NationStates Jolt Archive


No Child Left Behind

Kaziganthis
24-09-2004, 06:44
Hmm, it looks like nobody's talked about the No Child Left Behind Act in its own thread, so I thought I'd bring it up.

For those not in the know: The nclb act is a Bush proposition that changes the national school system into some convoluted Thing that looks good, but has little chance to work.

Having spent 12 years in public school, I think I have at least a bum-on-a-soapbox right to bitch about this. First of all, the act 'puts accountability into the schools' in some revolver-to-the-head kind of way. If a school does badly according to these 'school report cards' they get renovated. I believe this is a nice way of saying 'fire half the teachers and start all over'. When it becomes the teacher's fault for a child's misbehavior it sets a whole new system. Teachers refocus from helping the kids learn, to helping the kids get good grades. Good grades can be achieved by pure rote memory and cliff notes. While kids that learn make wonderful revelations in the school years, and make better and more morally steadfast adults. Learning children know how to make arguments and decisions, high grade students could only know how to copy and paste.

Then, all parents get these report cards as well. If a school does poorly, then the parents can choose to change schools. You know what this causes? An influx of overhead (students) on already overtaxed schools, I was lucky enough to have a school system built intentionally around large classrooms. But what about old fashioned schools? And what about the stress of changing schools? I doubt a middle school kid has friends in other schools. They'll be lonely and will very likely do worse in an unfamiliar school. And this will be increased by forcing schools to provide transportation to these new schools. My district was highly overtaxed on its busses. It had to get up at 5:30 to reach a 7:30 class. The bus had to provide to 5 residential areas because we were so sparse. I was at the edge of the district and all the younger kids were going to a new school.

Back to old fashion. The act wants to use 'proven methods' for kids. This means that what gives kids good grades is forced on other schools. This stagnates them to the same teaching methods. I went to a very experimental school which accommodated for the larger population. I had wonderful classes where the subjects were intermingled as much as possible, and it was fun. I shudder to think what it would have been like to have english/math/science/PE curriculum all four years. We had school representatives from a dozen different states to see how we worked. I think the act will bring an end to this experimentation, and become painfully obsolete in 10 years. Conveniently, after this guy's term is over.

I haven't taken my usual steps to make an argument in this, but I'd like to hear people's thoughts on the program.
TheOneRule
24-09-2004, 06:53
I dont see a problem with holding schools accountable for their performance. I dont see a problem holding people accountable for their performance either. If a school seems unable to teach children "the basics", is that not an indicator that something is wrong?

Anytime someone with a responsibility to do something, but there is no means to hold them accountable, it leaves the system open to manipulation. And it isn't always good manipulation. Teacher "tenure" is a horrible system that does nothing to induce a teacher to do anything at all.

You talked about "proven methods" being "forced" on schools is a bad thing. If something works, what is wrong with doing that? Sure, experiment with new ideas.. but if they don't work, go back to what does. I dont see a problem with that at all.
Genady
24-09-2004, 06:56
Personally, I don't support it. It's advocating the teaching to lower students rather than higher ones, which yes, sounds good on paper, but its not helping those students who are above average.
TheOneRule
24-09-2004, 06:58
Personally, I don't support it. It's advocating the teaching to lower students rather than higher ones, which yes, sounds good on paper, but its not helping those students who are above average.
Im sure you didnt mean this the way I took it.
But what I took from this was that you think that schools should rather teach to the upper half of the students, and if the lower half can't keep up.... oh well.
The Derelict
24-09-2004, 07:00
The above average students have option. AP classes and magnet programs. I was public schooled and yes, it was horrible teaching. See the problem here is, they haven't been held accountable for doing their jobs. Remember, they aren't volunteering they are getting paid to provide a service. And just like every other job they should be held accountable for their proformance.

Having said that, I don't think NCLB will help that much but, its a step in the right direction.
Kaziganthis
24-09-2004, 07:23
Using proven methods and only proven methods is a definition of stagnation. I'm sure many here heard from their parents "they never taught that when I was in school." Bush's plan appears to base the validity of methods on lab experiments. Considering the diverse nature of public schools, I doubt they'll hold up very well.
Genady
24-09-2004, 07:35
Im sure you didnt mean this the way I took it.
But what I took from this was that you think that schools should rather teach to the upper half of the students, and if the lower half can't keep up.... oh well.
Well..that's what was said, but not exactly what I meant. This is going to sound terrible, but I think kids should be tested and placed into classes with others of similar intellect. While yes there may happen to be some psychological problems with this...but eh...i dunno. Its a lose-lose situation any way you go.
TheOneRule
24-09-2004, 07:48
Well..that's what was said, but not exactly what I meant. This is going to sound terrible, but I think kids should be tested and placed into classes with others of similar intellect. While yes there may happen to be some psychological problems with this...but eh...i dunno. Its a lose-lose situation any way you go.
It doesnt have to be lose-lose. And I would agree with you with the change of one word. I believe students should be placed according to ability, not intellect. Ability has to do with intellect as well as willingness to do the work and a myrad of other factors.
Students of different ability levels learn with different techniques. What works for some, might not or will not work for others. I believe that each and every student should reach the utmost of their own potential and we as a people should help them.
However, not holding teachers accountable for their failures doesnt help anyone, but the teachers.