No Child Left Behind

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) to me is an Act with great intentions, but with unreasonable goals, resources, and expectations.

I am a teacher and a parent, so I can see both sides of the equation. As a parent, obviously I want my kids to go to schools that have high expectations, with excellent teachers that are held accountable for teaching every kid the things they need to learn. However as a teacher, I see and experience the unrealistic expectations placed on educators by NCLB. Under the federal law, all students are expected to be reading and doing math on grade level by the year 2014 , including special-education students and foreign-language speakers who are just learning English (Zuckerbrod, 2007). No matter how well I teach or how I vary instruction, my two inclusion classes are full of kids that are going to struggle to pass the various tests based on their special needs or language barriers. This "one size fits all" testing mentality is one of the big criticisms of NCLB, as it does not factor that different children learn in different ways and therefore should be tested by different methods (NEA, 2007). How can we have IEPs that individualize education, then turn around and expect everyone to pass one test with identical standards?

The pressure on teachers and administrators is also intense. If groups of students fail to meet their specific goals, entire schools are labeled as needing improvement, and otherwise excellent teachers and principals are in danger of losing jobs (Zuckerbrod, 2007). Teachers are already notoriously underpaid (at least when you factor in time after-school and buying supplies) and this type of pressure is not going to attract the best of the best coming from our colleges.

Then there is the issue of resources. NCLB is a bit of a Catch-22: if you do not meet the standards, school lose federal funding; without federal funding, schools have a difficult time getting the resources to improve. The funding issue is such a hotbed, that in 2005 the NEA and several school districts actually filed a lawsuit against the DEA, charging the government with creating an unconstitutional, unfunded mandate (Brown, 2005).

So the NCLB is a great idea on paper...but is too narrow and unrealistic long-term. If it is going to last into the next decade, some sweeping changes need to be made that consider multiple intelligences, special education, and other factors.

Resources:
Brown, M. (2005). No Child Left Behind Critics Say Law is Unfair. Medil News Service. Retrieved February 22, 2007 from http://mesh.medill.northwestern.edu/mnschicago/archives/2005/07/leaving_no_chil.html

National Education Association. (2006). 'No Child Left Behind' Act/ESEA. Retrieved February 22, 2007 from http://www.nea.org/esea/more.html

Zuckerbrod, N. (2007, February 13). Rethinking No Child Left Behind. The Seattle Times. Retrieved February 22, 2007 from http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education/2003566743_nochild11.html