Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiA child's education should begin at least one hundred years before he is born. - Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
The debate in Congress over whether to reauthorize No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is underway.
What's with these politically-calculated, brand-name, PR-speak, Orwellian euphemisms? Clear Skies Act. Operation Enduring Freedom. USA Patriot Act. No Child Left Behind. Who, other than Hal Lindsey fans, would want a child to be left behind?! What unenlightened creature, harboring "the soft bigotry of low expectations," in the words of the President, would be opposed to legislation that promotes "academic excellence?"
Loaded terms aside, the Repubs are ready to march in line behind Bush while the Dems say they have issues with the law's mandate that state's rely on standardized tests to measure "adequate yearly progress" in reading and math.
The most obvious problem with NCLB is the gap between the lofty sounding rhetoric coming out of the President's mouth, and the money. Since the law came into effect in 2002, it's been under-funded by an estimated $56 billion.
Last month, Bush held up New York City as an example of how to improve "under-performing" schools. "If New York City can do it, you can do it," he said.
Two weeks later, the New York press is reporting how "the feds are cheating the city out of $3.3 billion in education funds - money promised to help kids pass a slew of new standardized tests."
In 2007, for example, Bush promised $1.8 billion to Big Apple schools, but only delivered $834 million - a 54 percent shortfall, according to U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-Brooklyn and Queens.
Despite the under-funding of NCLB, student test scores have generally increased and the so-called achievement gap between ethnic groups has narrowed somewhat since the law was enacted. But, no one can say whether those gains are because of NCLB or other factors.
And there doesn't seem to be any discernible relationship between standardized test results and good grades, class rank or other measures used to predict success in college or the job market.
Ben Sears of Political Affairs magazine captures the situation succinctly. "This is resulting in narrowing the curriculum as schools focus on preparing for the tests and are forced to reduce instructional time for 'non-tested' subjects."
"All this forces one to wonder. Could NCLB as presently written be part of the long range plan of the Administration to undermine public education? If the law's harsh provisions result in more schools being branded 'failures,' could that lead to an exodus from the public schools in to the proliferating charter schools or religious or other private academies?"
"And could the law generate such frustration with the federal government's clumsy attempt to influence education policy, that it causes a 'backlash' movement opposing any federal role?"
Of course, high standards and accountability are worthy ideals but the public appears to be growing weary of this over-reliance on testing. A Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll in June found that 52 percent of public school parents felt there's too much testing - up from 32 percent in 2002. And, 75 percent of public school parents said the focus on testing was forcing teachers to teach to the test, not the subject matter.
This growing skepticism is based on more than just gut instinct or warmed-over Dr. Spock feel good-ism. A survey conducted by the Center on Education Policy shows that 71 percent of America's 15,000 schools had cut instruction time at the expense of other subjects like history, art and music.
But, even more basic than these concerns are those coming from the scientific community. "Contrary to traditional notions...emotions, not cognitive stimulation, serve as the mind's primary architect," Dr. Stanley Greenspan details in his book The Growth of the Mind.
So while we're obsessing over high-stakes testing and focusing on the minds of teenagers, there's not much attention being paid to what's in the babies' heart - the foundation of theirs (and ours) educational future.
And not just the babies but their mothers too. I think Abigail Adams was onto something when she wrote to her husband and Founding Father, John: "If we mean to have heroes, statesmen and philosophers, we should have learned women."
"If much depends...on the early education of youth and the first principles which are instilled take the deepest root, great benefit must arise from literary accomplishments in women."
Sean Gonsalves is a Cape Cod Times staff writer and a syndicated columnist. E-mail him at sgonsalves@capecodonline.com.
21 Comments so far
Show AllSusan H: Thanks for your thoughtful remarks. As you said, public schools have always resisted progress.
The quality of teaching in USA schools has declined, probably due to the increase of violence, drugs, and lack of discipline in public schools. Our best qualified and dedicated teachers have either left the profession or turned to private education.
I dislike GWB so much that I believe he should be impeached and tried for war crimes, but I agree with him on NCLB.
The constitution does not guarantee a free public education, and the states are responsible for funding their own education needs. Many other Federally mandated laws are not fully funded by the Federal government, and I doubt the incompetents who teach in our public school systems would stop complaining if NCLB was fully funded.
Educational standards vary from state to state, and our children really do not have an opportunity for equal educations until all states have the same standards.
I salute you, Susan H!
Teachers have to school the children to memorize the answers to the tests. There is little time to answer questions about the environment, Teachers don't dare give an intelligent answer or opinion if a kid asks a question about the war. They may well lose their job. (One teacher admitted to the class in answer to a question about peace demonstrations that she often honked her horn when she went by one with signs that said "Honk for Peace." That cost her her job and she's lost the appeal all the way to SCOTUS)
The other day, der Bush said our educational system was not training kids for the jobs of the past, but for the jobs of the future!
"Do you want fries with that?"
I've always wondered why no one has looked to industry to help set educational standards. If I'm a hiring manager, and I expect a given employee to show up with a skill set, couldn't I have some insight or input into what that skill set is? It's just so sad to hire a high school graduate with a diploma into an entry level position, and then finding out that they lack even basic math & language skills. From that perspective, I'm for standardized testing, just to avoid being in that position. However, I am for hiring creative people who can think on their feet! Automotons need not apply!
Children don't learn because their parents didn't learn either. They all live in a culture where real knowledge and understanding don't make any difference.( Barbara Ehrenreich wrote an essay related to this thesis. I think it was published in Newsweek circa, July 2006).
Men make more money than women even though they learn a lot less in college.
Also, the workplace is tyrannical in its authoritative structure so intelligence and creativity don't matter. Politics and playing social games well do. And luck. How one is typecast is one's fate.
Kids learn all this early. Performing well on tests is just another mode of jumping through hoops to please those with power. It has nothing to do with nurturing the whole personality and developing healthily-functioning adults.
I work for the school system in West Virginia, and I have a lot of friends who are teachers. They all really hate NCLB. One English teacher told me that the state provides "sample" tests before the actual tests are given, and that, in fact, they are not just samples but the same tests that students really take.
The writing assessment tests, he told me, are graded by computer! Unbelievable. This means that the tests can only be graded on the basis of grammar, spelling, and sentence structure, but not creativity, clarity of ideas, or quality of content.
The following is a scenario my friend described to me It happened about two years ago.
Students were given topics for the writing assessment test in order for them to practice. The English teachers were supposed to discuss the students' writing and help them prepare for the test. There was no guidance from the state concerning rules during the test including whether or not the students could bring their practice essays with them, but the county did create guidelines that prohibited students from having their essays available to them during the test.
On the day of the test, at least one of the students managed to sneak his practice essay into the testing room and was found using it. The worst part of this is that it turned out to be not a "sample" at all, but exactly the same topic the students had been given to practice on! Of course, this student began to copy the essay and was caught.
Apparently there was a big bruhaha over this incident, and the boy's teacher (my friend) was dragged on the carpet as if this were his fault. A big argument ensued during which he got in trouble for accusing the state people of not having good guidelines, for being outraged that the state supplied students with the actual tests for practice, and for having an opinion about the stupidity of using computers to correct written English tests.
I'm not sure if the problems at the state level are due to funding, incompetence, or some other unimaginable roadblocks, but the way kids are taught to the test, the administration of the tests, the grading of these tests, and the neglect of other subject matter are detracting from education, not bringing anyone up to higher standards.
Kids have more homework than ever before, their recess is cut short, and creativity suffers. It's a travesty.
bloofer
I think your assessment is well said and accurate. I would add that it also has a chilling effect on teachers as they become more like customer service representatives.
The effect of forcing schools to "teach the test" is essentially to give over control of the curriculum to the federal government: THEY will decide, not only what is taught in the schools, but the correct answers.
Perhaps the biggest problem with the educational system is that it does not present facts and encourage inductive reasoning. Instead, the approach is to feed kids pat answers.
Often we are well into adulthood before we come to realize that the pat answers we were fed in school were disinformation, propaganda, lies by omission, spin, and outright falsehoods. What this system produces--especially at the college level--is kids whose possession of a flattering degree fosters the notion that their more extensive exposure to propaganda equals superiority to others, and greater knowledge than others.
This where all these people are coming from who have no knowledge of facts, no interest in facts that contradict whatever bullshit they've been taught, and no ability to reason or think critically--from the educational system.
Nock got it right when he said that the purpose of the public educational system is to promote "a servile reverence for a sacrosanct State." NCLB is simply applying a more efficient means to this end.
DICTENFREUND: Brilliantly encapsulated and stated!
I have a great and simple way to take care of the health insurance situation for the kids in the USA and their education can be funded by this as well. let's start making carpets; their small hands are perfect for tying tiny knots, we can export to Iran for oil. Then they can have their health benefits, and if they are really proficient maybe we can even start them off on an early 401k. Maybe they'll get voting rights; who knows, they might not be as brainwashed as the middle aged populace and we might actually get a government with something to offer other than war, thievery and pollution.
Susan H: I appreciate the idealism behind your posting, but let us remember this is largely a BUSH initiative and it HIS people designing the books and tests. I can't remember if it was in the September or October issue of Harper's, but a scathing review of "No Child Left Behind" and the insidious manner it's leading to privatizing education and in some instances confiscating public school property (real estate!) was published. I think it will cause you to drop your ideals. Your logic is right-on, but I don't think it implies when the crazies are in charge.
Standardizing a test is not inherently bad; that's what you do if you want to measure something, compare results, and infer something meaningful from the comparison. This is part of critical thinking, too: logic, inference, deduction, comparison, definition, etc. These things can definitely be tested. Creative writing can't be tested with a multiple choice test, but math can and so can a lot of other things, like reading comprehension, vocabulary, content knowledge for various fields, logic, analysis, decoding significance, categorization, inference, deduction, etc. These things are the basis for broader critical thinking, so our kids should learn them and we should be able to get a reading as to whether or not our public schools and teachers who can talk the talk can actually deliver.
The test itself is not intended to BE the education. It is the accountability portion, and if we want to foster democracy in this country by making a quality education accessible to all students, then we need accountability, because it does not naturally exist without concerted effort.
Public schools before NCLB were not uniformly wonderful places brimming with achievement. Many were (and are) staffed with arrogant, intractable bureaucrats who do things for the convenience of the adults who work there and for whom students' interests rank dead last. Public schools as an institution have always had to be dragged to the table, kicking and screaming – forced via the courts, legislation, and people in the streets – to deal with segregation, religious discrimination, racism, sexism, inequality of funding, homophobia, neglect and abuse of the learning disabled and the physically disabled, et cetera, et cetera. They did not step forward themselves to address the achievement gaps that keep generations of Americans in poverty; but with the light of public scrutiny on their shameful disaggregated test scores and the threat of the loss of funds, they have to do something.
When some schools and teachers see bad test scores for their schools they analyze the results and start putting into place the infrastructure and best practices that will address the problems, including training teachers with effective methodologies and supporting a collaborative organization that continuously gathers data, learns, and moves forward.
Unfortunately, many other schools just blame the messenger that's telling them that their methods and processes are inadequate; they blame the test. They don't have any idea how to improve and blame the test for their inadequate responses such as narrowing the curriculum, drill and kill, taking away recess, art, and music.
Just a thought:
School administrators and teachers who cannot respond to bad test results by anything other than attacking the test may not be able to actually teach your children critical thinking skills, because they themselves may not possess them. Bad test results may hurt your feelings or your professional pride, but they are a data point that could be put to good use in a program of improvement.
Critical thinking in action is what is required in problem solving. Huge achievement gaps, low literacy and numeracy rates, and low graduation rates definitely qualify as problems that need solving.
I disagree AdeleTheCzech. What the article points to is that the curriculum is being based on the test; not the other way around as you say, hence the phrase teaching to the test. Hence, the cutting of art, history, et al out of the curriculum.
Susan H--correction, it applies when the crazies are in charge. (I've been editing for days!)
Columbia Univ. Provost Jacques Barzun once wrote that "the purpose of education is to dispel ignorance." I agree that NCLB has very serious flaws in this regard, and is chronically underfunded to boot. But in arguing against it, let's not use the tired old phrase "teaching to the test." The "test" is based on the CURRICULUM -- what ELSE would you base the questions on? Back in the Pleistocene Era when I was in grade school, I can assure you that our teachers prepared us for tests by teaching everything in the State-mandated curriculum. We got a solid educational start in the first 8 grades.
What surprised me was when my neighbor's teenagers were being given classes in how to take an SAT test. In my day, we simply took the test even though the form of it was unfamiliar to us. It seems to me that giving children information on the format of the test and examples of the kinds of questions to expect will make the test scores artificially high - as least compared to what they used to be.
NCLB will leave more children far behind as they leave and drop out of schools that do nothing but teach to a test, the most boring curriculum ever devised. Indeed, NCLB is sure to undermine public schools in favor of corporate skill and drill routines.
Like all the "branded" initiative implemented by Bush, No Child Left Behind is designed to do just the opposite of it's name. I'm not sure whether it is the lack of funding, or the focus on testing that infuriates me more. The fact is that it is the poor schools that are suffering the most. The wealthy schools can afford not to teach to the test, since their dependency on federal funding is much less, but poor schools need that funding, so are forced to sacrifice real education for teaching to the test.
Does anyone remember the movie Overboard with Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russel. Well this bit between Goldie's character and the kids teacher sums up the value of testing pretty well for me.
"Annie: Mrs. Burbridge, would you come over here for a moment? Has it *escaped your attention* that these children have head to toe poison oak?
Adele Burbridge: Well no, I... well yes, but...
Annie: But WHAT? My children are in need of medical assistance! And you can sit here and smugly lecture me on the importance of tests? Tests which exist to pigeonhole childrens potential, a thing which cannot *possibly* be measured, least of all by anal compulsive HUNS! And my husband may be a "large child," but that's none of your business! And my children may be rotten, but they're MINE. And I think that they're bright, and sensitive, so I have no doubts whatsoever about their intelligence. I do however have *serious* doubts about YOURS."
It's amazing where tidbits of wisdom show up in our culture, but Annie's statement on the importance of tests is right on.
I believe it is the purpose of the ruling class to keep the rest of us as ignorant and unable to create a climate that fosters critical thinking. Cheap beer and Nascar helps keep our focus on things other than how bad we are being hoodwinked.
Because of better nutrition and modern medicine, we are not only living longer but children are being born with higher I.Q.'s. Higher intelligence means more progress. Unless we blow ourselves up or destroy our environment, with modern communications and information technologies future generations should be able to analyze and solve problems caused largely by ignorance. There is hope.
Orwellian to the 10th degree.
The Patriot Act steals our rights.
The NCLB Act gives military recruiters access to school files for recruiting "troubled teens"
The Clean Skies Act helps corps pollute.
The War on Terror creates unending terror...
I give up.
Right-wingers have to wring all semblance of whole-brain thinking & emotional intelligence from themselves & from education. Their appeal to "logic" is nothing more than an appeal to Gradgrind-esque "facts" -- and they prefer non-facts -- and the most robotic sort of calculation, designed solely to profit their own test-making & textbook industries.
Constricted hearts, strangled minds, empty souls -- the reactionary ideal.