is good about it? Well, it has people talking about education. THAT is an improvement.
Re: student retention. Multiple measures are good. Unfortunately we have quite a difference in grading standards. I read the work of proported honor students on these blogs and they are on the level of 8th graders.
It is sort of like basing the HOPE grant on student grades. We need a more unbiased measure such as SAT scores, to show that a 3.0 MEANS above average work.
By don
March 19, 2008 3:47 PM | Link to this
Amen Old School, just wish all teachers were as dedicated as you
By hs sped
March 19, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this
So, If I’m reading this correctly, my mildly retarded (MID)students that are working toward a reg ed diploma can keep my entire school from making AYP?
By high school teacher
March 19, 2008 3:59 PM | Link to this
hs sped, you got it!
By jim d
March 19, 2008 4:10 PM | Link to this
JM,
“I still have a problem with using a single test criteria for any type of educational advancement.
Understand that my first expierence with this concept was a little thing called the “Gateway Test” in Gwinnett county about 9 years ago. It was a bogus test then and it still is. Gwinnett students must pass a battery of tests that consumes entirely too much time.
Here’s a link to their testing calendar. Check for youself to determine if it’s too much.
By don
March 19, 2008 5:01 PM | Link to this
jim d that does look like a helluva lot of tests to be administering. for my two cents (this is probably going to be an unpopular opinion) the fed govt should not, in any way, be dictating curriculum standards or “benchmarks” on performance, let alone tying funding to those benchmarks. each state, and each county/parrish in that state, should be responsible for its own education standards. the funding should be based solely on the tax base in that area. if your county raised 100 million in taxes, you have 100 million to spend on education, if you only raised 50 mill, you only have 50mil
By Lee
March 19, 2008 7:52 PM | Link to this
Poetic justice, if you ask me…
School systems want to hold back a student based solely on one test but when a school is designated “Needs Improvement” based on one test criteria, they all call foul.
Excuse me while I LMAO.
Let us not forget the reason for all this nonsense. That is, schools were passing students from grade to grade that could not do the work and were graduating illiterates.
By C.R.H.
March 19, 2008 10:07 PM | Link to this
Let us also not forget that many of these illiterates were being passed on despite the teacher’s efforts to keep them back! When parents raise hell and administrators or school boards back down, everyone loses. The biggest losers are the students and they are too stupid to realize they didn’t really get “something for nothing”. Some teachers lose their job or are “demoted” (take that however you wish) when they have kids failing.
By eleteach
March 19, 2008 10:14 PM | Link to this
As a teacher, I’m rather frustrated with NCLB. However, as a parent, I’m extremely frustrated. My gifted, underachieving son has learned that he really doesn’t have to participate in class, turn in any work, can even fail the majority of his classes, as long as he passes that test at the end of the year.
He determines at the beginning of each school year, the subjects for which he must pass the class (usually only 1 of 4 core classes) and which ones only require passing scores on the tests(CRCT, Gateway)in order to move to the next grade level.
He figured out this little loop hole when he was 12. When are the politicians going to???
By JustMe
March 19, 2008 11:34 PM | Link to this
My dear Lee, there is no school or school system that “wants to hold a child back” due to failing one test. Where do you ever get such an idea?
I guess what you are referring to is a STATE LAW as a result from the FEDERAL NCLB. Why do you blame the school or school system?
Get your facts straight, please.
By Lee
March 20, 2008 5:40 AM | Link to this
Justme, maybe Jim D can clarify, but I’m pretty sure that Gwinnett implemented the Gateway test well before NCLB. The NCLB has become a crutch for local and state educrats to hide behind.
That said, perhaps I misspoke (using the George Bush vernacular) when I said schools were holding students back. Silly me. Schools don’t hold anyone back anymore. That’s part of the problem and one of the root causes of graduating illiterates.
While we’re on the subject of politically correct pathology, it seems the Palm Beach Florida ACLU has it’s panties in a wad over minority graduation rates and is suing the local school district. More of the same old “equal outcomes” nonsense, IMHO. 50+ years after Brown vs. Board and 30 years after IDEA, the politically correct crowd can’t come to grasp with the reality that there are differences between individuals.
By lynn d
March 20, 2008 6:11 AM | Link to this
First, Lee is right. The Gateway came before NCLB and the feds do not require any state to use standardized testing to hold a student back. Read NCLB yourself, JustMe, there is no mention of holding students accountable, only schools, systems and states.
Lee,
Absolutely people are different. But, in some cases, school systems really haven’t been doing their jobs and students haven’t been successful. What a shame that so much of NCLB is garbage, because its’ one positive aspect has been shining the light on this issue.
I strongly believe that we need to hold SYSTEMS responsible for what is happening in their schools.
By Tater
March 20, 2008 8:56 AM | Link to this
JustMe
I FOUND a job absolutely suited for you. You get your own driver, 24-hours a day (Town Car by the way…nice) your own security team, $2 Million to hire your BFF’s AND a salary of $275,000.00. Oh there are other perks, but to minuscule to mention.
Yea, Government really works.. Leave it up to the school district, they know how to fix it. Your views are out of touch with reality, the posters here have tried to educate you to no avail.
Truly pathetic (but not surprised) situation.
By One
March 20, 2008 9:10 AM | Link to this
That’s like asking if that thug Dubya will do anything too help Americans……….and we know the answer to that, HE!! NO!!!!!!!!!!!!
By Tater
March 20, 2008 9:23 AM | Link to this
Hey One.. How about being responsible for yourself and your life instead of counting on government to solve your problems.
You are on the wrong post here. The democratic posters are on the whiners blog.
By One
March 20, 2008 9:24 AM | Link to this
“to”……..and the answer’s still HE!! NO!!!!!
By jim d
March 21, 2008 11:24 AM | Link to this
Sorry Lee,
But the Gateway was never ever intended to hold kids back It was simply a pilot for the state that we in gwinnett got to pay for.
Not one student has been held back that wouldn’t have been anyway and many that should have—have been passed on thru. So no real gains in education have been realized from this stupid — bogus— flawed —expensive —piece of crap.
Someday I may tell you how I really feel about this issue.
By Truth Filter
March 21, 2008 12:37 PM | Link to this
A few facts (hate to inject those here):