No Child Left Behind - Reforms Needed
Our project was about the “No Child Left Behind Act.” We took an interesting approach to our topic and it didn’t end up the way we had originally planned. At first, we thought that we would just find information about the Act and present it to the class and let the class decide for themselves which position to take on the issue. Once we had started looking into the Act more, we found more and more information that lead us to take a position. We found out various reasons why the Act is not working and how it could be reformed.
We found, firstly, that the Act was setting impossible standards for schools to comply with. It was requiring close to if not perfect proficiency in order to maintain school funding. If the schools were not meeting the proficiency standards they were put on a sort of probation for a year. After this time, if the school is not meeting proficiency standards, they are in danger of losing government funding and being shut down. To counter the effects of school shut downs, the government made it possible for students in a school that doesn’t meet standards to attend another school in the district. Unfortunately, some districts only have one school and if those school don’t meet standards, students run into trouble.
Another main issue in the Act is that it is not properly funded. When the Act was initiated, the government, on the President’s request, kicked in fifty percent of the funding needed for the Act, leaving the schools and the states responsible for the remaining half of the funding. Schools are finding it impossible to find the money to cover the mandatory legislation. They are being forced to cut programs and cut faculty pay.
This Act is not all bad. The main idea is very good in theory. It is a program that forces public schools into accountability. It tries to keep students proficient with the national standards. It help school learn how to establish tutoring and after school programs to allow students to get ahead and stay ahead. It also established uniformity in the school system through the use of standardized testing to measure proficiency. Unfortunately, it is very under funded and this is a major problem. The schools who are doing well, but do not have money to support the Act are being penalized.
Once we had discovered these things, we felt that we now had a very valid presentation and that we could take it somewhere. So we turned our research in a different direction. We began emailing our instructors to ask them for a first hand account of what they thought about the Act and how it was affecting schools. Many of them replied and, surprisingly, every single reply had the same answer. The answer was reinforcement to our conclusion that the ideals of this Act were excellent in theory, but putting them into practice, especially with the lack of funding, was very hard to do. They all thought that the government was not giving enough margin for error. Many people thought that the government was overstepping its boundaries in trying to control the public school system.
We then decided that the plan could work, but it needs major reforms. First of all, adequate funding is absolutely necessary. Secondly, evaluation of each school needs to be done on a personal basis rather than on a national standard. Different regions of the nation are performing differently and cannot be evaluated the same way. The bill was too rushed and not given enough thought before it was enacted. As of now, programs are being cut, schools are being closed and teachers and faculty are receiving salary cuts. It is very important for America’s youth to be well educated, but at what cost?
We found, firstly, that the Act was setting impossible standards for schools to comply with. It was requiring close to if not perfect proficiency in order to maintain school funding. If the schools were not meeting the proficiency standards they were put on a sort of probation for a year. After this time, if the school is not meeting proficiency standards, they are in danger of losing government funding and being shut down. To counter the effects of school shut downs, the government made it possible for students in a school that doesn’t meet standards to attend another school in the district. Unfortunately, some districts only have one school and if those school don’t meet standards, students run into trouble.
Another main issue in the Act is that it is not properly funded. When the Act was initiated, the government, on the President’s request, kicked in fifty percent of the funding needed for the Act, leaving the schools and the states responsible for the remaining half of the funding. Schools are finding it impossible to find the money to cover the mandatory legislation. They are being forced to cut programs and cut faculty pay.
This Act is not all bad. The main idea is very good in theory. It is a program that forces public schools into accountability. It tries to keep students proficient with the national standards. It help school learn how to establish tutoring and after school programs to allow students to get ahead and stay ahead. It also established uniformity in the school system through the use of standardized testing to measure proficiency. Unfortunately, it is very under funded and this is a major problem. The schools who are doing well, but do not have money to support the Act are being penalized.
Once we had discovered these things, we felt that we now had a very valid presentation and that we could take it somewhere. So we turned our research in a different direction. We began emailing our instructors to ask them for a first hand account of what they thought about the Act and how it was affecting schools. Many of them replied and, surprisingly, every single reply had the same answer. The answer was reinforcement to our conclusion that the ideals of this Act were excellent in theory, but putting them into practice, especially with the lack of funding, was very hard to do. They all thought that the government was not giving enough margin for error. Many people thought that the government was overstepping its boundaries in trying to control the public school system.
We then decided that the plan could work, but it needs major reforms. First of all, adequate funding is absolutely necessary. Secondly, evaluation of each school needs to be done on a personal basis rather than on a national standard. Different regions of the nation are performing differently and cannot be evaluated the same way. The bill was too rushed and not given enough thought before it was enacted. As of now, programs are being cut, schools are being closed and teachers and faculty are receiving salary cuts. It is very important for America’s youth to be well educated, but at what cost?
posted by Tyler Brown @ 11:33 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home