Reading First

01/19/09 It seems that the search for answers always leads to more questions and that there are no simple answers. An assignment for our BEDUC 405 Class: Contexts of Learning and Schooling, is to attend a School Board Meeting. I was able to attend one in the Mukilteo School District. This is my family’s district so I was able to attend as a UWB student and a parent. Governor Gregoire’s new budget was heavily discussed which led to new questions:
A) What is the history for funding for our schools?
B) Where do the funds come from; i.e., local, state, federal, lottery?
C) How are the funds spent,; i.e., who determines what goes where?
I will add these to my previous questions and I am sure that my search will go on long after this quarter has wrapped up.

Now for my first question from last week, what is Reading First? According to a USAToday.com article written 7/01/08, Reading First is a program proposed by President Bush in 2002 to teach low-income elementary students to read. A key part of No Child Left Behind, Reading First grew out of a pact between policy makers and brain researchers at the National Institute of Health. Since 2002, the Federal Government has spent $1 Billion/year on Reading First or roughly $17.7 million/state.
Early reviews of the program were generally positive. Some educators say the money has been a godsend, allowing them to train teachers in scientifically based reading methods, buy quality supplies and help school children learn to read.
The controversy erupted over squabbles about how the Education Department handed out money. House hearings have focused on financial ties between Reading First’s top advisors and major textbook publishers. In April 2007, in a hearing by the Education and Labor Committee, it was found that “mismanagement and conflicts of interest were pervasive in the Reading First Program.”
Furthermore, a 2008 study from the Department of Education concluded that the Reaing First Program is ineffective.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2008-07-01-reading-first_N.htm
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/edlabor_dem/rel042007rf.html

What is No Child Left Behind?
(per wikipedia.com article updated 01/19/2009)
Proposed by President Bush, it was a bi-partisan piece of legislation co-authored by Representatives John Boehner (R-OH) and George Miller (D-CA) and Senators Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA) in 2001. It took effect in 2003. The law reauthorized a number of federal programs aiming to improve schools by increasing standards of accountability for states, school districts and schools. It also provided parents more flexibility in choosing which school their children can attend.
NCLB requires states to develop assessments in basic skills. These assessments are to be given to all students in certain grades. NCLB does not assert a national achievement standard. Standards are set by states.
Congress increased federal funding of education from $42.2 billion in 2001 to $54.4 billion in 2007. Funding for reading quadrupled from $286 million in 2001 to $1.2 billion.

Primary Supportive Claim for NCLB asserts that systematic testing provides data that shed light on which schools are not teaching basic skills. This allows interventions to be made to improve outcomes for all students while reducing the achievement gap for disadvantage and disabled students.
Claims made in favor:
- Improved Test Scores
- Improvement over local standards
- Increased accountability
- Attention to minority populations
- Quality of education; emphasizes reading, writing, math,and science as “core academic subjects.”
- School choices
- Funding
- Public perception of public education.

Primary Criticism asserts NCLB may cause states to lower achievement goals and may motivate teachers to teach to a test.
Criticisms:
- Gaming the system
- Problems with standardized tests
- Incentives against low-performing students
- Incentives against gifted, talented, and high-performing students; some schools are only funding instruction for core subjects or remedial special education.
- States refusal to produce non-English assessments
- Narrow curriculum
- Narrow definition of research
- Limitations on local control
- Facilitates military recruitment
- Some students may not learn as well; NCLB places a “one-size-fits-all” standard on individual students.

NCLB pushes for quality teachers and more professional development. This is not fully funded by NCLB monies. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) initial sponsor of NCLB states, “The tragedy is that these long overdue reforms are finally in place but the funds are not.”

Proposals for reforms. The Forum on Educational Accountability proposes to shift NCLB from applying sanctions for failing to raise test scores to supporting state and communities and holding them accountable as they make systemic changes that improve student learning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Child_Left_Behind_Act