The Wrong Way: What No Child Left Behind

I have to admit, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) has its moments. Setting a nationwide standard for students at every age and holding teachers and schools accountable for student progress are sensible foundations on which to build our school reform. Giving students and families more rights to choose the best school for them is also an effective way to ensure that opportunity is waiting for those who would like to indulge. There is no denying the validity of these ideals, nor that they are critical in our nation’s pursuit toward quality education for all children and young people; yet, NCLB’s very existence sidesteps the true issue, leaving it nearly impossible to achieve quality education.

There is a huge gap in achievement between poor and affluent communities in every state in the nation. This gap can be attributed to many things, but the most important factors in a student’s success include parents’ education level and socioeconomic status. NCLB devotes an entire section to “Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged.” The academic achievement of the disadvantaged boils down to 12 bullet points that will see our students through to success. These bullet points repeatedly address accountability on the part of teachers and schools, and are fairly unspecific. Here’s an example, “[Improving the achievement of the disadvantaged] can be accomplished by closing the achievement gap between high- and low-performing children, especially the achievement gaps between minority and nonminority students, and between disadvantaged children and their more advantaged peers.” This section of the Act does not go into specifics on how closing the achievement gap can be carried out, leading me to conclude that the answer must be found in some of the funding that NCLB promises. More on that in a few.

So tracking this gap is rather important. Let’s see how they do it.

Testing. Testing is an indicator of progress, but in itself is not a solution. Taken to the next level, it is used to dole out consequences: dictating whether a student can graduate, whether a school gets extra funding, whether a teacher is up to par. The term accountability is mentioned several hundred times in NCLB, and while it relates to the responsibility of the state, superintendent, and principal, accountability ultimately rests on the shoulders of the teachers.  “Bad teachers” are the ones making the headlines when we talk about our underperforming schools. You don’t hear much about bad principals or governors (at least as far as education is concerned). Teachers are considered the true measure of a student’s progress. This assertion seems to make sense; after all, teachers are the most direct link to a student’s education and achievement. But let’s take a moment to rewind. If low-income students, many in inner cities, are achieving at a much lower rate than students in more affluent communities (53% graduate from high school, compared to 71% in the suburbs), perhaps a student’s environment also has a large impact on achievement. Why focus all of our attention on the teachers? Perhaps poorer communities just have a harder time getting good teachers. That certainly could be true.

In low-income school districts, many students arrive to school on the first day 2 or more grade levels behind. Let’s say you’re a 6^th grade English teacher and about half of your students are reading at a 4^th grade level, or lower. You have a list of books you have to teach, and more than half of your students struggle to read a single sentence from these books. While you’re not allowed to take any class time to teach struggling students the basics, you invite them to meet you after school. Few show up. At the end of the year, when the students’ test scores come back, your students are expected to be at grade level. If not, your job is in jeopardy, and thanks to you, the state department of education’s poor assessment of your school, your students, and your abilities won’t be adjusted this year. In fact, keep it up and the state will completely take over your school, rendering all of that expertise they demanded of you (passing a test, earning your Master’s degree, attending hours of workshops), pretty much useless.  While undoubtedly bad teachers do exist, using test scores to decide the fate of teachers is a great way to fast track them very willingly into their next careers. Although many teachers leave the profession after just a few years, there are huge numbers of great teachers in low-income schools who stick it out through their entire careers. This is not to say that high turnover among the faculty could not be a contributor to poor achievement. But it certainly can’t be the only contributor. And in order to judge “bad” teachers, we need to start looking at realistic data.

The problem with NCLB is that it ultimately holds only teachers accountable for students’ low achievement. The lagging performance of our lower income schools demanded this reform, but the reformers didn’t look at the heart of the problem. Our schools’ need to be reformed is just an indicator of a much larger scale problem – the need for reform in our communities, where crime and poverty run rampant and survival is more important than academic success. While NCLB has dominated education, it has failed to yield results. Test scores of 4^th graders have not made any gains since 2002 and test scores of 8^th graders have actually dropped.  While we continue to let a failing piece of legislation rule our schools, we ignore the many factors outside of the classroom that affect student achievement. The amount of funding and time spent enforcing NCLB in underperforming schools is excessive in comparison to the results. If our lawmakers would instead put their efforts behind a program to improve our communities, our schools would most likely fix themselves.

Also by Caty DiDonato Anderson:

Whose Right? Adoption Exclusion in America

Will Today’s Youth Matter? A Look Ahead

The Wrong Way: What No Child Left Behind