Nclb argument

It has been aimed at young students in an attempt to find strategies to help them learn to read. In addition to negatively making an impact on the political hemisphere, No Child Left Behind has proceeded to negatively impact Americans as a whole. Punitive consequences achieve temporary compliance at the cost of demoralizing teachers and students.

Knowing that consequences from Washington were unlikely, states put so many loopholes into their accountability systems that it rendered many of them meaningless, and they allowed school districts to take the easy way out when faced with the hard work of turning around low-performing schools.

This was consistent with the administration's position of funding formula programs, which distribute money to local schools for their use, and grant programs, where particular schools or groups apply directly to the federal government for funding.

Assessment-centered accountability Pro arguments Standardized testing is the best alternative for comparing student performance across different education systems because human judgment is error-prone. The greatest bang-for-the-buck for teachers under threat from NCLB penalties is to focus on students that are just below the passing grade.

The researchers recommend the following action research agenda: Combined with the budget crises in the lates recessionsome schools have cut or eliminated classes and resources for many subject areas that are not part of NCLB's accountability standards.

Forty-three states and the District of Columbia either improved academically or held steady in all categories fourth- and eighth-grade reading and fourth- and eighth-grade math. Common acceptable changes include extended test time, testing in a quieter room, translation of math problems into the student's native language, or allowing a student to type answers instead of writing them by hand.

August 29, - "Teaching to the test. School AYP results must be reported separately for each group of students identified above so that it can be determined whether each student group met the AYP objective.

Two recent studies suggest this will be more than adequate. When Bush became President and got recalcitrant Republicans to fall in line and support his accountability measures, it was a Nixon-to-China move on education policy.

Promising high-quality teachers in every classroom and then leaving the support and the pay for those teachers behind is wrong. Without adequate funding for test development and personnel training, the accountability mandate is likely to be challenged on legal grounds.

But this had much more to do with insufficient funding than with any inadequacies of the program itself. This portion of the law has drawn lots of criticism and has even led to political resistance. There has been an upward trend in the s and into the s.

These subjects are not testable. He doesn't argue that standardized testing or accountability are inherently good or evil.

No Child Left Behind

While the cacophony continues in Washington, I was lucky enough to catch a bit of a different argument on campus -- twice. Individual schools, school districts and states must publicly report test results in the aggregate and for specific student subgroups, including low-income students, students with disabilities, English language learners, and major racial and ethnic groups.

Critics point out that if a school does poorly, reducing its budget and cutting teacher salaries will likely hamper the school's ability to improve. The report "highlights the problems arising with implementation and the strategies used to tackle these problems.

State standards are externally imposed on local teachers. The case questioned which better indicated progress: Gives school districts the opportunity to demonstrate proficiency, even for subgroups that do not meet State Minimum Achievement standards, through a process called "safe harbor," a precursor to growth-based or value-added assessments.

An IEP is designed to give students with disabilities individual goals that are often not on their grade level. What he finds is, quite simply, that NCLB encourages schools to focus on only a small portion of what is important and, for that reason, needs to be changed.

Unfortunately, there is no consensus on what traits are most important and most education policy experts agree that further research is required. The act requires states to provide " highly qualified " teachers to all students. The No Child Left Behind law—the update of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act—effectively scaled up the federal role in holding schools accountable for student outcomes.

In DecemberCongress passed the Every Student Succeeds Act to replace NCLB.

Debate: No Child Left Behind Act

But besides just improving scores on tests, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) also allocates more attention to minority populations in our schools. NCLB seeks to narrow the racial and social gaps that exist in our schools to create common expectations.

Report this Argument. Pro. Jesso forfeited this round. Con. Since the Jessica. No Child Left Behind January 8, the Act of called No Child Left Behind became a law signed by President Bush.

It came in at a time when the state of education was in the forefront of public concern. The pros and cons of NCLB often seem to cancel each other out in the debate over this controversial law. In a recent issue of Applied Measurement in. The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support in and was signed into law by President George W.

Bush on Jan. 8,is the name for the. The No Child Left Behind Act or NCLB was established in under the Bush Administration. The original intent for this law was to encourage public schools to increase their academic performance, while creating an increase in student success.

Nclb argument
Rated 0/5 based on 68 review
Pros and cons of NCLB: What the research says