Support NeoGAF

[GhaleonEB]

It's about time.

Obama seeks to overhaul ‘No Child Left Behind’

Plan would dismantle annual school benchmarks championed by Bush

President Barack Obama is promising parents and their kids that with his administration's help they will have better teachers in improved schools so U.S. students can make up for academic ground lost against youngsters in other countries.

A plan to overhaul the 2002 education law championed by President George W. Bush was unveiled by the Obama administration Saturday in hopes of replacing a system that in the last decade has tagged more than a third of schools as failing and created a hodgepodge of sometimes weak academic standards among states.

"Unless we take action — unless we step up — there are countless children who will never realize their full talent and potential," Obama said during a video address on Saturday. "I don't accept that future for them. And I don't accept that future for the United States of America."

In the proposed dismantling of the No Child Left Behind law, education officials would move away from punishing schools that don't meet benchmarks and focus on rewarding schools for progress, particularly with poor and minority students. Obama intends to send a rewrite to Congress on Monday of the law.

The proposed changes call for states to adopt standards that ensure students are ready for college or a career rather than grade-level proficiency — the focus of the current law.

The blueprint also would allow states to use subjects other than reading and mathematics as part of their measurements for meeting federal goals, pleasing many education groups that have said No Child Left Behind encouraged teachers not to focus on history, art, science, social studies and other important subjects.

And, for the first time in 45 years, the White House is proposing a $4 billion increase in federal education spending, most of which would go to increase the competition among states for grant money and move away from formula-based funding.

The blueprint goes before the House Education and Labor Committee on Wednesday as Obama pushes Congress to reauthorize the education law this year, a time-consuming task that some observers say will be difficult. Committee Chairman George Miller, a Democrat from California, praised Obama's plan.

"This blueprint lays the right markers to help us reset the bar for our students and the nation," Miller said in a prepared statement.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan briefed a handful of governors, lawmakers and education groups on the plan Friday, including Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue, a Republican.

"The governor is very supportive of the direction the secretary is going," said Perdue's spokesman Chris Schrimpf.

A few other highlights from the blueprint:

— By 2020, all students graduating from high school would need to be ready for college or a career. That's a shift away from the current law, which calls for all students to be performing at grade level in reading and math by 2014.

— Give more rewards — money and flexibility — to high-poverty schools that are seeing big gains in student achievement and use them as a model for other schools in low-income neighborhoods that struggle with performance.

— Punish the lowest-performing 5 percent of schools using aggressive measures, such as having the state take over federal funding for poor students, replacing the principal and half the teaching staff or closing the school altogether.

— Duncan has said the name No Child Left Behind will be dropped because it is associated with a harsh law that punishes schools for not reaching benchmarks even if they've made big gains. He said the administration will work with Congress to come up with a new name.

Amy Wilkins, a vice president with The Education Trust in Washington, D.C., called the blueprint a "culture shift."

"One of the things America has not been clear about is what k-12 is supposed to do," Wilkins said. "In this, we're saying K-12 is supposed to prepare kids for college and meaningful careers."

The nation's first federal education law — Elementary and Secondary Education Act — was passed in 1965 as part of Lyndon B. Johnson's war on poverty. The law has been reauthorized several times since, most recently in 2001 under President George W. Bush.

It was criticized by educators for focusing too much on testing and not enough on learning. Daniel Domenech, executive director of the American Association of School Administrators, said he is glad to see No Child Left Behind go away.

"We're delighted over that," he said. "We have not been a fan of No Child Left Behind."

 

[whytemyke]

Seems to me that the problem with NCLB is that it was holding teachers to a testing standard whereby if they didn't meet it, they would be "held accountable." That's a term these people like to use, "accountability," or in Washington terms the "scapegoat."

I don't see how getting rid of one bill and setting up a new string of standards that the schools have to meet is really alleviating the problem. Yeah there's going to be more money involved, which is great, but the teachers will still be teaching to a set of tests because that seems to be the only method of measuring the capacity/growth of students.

The fundamental problem with education in this country is, imo, teacher tenure. As long as teachers unions control thru force of size who does and doesn't have a job, then there really won't be any accountability at all. Also, they need to make students go to school year round. Adopt an "8 weeks on/ 2 weeks off" schedule if you like, but this agrarian system is bullshit and totally unnecessary. If you need to do it in rural counties, ok, but I personally think that students would learn more with less pressure on them to begin with.


bahhhh. I could write an essay on things I think are wrong with the system. Bottom line is this: I'd be stunned if this new bill does anything to alleviate any problems.

 

[Drkirby]

focus on rewarding schools for progress

This I have a problem with a bit. Shouldn't we be focusing on getting other schools to make progress? Or is not cutting any more funding enough on its own?

 

[whytemyke]

This I have a problem with a bit. Shouldn't we be focusing on getting other schools to make progress? Or is not cutting any more funding enough on its own?

well it seems like the other side of the same coin. "We're not going to punish the schools that are bad anymore, we're just going to reward schools that are good." Isn't that the same thing? Either way they're creating an inequality based on performance and then feeding into it further and further. And the "bottom 5%" thing? Seriously? So we're going to say that if your school is in the 8th percentile you're ok to keep your job?

 

[perfectchaos007]

good riddance. standardized tests were the worst thing to happen to America. According to my parents, back in the day they were taught how to read in school using good programs like Hooked on Phonics. Now we aren't taught how to read in school, we are taught how to succeed on standardized state tests. Standardized tests are a terrible way to teach children.

 

[hermit7]

No Child Left Behind is terrible and never should have been passed. Why one would cut funding of schools that are not meeting standards is idiotic, as it reduces their ability to perform in the future.

Hopefully it is merit based, and progress of individual schools is measured as such individually.

 

[TomServo]

Seems to me that the problem with NCLB is that it was holding teachers to a testing standard whereby if they didn't meet it, they would be "held accountable." That's a term these people like to use, "accountability," or in Washington terms the "scapegoat."

The main problem w NCLB was that it's an unfunded Federal mandate.

No big surprise though, that's the trend in government. Local governments lose power to state government through unfunded mandates, states lose power to the Federal government through the same means.

Getting involved in local government turned me off to politics on the whole for that reason, but I digress.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Reminds me of
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdPInPySbiw

One of my cousins is in the Detroit public school system, and I've seen his math homework and test preparation a couple times. Often students just memorize multiple choice patterns; I'll show him how to do stuff, and get the impression he doesn't know some basic stuff, and is instead memorizing a little bit of everything just to pass tests.

When I was a kid, I remember memorizing the bolded words/definitions heh, but it wasn't possible to pull that off in math class.

 

[Stinkles]

Teachers on gaf, who we can assume are typically not the "lazy substitute teacher retards" the policy invents as the "main problem" will tell you that "No Child Left Behind" is a Rove-ian concept that actually means "Leave Poor Children Behind." And there aren't a lot of other ways to interpret it.

 

[Firestorm]

No Child Left Behind is terrible and never should have been passed. Why one would cut funding of schools that are not meeting standards is idiotic, as it reduces their ability to perform in the future.

Wait, the US actually had a law that cut funding of schools that had students who performed poorly on standardized tests?

...

 

[Sqorgar]

According to my parents, back in the day they were taught how to read in school using good programs like Hooked on Phonics.

Holy crap, how old are your parents? Hooked on Phonics was in the 90s!

 

[GhaleonEB]

well it seems like the other side of the same coin. "We're not going to punish the schools that are bad anymore, we're just going to reward schools that are good." Isn't that the same thing? Either way they're creating an inequality based on performance and then feeding into it further and further. And the "bottom 5%" thing? Seriously? So we're going to say that if your school is in the 8th percentile you're ok to keep your job?

Under NCLB, a school that was doing poorly according to standardized testing but making progress in many areas will see its funding cut for not meeting the standards. Under the new proposal, schools that are making progress in a number of ways - the NY Times cites not just test scores, but "pupil attendance, graduation rates and learning climate" - get rewarded with additional funding and support. This encourages progress and cuts off the downard spiral of ensuring failing schools continue to fail. It's not two sides of the same coin.

Wait, the US actually had a law that cut funding of schools that had students who performed poorly on standardized tests?

...

Yup. That's what NCLB did. And one-third of US schools are classified as failing under it.

 

[dschalter]

Holy crap, how old are your parents? Hooked on Phonics was in the 90s!

joke post?

 

[perfectchaos007]

Holy crap, how old are your parents? Hooked on Phonics was in the 90s!

oh nvm my mom must have been talking about when she was teaching kids. She was a first grade teacher from the mid 80's through early 90's. But I never got that program. I had to learn through TAAS which was a standardized test we started practicing since first grade. We learned how to take reading comprehension tests before we learned how to read. it was ridiculous.

 

[whytemyke]

Under NCLB, a school that was doing poorly according to standardized testing but making progress in many areas will see its funding cut for not meeting the standards. Under the new proposal, schools that are making progress in a number of ways - the NY Times cites not just test scores, but "pupil attendance, graduation rates and learning climate" - get rewarded with additional funding and support. This encourages progress and cuts off the downard spiral of ensuring failing schools continue to fail. It's not two sides of the same coin.

Yup. That's what NCLB did. And one-third of US schools are classified as failing under it.

To think that 2/3rds of the US Schools are classified as successes is kind of a bummer.

And yeah, you're right, it's not 2 sides of the same coin, though I do get a bit nervous when I hear about more federal mandates. I think this new bill is moving in the right direction but I also think that there are some major problems with the education system that aren't going to change as long as the Democrats are beholden to the teachers unions. Teacher tenure has got to stop. I'll cope with it at major universities, because students have the ability (usually) to pick and choose where to go, but they don't have that with K-12.

Plus, if a teacher is good, they shouldn't really need tenure anyways, right?

 

[Ripclawe]

Its less of an overhaul and more of the same with looser standards and different funding formulas. There is nothing there that will encourage better schools especially in bad areas because the results set by the proposals can be fudged worse than it is now

 

[Particle Physicist]

Wait, the US actually had a law that cut funding of schools that had students who performed poorly on standardized tests?

...

Yup!!! How retarded is that? Just think about it. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

 

[Ripclawe]

It made sense considering bad schools in this country tend to stay bad schools no matter what you do, this was also a way to get around the teachers union who whined about it. The children in a bad school would get the right to transfer to another school or get after school tutoring. It wasn't just cut off the funds.

 

[Domino Theory]

By 2020, all students graduating from high school would need to be ready for college or a career. That's a shift away from the current law, which calls for all students to be performing at grade level in reading and math by 2014.

What's Obama smoking? The world ends in 2012.

Give more rewards — money and flexibility —

Hopefully $4 billion out of the $4 billion in extra money goes to California's education system because we desperately need it.

 

[speculawyer]

It's the economy, stupid.

 

[Stinkles]

It made sense considering bad schools in this country tend to stay bad schools no matter what you do, this was also a way to get around the teachers union who whined about it. The children in a bad school would get the right to transfer to another school or get after school tutoring. It wasn't just cut off the funds.

Except it failed superhard and made everything worse. Demonstrating, factually, that it was a shit idea. Which smart people, demonstrably, predicted.

 

[atkbob]

good riddance. standardized tests were the worst thing to happen to America. According to my parents, back in the day they were taught how to read in school using good programs like Hooked on Phonics. Now we aren't taught how to read in school, we are taught how to succeed on standardized state tests. Standardized tests are a terrible way to teach children.

I don't understand why people complain about standardized test so much. In Alberta, everyone in Grade 12 has to take each provincial exam in English, Social Studies, Math, Chemistry, Physics, Biology, etc. (depending on which courses you're taking) as the course's final exam, and it's worth 50% of your final class mark. Since the class curriculum was based around the exams, there was no "teaching to the test" and the exam fit perfectly with the course. Having done both high school in Ontario and Alberta, and doing university in Ontario, I never felt like having a standardized curriculum/exams was a bad thing, and in fact I felt like students from Alberta were much more prepared for university than those from other provinces, even for Ontario universities. I think as long as you're teaching the right material, it doesn't really matter if the tests are standardized or not.

 

[Noshino]

It made sense considering bad schools in this country tend to stay bad schools no matter what you do, this was also a way to get around the teachers union who whined about it. The children in a bad school would get the right to transfer to another school or get after school tutoring. It wasn't just cut off the funds.

Only if it was an F school if Im not mistaken

Also, it was ridiculous that their solution was to allow children to move to another school, because what happened was that then those kids were sent to schools with the higher ratings that not most of the times were not in their areas. And a couple of friends that are teachers are pissed about it, because although it is great for said transfered kids to have the option, but those kids are not caught up, at times slowing down the rest, but also the budget of those schools was at risk due to the increased number of students (it was ridiculous that at times, 1 bus would have to go about 10 miles just to pick up 1 kid)

It was great that they wanted to do something about that issue, but NCLB was a complete failure.

 

[PantherLotus]

 

[GrotesqueBeauty]

So what you're basically saying is that big government aims to fund turning our children into a radical Marxist youth brigade? Chilling news. Thanks for the warning. I'll be sure to add more ammo to my stockpile before it's outlawed altogether.

 

[Slavik81]

I don't understand why people complain about standardized test so much. In Alberta, everyone in Grade 12 has to take each provincial exam in English, Social Studies, Math, Chemistry, Physics, Biology, etc. (depending on which courses you're taking) as the course's final exam, and it's worth 50% of your final class mark. Since the class curriculum was based around the exams, there was no "teaching to the test" and the exam fit perfectly with the course. Having done both high school in Ontario and Alberta, and doing university in Ontario, I never felt like having a standardized curriculum/exams was a bad thing, and in fact I felt like students from Alberta were much more prepared for university than those from other provinces, even for Ontario universities. I think as long as you're teaching the right material, it doesn't really matter if the tests are standardized or not.

I too have good things to say about it.

It was also useful for my university, which could look at my high school's test average and graduating average to see what my marks really meant. A 90% average at one school might be an 85% at another. Without some sort of cross-school standard, the marks are hard to compare.

 

[Particle Physicist]

I too have good things to say about it.

It was also useful for my university, which could look at my high school's test average and graduating average to see what my marks really meant. A 90% average at one school might be an 85% at another. Without some sort of cross-school standard, the marks are hard to compare.

We have SATs for college entrance exams. The NCLB exams are completely different, and are given every year, starting at a very young age. It's a completely foolish system.

 

[Firestorm]

I don't understand why people complain about standardized test so much. In Alberta, everyone in Grade 12 has to take each provincial exam in English, Social Studies, Math, Chemistry, Physics, Biology, etc. (depending on which courses you're taking) as the course's final exam, and it's worth 50% of your final class mark. Since the class curriculum was based around the exams, there was no "teaching to the test" and the exam fit perfectly with the course. Having done both high school in Ontario and Alberta, and doing university in Ontario, I never felt like having a standardized curriculum/exams was a bad thing, and in fact I felt like students from Alberta were much more prepared for university than those from other provinces, even for Ontario universities. I think as long as you're teaching the right material, it doesn't really matter if the tests are standardized or not.

When looking at admission, BC universities no longer take into account your provincial exam mark unless it's helpful to you. I still think exams are a terrible way to judge your knowledge in this day and age. Maybe I'm biased as they always bring down my grade which I usually build up with papers, projects, discussion, etc.

 

[grandjedi6]

If there is one thing I learned from my primary school education, its that No Child Left Behind is stupid.

 

[Freshmaker]

This I have a problem with a bit. Shouldn't we be focusing on getting other schools to make progress? Or is not cutting any more funding enough on its own?

The whole model always seemed backwards. A poor performing school should have increased resources to enable it to catch up, it shouldn't have slashed resources, and then try to catch up with no supplies, texts etc.

 

[Noshino]

I don't understand why people complain about standardized test so much. In Alberta, everyone in Grade 12 has to take each provincial exam in English, Social Studies, Math, Chemistry, Physics, Biology, etc. (depending on which courses you're taking) as the course's final exam, and it's worth 50% of your final class mark. Since the class curriculum was based around the exams, there was no "teaching to the test" and the exam fit perfectly with the course. Having done both high school in Ontario and Alberta, and doing university in Ontario, I never felt like having a standardized curriculum/exams was a bad thing, and in fact I felt like students from Alberta were much more prepared for university than those from other provinces, even for Ontario universities. I think as long as you're teaching the right material, it doesn't really matter if the tests are standardized or not.

Look, I love tests/exams (I hated homework and so never did it, usually my exams and test grades were enough to help me pass with A's or B's), but the problem is that here in the US, these exams are seen as scary things.

I swear, the first year of school over here in FL, every one was telling me to prepare for the FCAT because it was a really hard test, I passed math with a 4 (just a few points away from 5), reading with a 4, and writing with a 3, and this was just months after I had arrived here to the US not knowing any english :lol

School staff fear that students are not going to pass the tests, and so spend a hell lot of time practicing just for the tests. I kid you not, we were doing FCAT reading practices during math, spanish, economics, american history, etc...it was ridiculous. All of this insecurity by the schools would often rub on the students who would then get nervous about said tests, which then would cause parents to also exaggerate the issue, which ends up usually getting students even more nervous :lol I have seen it happen a few times in which parents would get their kids into so many FCAT programs, its just too overwhelming.


From the looks of it, this plan is much more "understanding" than NCLB, which was far too drastic

 

[hsukardi]

The whole model always seemed backwards. A poor performing school should have increased resources to enable it to catch up, it shouldn't have slashed resources, and then try to catch up with no supplies, texts etc.

This isn't true, poor performing schools should not have increased funding because it might be a shitty administration putting money to waste. The process is more complicated.