No Child Left Behind

UWB EDUC 427 JOURNAL
Ann Van Cotthem

1/12/09 Last Tuesday, January 6th, Cohort X10 started a new Quarter at UW Bothell. We will be taking two classes:
B EDUC 427 Reflective Seminar: Becoming a Professional Educator
Instructor: Dr. Jane Van Galen
and
B Educ 405 Contexts of Learning and Schooling
Instructor: Dr. Janice Kelly
In Tuesday’s class I heard mentioned the “Reading First” program This is apparently a Federal program with benchmarks to be met that are tied to Federal funds. I have not heard of this program before. The program was only mentioned in passing but it seemed that Dr. Van Galen believes the Federal government is over-stepping its bounds. I hope that we will discuss this in more detail and I plan to see what I can find on the internet regarding this.
I have friends who work in our public schools. When they speak about No Child Left Behind, it is usually with frustration and/or disapproval. I have not worked in the Public School System and have no first hand knowledge of what requirements NCLB places on schools and what the consequences are for not meeting these requirements. But it seems to me that, if our schools are going to accept Federal funds - the public’s money - there must be accountablility. What demands can the government justifiably place on schools and what rubric can our school system use to demonstrate that they are accomplishing their Number 1 responsibility, to educate our young?
In our Fall class, B EDUC 402 Human Growth and Learning, we were challenged to question the efficacy of testing students. Just what does a test tell us about a student’s knowledge? This makes sense to me. I understand the inefficiencies and inaccuracies of a test. But what is the alternative? How can children’s academic growth be measured and monitored so that one can see that a student is growing intellectually and not just physically?
As a parent with children in Washington Public Schools, I have watched the WASL evolve and grow in influence. It was my belief that it began as a test to see how well the school was performing. It was not to have an emphasis on student placement. Shortly, however, exceeding the benchmark in Writing became a criteria for placement in Honors Language Arts at my son’s Middle School. It would soon become a requirement for High School graduation.
I have seen teachers teaching for the WASL with lessons planned around passing it. I’ve seen math lessons turned into writing lessons as a student must now be able to write an explanation as to how s/he came to a math answer.
I believe that the intent of the WASL was good, to assess how well our schools are educating our children, to assess how effective our teaching is. I, also, believe that the swing of the WASL’s pendulum as gone too far. And we are now hearing cries from all areas - teachers, parents, legislators - for reforms and changes to the WASL.
But how can our schools reassure the public that they are effectively doing their job? Are they free to spend the public’s money which is entrusted to the schools in the faith that our youth will be educated, with no guidelines and no accountability? And, if we, as a public, want guidelines and accountability, what should those be? What is a fair analysis of our schools’ progress with regards to educating our children? What is a fair analysis of our children’s progress? I so hope that these issues will be addressed in our upcoming classes.
We saw a film in our BEDUC 405 class last Thursday about the history of Public Education in America. The film began in the 1770’s with Thomas Jefferson promoting “education for the masses.” Jefferson’s bill would be defeated three times as citizens did not want the state interferring in what was perceived to be a local issue. Horace Mann of Massachusettes, our first Secretary of the Board of Education, would take up the cause. He called it The Great Duty of Educating. Mann, too, would find resistance. Locals did not want the state meddling in their schools.
We now look back on this period in history with a different perspective and most of us agree that Jefferson and Mann were right in their efforts to promote a public educational system, “the great equilizer of the condition of men” according to Mann. I wonder how we will be perceived two hundred years from now. Will our Federal government’s cause of “leaving no child behind” be perceived as noble and our public school’s resistance to this Federal mandate be perceived as colloquial and quaint?
It seems that I have the following questions:
1) What is Reading First?
2) What is No Child Left Behind?
a. Goals
b. Criteria & Guidelines
c. Consequences
3) How to fairly assess students’ progress with regards to education and learning?
4) How to fairly asses our schools’ (public & private) role with regards to students’ progress?
5) How to fairly assess teachers’ role with regards to students’ progress?

I hope to address these questions in the coming weeks.