Critical Thinking Paper Ellie Struewing Green Group

Critical Thinking Paper Because standardized tests do not supply reliable and helpful data about students growth, encourage focus on only some basic parts of learning rather than letting students experience different creative aspects of school, and wrongly label schools and teachers as failing, the President must make changes in the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act to make a better program that is more effective in schools. The public had high hopes for NCLB when former president George Bush released it in 2001. Its original purpose was to ensure that students in public schools improved and met the goal set by NCLB in certain areas of learning. The plan was to require states to test their students in different basic skills, while deciding on a goal that would ultimately decide if the school received government funding or not. Unfortunately, what has happened is that schools have become too invested in these tests, and focus on teaching students based on the test content rather than teaching them for real life situations. Also, the focus on only a few subjects makes school less interesting and fun for students. To best prepare students for the world around them, education should not be designed around standardized tests. These and several more problems with NCLB indicate that it needs improvement to truly benefit teachers, students, and their schools.

The history of NCLB does not begin when it was released over 10 years ago. Although NCLB began in 2001, it is not the first attempt at reaching educational equity in the United States. In 1965, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was enacted by former president Lyndon Johnson, and has been reauthorized

several times. In 1994, the Improving Americas Schools Act added standards and accountability elements to the education plan. NCLB works off of those added aspects. When NCLB was introduced, the support by the Senate and House was a reflection of the hope that people felt regarding the improvement of education. The votes were 87-10 for the act in the Senate, and 381-41 in the House. (Ed.Gov, U.S. Department of Education) While hope was high, the Governments actions regarding education did not fulfill the needs of schools.

One major problem with NCLB is that its main strategy, the use of standardized tests, is not a good way of reflecting or improving students learning. According to Valerie Strauss, (NCLB) has neither significantly increased academic performance nor significantly reduced achievement gaps, even as measured by standardized exams. (Valerie Strauss, The Washington Post) The tests dont measure the ability to take meaning from texts or to apply math, but only to understand the basics, meaning only these skills are focused on in schools. This is not whats important for students today. Whats truly important doesnt rely on basic skills, but on how to use them and how to extend on those ideas and interpret them in a way that makes sense to each individual student. Currently, the way that improvement is measured is by looking at scores of one group of students, maybe fourth graders, and comparing them to the scores of the fourth grade class of the previous year. This is a bad idea for many reasons. One group of students cannot be compared to a completely different group of students. Circumstances may have changed from year to year, so comparing the scores of entirely different groups of

students is not an effective way to measure improvement. Another aspect that must be considered is the fact that we live in a world where people make discoveries every day and inventions are changing the lives of people everywhere. If the curriculum in schools becomes the basics that are on standardized tests, we are decreasing the likelihood of success for children adapting to the modern world. Students need to be prepared through a variety of classes that do not just focus on standardized test material, such as art or music classes. Leaving out these classes is denying students the opportunity to develop an understanding of more than just what NCLB is testing on. In an article written by Alfie Kohn, she claims NCLB is wrong for education and even if the scores do rise, it's at the expense of a quality education. (Alfie Kohn, Common Dreams)

Another criticism regarding NCLB is the test material, which has no focus whatsoever on creativity and individual talent, but relies on memorization and drills. In the tests, students answer questions that do not require much creative thinking at all. It is wrong to judge students academically when the only evidence taken into consideration is standardized test scores. Reading and math are the two main parts of the test and they are focused on too much. As a result, Art, music, physical education, social studies and other important subjects not tested have taken a back seat to intensive instruction geared specifically toward standardized tests. (The Daily Campus) While reading and math are very important, they should not take the place of other subjects just because they are on standardized tests. Because of NCLB, schools in many places dedicate almost all of what they teach to

the basic math and reading skills found on standardized tests. From 1999 to 2004, reading instruction gained about 40 minutes a week, while science lost about 23 minutes. (Claudia Wallis & Sonja Steptoe, Debatepedia) This subtle change in what is being taught is due to NCLB, and is not beneficial to students learning. Science and social studies classes cannot be ignored because kids need to be drilled in superficial math and reading questions in preparation for standardized tests. These classes are just as important for students to get a full education. Also, school isnt fun without a variety of classes that encourage creativity and investigation. Students may not want to come to school if all they learn is math and reading concepts that they are required to be tested on. While math and reading skills are important to know, more opportunities will be offered to students who have other skills. For example, if a student scores well on a standardized test, but does not have any evidence of growth in other areas that they thrive in, like art or theater, then colleges wont be as likely to accept them.

Standardized test results are not a good reflection of a school, and when schools dont meet the set goals, they are labeled as failing. In addition, schools are required to make adequate progress in thirty-three areas, and falling short in just one of them means they have failed. This makes preparing and drilling for standardized tests a huge priority in schools. An example of harsh requirements can be found in the situation of Bud Carson Middle School, in California. When it missed one of its AYP (adequate yearly progress) goals, it was on the needs improvement list, even after improving greatly from the previous year. Additionally, other schools

in California were required to help students transfer to other schools purely because their current schools did not meet every requirement after 1 year. According to Columbia Business School, school failure rates ranged from less than 1% to more than 80% across states. (columbia.edu) Every school is different and the Government does not take that into consideration. Things like student population can affect how schools score, yet all schools are given then same requirements and goals. Tests dont just affect the students, though. Teachers are under stress because how well their students do is a reflection of them and how well they teach. Because of this, they alter how and what they teach. Knowing the general kind of questions found on standardized tests, teachers restrict their teaching to those sorts of questions, and in doing so fail to let kids experience different kinds of learning that will be more interesting and beneficial to them.

While some people say that NCLB should be abandoned totally, there are some things that could be done to fix it instead of end it. An idea that has come to light recently is the waiver system. When a state receives a waiver, it would be able to create its own system to aim for improvement. With a waiver, a state could Set their own ambitious but achievable terms for closing achievement gaps and ensuring students are proficient in reading and math, instead of meeting the NCLB timeline that requires 100 percent proficiency by 2014 (Megan Slack, White House Blog) This is a good solution because giving more options for states will allow them to make decisions that tailor to their needs rather than NCLBs current approach, which is more of one size fits all. If waivers wouldnt work, there are still some

things that could be changed. Rather than give standardized tests, why not assign group projects, extended writing assignments, or individual projects that showcase a students creativity and true knowledge and understanding instead? This would allow teachers to continue teaching from a broader spectrum of a subject and allow a bigger variety of classes. Students would be happier learning more than just the basics, and teachers would have the opportunity to use more of their expertise when teaching. Also, instead of comparing the scores of one grade with the grade above it, it would make more sense to measure individual students grades over time. This would make it easier to see if individual students need improvement. Then, if they do, they can get the attention they needed from teachers to help them catch up.

Since the program started, some changes and additions have been made in attempt to make it better. In 2009, President Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan implemented the Race to the Top program. It offers bold incentives to states willing to spur systemic reform to improve teaching and learning in Americas schools (TheWhiteHouse) It implements incentives like big grants to states that get higher test scores, improve teacher effectiveness, and help and improve struggling schools. For example, Maryland was awarded 250 million dollars because of the overall score it received. While some states benefited from the grants, some, like Virginia and Texas, refused to be a part of the RTTP because they didnt like the program. Virginia is ranked as one of the best states education wise and yet they backed out of the second round of the Race to the Top program.

Critics of Race to the Top say that standardized tests havent worked in the past, and shouldnt still be used to gain data on schools. According to historian Diane Ravitch, it will make the current standardized tests of basic skills more important than ever, and even more time and resources will be devoted to raising scores on these tests. There will be even less time available for the arts, science, history, civics, foreign language, even physical education. Teachers will teach to the test. There will be more cheating, more gaming the system. (Huffington Post) Several reasons make the Race to the Top program not the right fit for the advancement of education, and the President should look for different solutions.

Overall, the main priorities of NCLB, which are standardized tests, a focus on math and reading, and high goals set for schools, do not reflect what needs to be done to improve education and therefore should be changed. Comparing the scores of different groups of students is not an effective way of measuring improvement and individual students scores would be more helpful. Classes like science, history, art, physical education, etc., should not be ignored because of the enormous emphasis on math and reading that NCLB requires. Finally, it is unfair to label schools as failing or improving just based on the scores of a multiple-choice test. With the right improvements though, NCLB can be a more effective way to help education for future generations.

Works Cited Columbia Business School. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Apr. 2013. <http://www7.gsb.columbia.edu/nclb/research>. "The History of No Child Left Behind." ED.gov. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/guide/guide_pg12.html>. "No Child Left Behind a Flawed System." The Daily Campus. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://dbp.idebate.org/en/index.php/Argument:_No_Child_Left_Behind_overemphasizes_math_and_reading_in_curriculum>. "No Child Left Behind Debate Centers On Federalism." Huff Post. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/16/no-child-left-behindreauthorization-federalism_n_927718.html>. "No Child Left Behind - Overview." New America Foundation. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://febp.newamerica.net/background-analysis/no-child-left-behindoverview>. "Our View: No Child Left Behind." Anchorage Daily News. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://www.adn.com/2008/12/10/619086/our-view-no-child-left-behind.html>. "Promise of No Child Left Behind Falls Short after 10 Years." USA Today News. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. <http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/>.

Ravitch, Diane. "Obamas Race to the Top Will Not Improve Education." Huffington Post. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Apr. 2013. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dianeravitch/obamas-race-to-the-top-wi_b_666598.html>. Seigel, Timothy. "The Problem with 'No Child Left Behind.'" Forbes. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. <http://www.forbes.com/>. Slack, Megan. "Everything You Need to Know." The White House Blog. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/02/09/everything-you-needknow-waivers-flexibility-and-reforming-no-child-left-behind>. "Standardized tests poorly measure real student learning." Debatepedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Feb. 2013. <http://dbp.idebate.org/>. Strauss, Valerie. "A Decade of No Child Left Behind: Lessons from a policy failure." The Washington Post. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/a-decade-of-no-childleft-behind-lessons-from-a-policy-failure/2012/01/05/gIQAeb19gP_blog.html>. - - -. "Education reform paralysis-and how to fix it." The Washington Post. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answersheet/post/how-the-ed-reform-debate-became-boring--and-how-to-enlivenit/2011/12/15/gIQAUVNH8O_blog.html>. Wallis, Claudia, and Sonja Steptoe. "How to Fix No Child Left Behind." Debatepedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2013. <http://dbp.idebate.org/en/index.php/Argument:_No_Child_Left_Behind_overemphasizes_math_and_reading_in_curriculum>.

10