As a teacher of Pre-school, I have had little exposure to the demands that NCLB appears to place on educators today. My son is in a parochial school which consistently boasts standardized test scores above average for the majority of its students. I should add that this is a very diverse school with a demographic make-up of 30% African America, 10% Latino, and 2% Asian. In addition the socio economics varies widely. That being said, I have never heard a concern being expressed by the faculty or administration regarding the effects of NCLB. However, I do know they do preparation for tests each year for a brief time before the exam. This has only been a mild concern of mine since it appears that there is still so much crammed into the curriculum throughout the year that I do not feel these children are really cheated in other subjects and extra curricula. However, as I commenced this degree last September I was immersed in literature and lecture at Montclair State about this subject manner and its effects on public edcuation today. I saw first hand during an observation at a small elementary school in Newark what NCLB meant for them and how it had changed the education they were providing. First on a bright note, the school was a delightful community with and incredibly nurturing staff that truly were passionate about teaching. The principal was an excellent leader and for the most part attempted to weave together a curriculum that would keep them on track with the requirements of NCLB while keeping the students interested and not at the expense of an exciting social studies and science curriculum. The school has proven themselves with a continuing rise in tests scores over the last few years to the point that they will now be removed some watch list they had been on for some time. I guess where I am going with this is Yes there was a lot sacrificed as a result of the drilling that was taking place in class as preparation for the test, but this staff seemed to use every resource and creative bone in their bodies to continue to build a well rounded curriculum for their students. They are not thrilled with the impact that NCLB has had on their teaching abilities, but have seemed to rise to the occasion and with the help of a flexible leader have managed to still make learning fun while raising the test scores. So yes NCLB has limited them but challenged them to think outside the box.
While reading the links within the NCLB, I have to agree that yes there needs to be accountability on all levels including administration, faculty, students and also parents. Again it goes back to the famous quote "it takes a village to raise a child," and if it is the NCLB that has forced educators and parents alike to realize that it is a community effort that is needed then NCLB may not be as bad as we criticize it to be. On the other hand, the actual design of the tests leave a lot to be desired. The students at that lovely Newark elementary school were lost at times trying to understand the text in the reading comprehension portion of the sampletests and were further confused by a picture prompt that many associated with the Disney story Cinderella. The picture appeared to be a colonial woman washing clothes on a washboard with a hearth behind her. None of the 17 students in that class had any idea about colonial life or how to respond to this prompt in a way that would be deemed correct by those grading the exams. Furthermore these student's social studies classes had been significantly reduced in an effort to accomodate the test prep time. Perhaps children that take regular trips to the museums or that have been on vacations that have included historic sites (Boston, Williams burg, Philadelphia, etc.) might have no problem with this picture prompt. But children from this school, many that had never left Newark their whole life were challenged greatly by the prompt. So, yes I agree that the tests are slanted towards a particularly small segment of the population.
I also take exception to the idea that teaching techniques must be based on "scientifically based research." It seems that NCLB may be taking away many of those treasured "teachable moments" when teachers are forced to stifle any ideas they may want to try in class if they have not been tested on a controlled group and proven as acceptable. However, again on a positive note, I agree that NCLB is raising the standards of teaching by requiring teachers to continue learning themselves. Of course they need to provide the funding for this too which seems to be one of the criticisms also.
The idea that parents can remove their children from one school and use another although as a parent seems appealing, also seems like it would only feed the problem of a struggling school if you begin to remove all those students that are capable of achieving their academic goals.
Another problem that I think is particularly challenging with the NCLB, is the gray area of special education within the NCLB guidelines. It seems difficult to think that after all we have achieved to date in understanding the many learning disabilities facing our children today, we are now going to impose these requirements that are so hard to tailor for our learning disability population.
Finally, I am not exactly sure how this can all impact reading. From what i have read in Routman it would seem that developing readings skills comes from a combination of many things including oral reading together, phonics, writing, and listening, and at no time a focus solely on phonics. Based on how NCLB currently designs their tests and creates accountability measures, it would seem that NCLB would favor worksheets and constant testing on phonics in the early reader and then a quick transition to an ability to comprehend, and synthesize complicated reading passages later in middle school. Unfortunately as I am now learning teaching reading is not just about sounds it is a lot more that perhaps NCLB needs to further investigate before setting standards.
In conclusion I am still confused about where I stand, it seems if nothing else, NCLB has given a jolt that was needed to many school districts. Unfortunately many will come out on the short end of the stick when all is done. It certainly has statistics to prove that it has narrowed the gap, but having worked 10 years in housing development with City funds, I am more than ware how those numbers can often be very inaccurate in reflecting the reality of the situation. Basically government plays with the number and puts the best spin on it to show how your tax money is working for you.
No comments:
Post a Comment