NCLB

To start off, I think the NCLB act while has a good purpose has failed to achieve it what it set out to. There are certain things that I like about NCLB. I think that there needs to be accountability in schools and I think that there needs to be a standard for teachers in order to teach. However, the system of accountability or standardized testing and the consequences for testing needs to be looked at again.

Working in a district that failed to meet AYP for many years, I have seen first hand of what standardized testing has done to the school. Because success of testing determine funds given to the school, the entire school (administration, teachers, students) gear toward this test (NJASK) for the entire year. Administrators determine success of the teacher by the success that of the test. This leads to teachers being moved around constantly from grade to grade or subject to subject. I have heard of excellent teachers who move their children in literacy more than 2 grade levels in a year be seen as failures because not enough students pass the test. Therefore, they either are moved from their position or leave the school due to their frustrations with the school. The turnover rate for teachers in my own school is incredibly high. Who can blame them? The first half of the year is stressful since we have to make sure that all aspects of the test are covered and after the test we are stressed to get back our results. Teachers are basically forced to teach to the test. For example, reading is now taught as reading a passage and completing a comprehension worksheet. The joy of teaching is stripped away due to these pressures. Students are then unmotivated to learn because of the bland nature of the classroom which result in more disruptive behaviors that the teacher has to endure. Taking reading as an example, the joy of reading a book is gone because all we focus on in class is comprehension. Students never develop a love for reading which in turn causes them to read less and less affecting their reading skills and lowering test scores. Teachers then push more comprehension worksheets to make up for their lack of skill and the cycle repeats again. The joy of teaching and learning is gone from school. Results are all that matter.

This past year, we had an average of 10-15 teachers who were constantly absent from school. So what then resulted from these absences, we had substitute teachers who basically did nothing which then in turn resulted in the children not learning anything which affected their test scores even more. On a personal level, since this was my first year of teaching, I disregarded what was suggested to me and I taught my students what I thought they should know instead of teaching them isolated skills for the test. The result, I had 1 student out of 8 pass the lit portion of the NJASK and 0 out of 8 pass the math portion of the test. So what does this mean? My students’ results were mixed in with everyone else which means that my students contributed to the success or failures of AYP. Were my students better off for me teaching what I did, I think yes. However, was my school better off for me doing what I did? Probably not which in turn affects my students. It’s a tough call on what I will do next year, one in which I have not yet decided upon.

On a different note, the one thing that comes to mind when reading the successes of NCLB is this. Well, of course scores are going to go up. The consequences of NCLB makes states do things that only show results. States lower standards and teachers teach the test to improve scores. Does this mean that the students are better prepared for life? Pardon my French but HELL NO. NCLB helps students succeed and graduate high school, but it fails them in life.