No child left behind (or untested!)

[Linda on the move]

My kids didn't start school until after No School Left Behind became law, so we didn't have a before and after experience. We were very happy with so many aspects of our public school experience, but the state mandated testing and all that was read into them was obviously annoying and frustrating to the teachers. (I witnessed a teacher going off for about 15 minutes about how having kids on IEPs take the same test was insane).

Anyway, how did it effect your school? What were the negatives? Were there ANY positives? Do you think it could be tweaked and be improved, or would just trashing completely be a big step in the right direction?

I, personally, am more interested in personal experiences and things one has witnessed rather than in stats and things that can be found in news articles. I've already read that stuff.

[whatsnextmom]

My eldest (14) started school in 2002, a year after NCLB. I do know that very little has changed in our local district even though we weren't personally present prior to 2001 when it was inacted. They test all kids from 2nd to 8th grade every Spring and the results are always acceptable. Some years they have high spikes, other years little dips but always good enough to make the state ignore them lol. Honestly, my kids schooling experience doesn't seem all that different from my own except that they do a little more "test practice" than we did the week or so prior to testing.

My high schooler is now in the city district (K-12) and we hear about NCLB all the time. It's the 6th largest district in the country and covers an incredibly diverse region... very wealthy areas as well as impoverished areas. This means they have schools that test really well and schools that fail every year. I know this past decade they've really chopped all the arts and put in programs like required reading blocks which haven't fixed the problems in the failing schools and have infuriated the successful schools. For a while, they'd extended the school year and hours but they couldn't afford to keep it up and so now they go a week less than the county districts. They fire superintendants regularly. I know they've had at least 3 in the past decade. They do have fantastic magnet schools but they have to turn away thousands of kids every year. The bonus is that tons of charter schools have flourished and families have flocked to them trying to get their kids out of the city district.

[Coral123]

One aspect of the law I do not like is the SINA provision which lets a family choose another school if they are in a SINA school.  I think it was well intentioned, but basically is utilized more be families wanting to choose another demographic rather than families concerned about educational issues.

We have always had standardized testing in our state...well at least since I was a child.  I took the same standardized test in a private school that the kids in public schools take.  I'm not against some sort of standardized testing to go along with whatever information the school provides about student progress.

I'd definitely say that NCLB didn't do what it intended to do.  I think it is a good thing though that the scores are broken down into subgroups.  Although our school district does very well on standardized testing...certain subgroups perform at the same level as they would if they were in a lower performing school district....am I making sense?

I think there are many small things that that schools should be looking at in an effort to improve student performance, but will not....like what happens when a sub teacher is in the building, teacher absenteeism etc.  Instead our district went the way of many other districts and  ended up shortening recess.

One thing that frustrates me about  people talking about NCLB is that people will an action by a school district is required by NCLB like cutting recess, etc, when this is simply a school district action.

When NCLB first came out, and individual schools were getting more attention, I'd have to say I was dismayed by some of the teachers responses.  Our school is one of the lower performing schools.  I realize how a student tests is affected by a variety of issues...but some teachers would like to characterize every student in our school as coming from a dysfunctional background, rather than to admit anything in the school needed to change.

I think if we are going to talk about school reform there needs to be a place where people will really listen to the parents.  I might not know what is wrong in every US school, but I can definitely tell you the weak links at our school.

[_ktg_]

I'm just going to

I think my experience with NCLB is limited given my DS just completed k4 this year.   Though I will say, my district in response to the testing reacted poorly and made district-wide changes which did not account for some of the unique schools/programs they sponsor and is impacting the programs negatively.

[whatsnextmom]

Yes, I like this too. I often tell parents to look at their demographic when looking at test scores. Our district, as I said, does "fine." It does not test as high as the wealtier districts but largely because we have a very high ESL population. Now, I'm not suggesting these kids aren't intelligent... It just takes TIME to learn a new language and be up to grade level in the material. These kids tend to test low for 2 or 3 years even if they are excellent students. In our state, they don't qualify for intervention until they've been in a district 2 years (because the new language can mask learning disabilities) and so can test poorly for MANY years longer than they should because of the delay in diagnosis. Speaking of learning disabilities, because of the failure to accomodate by neighboring districts, many have flocked to our district who DOES address them. It's great for the kids but again, a pull on overall test scores. However, when I look up my children's specific demographic, they are individually testing as high or higher than their same demographic in all around higher testing schools. I like the break down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coral123 

 I think it is a good thing though that the scores are broken down into subgroups.  Although our school district does very well on standardized testing...certain subgroups perform at the same level as they would if they were in a lower performing school district....am I making sense?

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by whatsnextmom 
 However, when I look up my children's specific demographic, they are individually testing as high or higher than their same demographic in all around higher testing schools. I like the break down.

YES!!!!  The public school my kids went to didn't have as strong of a reputation as some of the other schools in the area, but looking at the test score by demographic was mind blowing. Every single demographic tested better in our school, but we had a higher % of kids in demographics that tend to score lower. Minority children on free/reduced lunch score lower than other groups, and we had a fairly high % of kids in that group, but they did better in our school than ANY other school in the area. When I looked at the scores for white kids not on reduced lunch, our scores were higher for every subject in every grade than the surrounding schools. Yet, the other schools were still perceived as "better,"  either because the average was higher or just because more of the kids were white (I could never quite figure that out  .)  I always though it said a lot about our teachers that our average was NEARLY as good as the schools that had a different demographic.

And it's not just that some kids start out with the short end of the stick (by not even speaking English, for example). In our current city, the district with the highest scores (and the most monied population) has a tutoring center on every corner. Everyone acts like the school is doing something amazing, but I wonder whenever I drive through there how much of it is the school, how much of it what the kids are getting outside of school. If all the kids are doing great in math but half them go to math tutors, I just don't see that as a reflection on the school.

One good thing I'll say about our public school was that every elementary child had recess every single day. Every middle school child had PE every day, and the teachers tried to make it fun. It was seen as valuable for the kids to move around and get exercise, and talk to each other. They didn't take that away to strive for higher test scores.

[Coral123]

My comment about the subgroups was also to illustrate that our school district hasn't really put much focus on the lower performing schools, or tried to solve problems that have been identified.  My kids attend one of the most diverse schools in the district, and we have definitely noticed more than one issue that could impact student performance.

I'm not saying background doesn't matter...it does.  But we can't peg every kid for failure just because they have parents that are less affluent and have less education.....which is how many like to explain why the subgroups don't do as well in our district.

[Dar]

I used to sub a lot in the public schools, as a special ed teacher. I ran across stuff like moderately developmentally delayed middle schoolers who were mostly working on practical living skills (buying groceries, cooking simple meals, reading/recognizing warning signs) who were also spending a period a day memorizing Latin roots, for the upcoming testing. It was ridiculous. When I was teaching and/or subbing it was really difficult to get kids in special ed exempted (not sure if that's still true), so a lot of kids just had to spent a week or two taking tests that were just too hard for them, and they knew they were not doing well and felt so crappy about it. It was always a miserable week, even though I tried to make sure we did a lot of fun things when we weren't testing.

[whatsnextmom]

Originally Posted by Dar 

I used to sub a lot in the public schools, as a special ed teacher. I ran across stuff like moderately developmentally delayed middle schoolers who were mostly working on practical living skills (buying groceries, cooking simple meals, reading/recognizing warning signs) who were also spending a period a day memorizing Latin roots, for the upcoming testing. It was ridiculous. When I was teaching and/or subbing it was really difficult to get kids in special ed exempted (not sure if that's still true), so a lot of kids just had to spent a week or two taking tests that were just too hard for them, and they knew they were not doing well and felt so crappy about it. It was always a miserable week, even though I tried to make sure we did a lot of fun things when we weren't testing.

I don't believe it's difficult to exempt special ed kids from testing at all anymore. Didn't they catch that principal in Texas that had identified half his kids as special ed so they didn't have to test? He was getting kudos for his high test scores until they realized he was only testing the 50 percent that would do well on them. I know many parents with kids in special ed who opted out for their kids. In fact, I knew non-special ed families who opted out too. It's pretty easy to do around here. Of course, that causes problems too. One year the paper published that DD's school had not met state standards. Well, the kids actually tested really well but only 94 percent of the kids tested and the state requirement was 95 (probably because of that principal in Texas!)

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by whatsnextmom 

I don't believe it's difficult to exempt special ed kids from testing at all anymore.

I believe this varies from place to place. We were lived last year, special education students were NOT exempt, though some did get special consideration, such as having more time, doing in a room with fewer people etc.

[lauren]

In my area we have "failing schools." These schools seemed actually pretty good before NCLB. I've talked in another thread about the school wide theme based education that used to be present in the elementary school. It was so rich and pervasive; the children became immersed in a subject and really learned a lot. Recently when I talked to some of the teachers about why this is no longer happening they referred to NCLB. They said they aren't given planning time any longer to make things like this happen.

I think it has been demoralizing for the teachers and principals in our area. This is a rural area serving a high number of low income families. I can't remember how high the percentage is for free lunch but it's high and the percentage of IEP's is high too.  I think the test scores are probably as high as they're every going to get. The kids that have more resources and more parent involvement tend to do well (without a learning disability). The kids without those things tend not to. The school gets penalized as though they didn't even try to meet the needs of all the kids.

I also have a son that is quite bright and does well on his report card, but does not take standardized tests well. The current law doesn't allow for his learning to be measured well.

I'm not sure what the answer is but I am reasonably sure that NCLB is not the answer.

[Coral123]

NCLB certainly doesn't say a school can't have such things as theme based education.  My children attend/attended a SINA school.  I believe there were a lot of weak links in the system at our school that simply were not being acknowledged before NCLB.

I don't believe NCLB has worked out how it was intended.  I also believe it has become a huge scapegoat for many in the education community who really don't want any public focus on what is going on in the schools.

[karne]

Originally Posted by Linda on the move 

I believe this varies from place to place. We were lived last year, special education students were NOT exempt, though some did get special consideration, such as having more time, doing in a room with fewer people etc.

I've heard of eligible students being allowed to have alternate methods of evaluation, such as portfolio work, but I'm not sure exactly what that entails, or who is eligible to to opt out of regular testing for this.  

There is definitely a level of frustration around testing at my kid's schools, and  a "Rah-Rah" attitude by some administration when the good scores (meaning the school as a whole) come out.  I find that really disturbing, frankly.

The teacher's definitely try to make the day(s) bearable-kids chew gum, take frequent breaks, lots of outdoor time (in the elem school).  I also know in the middle school that the guidance dept. keeps kids on their radar who they feel might be overly stressed by the testing, and checks in with teachers/kids about this.

[serenbat]

It's very easy in my state to opt out and many are doing so- since each state does educate independently it does happen.

[_ktg_]

Originally Posted by Coral123 

NCLB certainly doesn't say a school can't have such things as theme based education.  My children attend/attended a SINA school.  I believe there were a lot of weak links in the system at our school that simply were not being acknowledged before NCLB.

I don't believe NCLB has worked out how it was intended.  I also believe it has become a huge scapegoat for many in the education community who really don't want any public focus on what is going on in the schools.

I agree with your first statement (and I had to go back and brief myself on NCLB)  Instead of flat out saying - you can/or cannot do in terms of education, NCLB I think set up an unrealistic structure for public education without taking into account the varied educational formats public schools offer and encompass along with not accounting for how students learn.  It's hard to make a standard to make for achivement when we're talking about human beings vs. widgets. 

I don't think it has become a scapegoat - I think it has become blurred at the district & state-levels in what NCLB requires when a school fails.  It's true the act requires corrective action etc, but it has some latitude about the type of corrective actions which could be taken and leaves it to the school & the district to make those decisions in terms of what would be the most beneficial to the students.   In addition I think it has set up a system of administrators doing everything to ensure success is demonstrated on the page to the Department of Ed to avoid funding cuts of any kind.

Personally - I think many people (me included) don't understand NCLB very well and could benefit from more reading on the topic to learn the legislation better and learn to fight more effectively for our schools and students.

[annethcz]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

It's very easy in my state to opt out and many are doing so- since each state does educate independently it does happen.

And that's the thing that's so frustrating- that although NCLB is is supposed to be a national law, it is implemented differerently in each state, at least to some extent.  I can say it is not easy, nor is it common, to opt out of testing in my state.

I think one of the biggest failures of standardized testing, in general, NCLB or not, is that teachers are not always trained in interpreting the results of the standardized scores. Although teachers generally have access to those scores, interpreting and making a plan for individual students based on those test scores does not always happen.  Testing for the sake of testing is stupid.  Testing so that the teacher can have a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of a particular student is not necessarily a bad thing. 

In my school (the school my children attend and also the school that I teach at), I've seen both good and bad result from NCLB.  I've seen teachers set up a weekly after-school math help program (teachers neglecting their own families and volunteering their time for students who are struggling).  I've also seen my school penalized for the fact that we have a higher than average special ed & non-native English-speaking populations. 

In general, I think that NCLB has had a negative effect on public schools.  While its goal was laudable, it is impossible to get 100% of students at grade level 100% of the time.  I honestly think the whole law should be scrapped.

[ecoteat]

Tiny schools like the one I teach in get screwed. We don't have enough kids in any one grade to make their scores statistically significant, although we do manage to meet expectations on testing every year (even though one special ed or ELL kid could be 20% of the grade, which is always a little scary), but the attendance requirements are unreasonable when one family of 4 kids coming down with the flu knocks us down to below what our attendance needs to be. When we had a hand, foot, and mouth outbreak, the CDC was requiring kids to stay home way more than was reasonable, and then the state threatens to punish us because attendance is 2% below the passing score. It's crazy.

[LynnS6]

Putting on only my parent hat (and not my professor hat), I'm incredibly frustrated by the testing requirements. In our state, children can retake the test  until they get a passing score. Fine. No reason to penalize a child because they can't pass it in January. BUT if other kids are taking the test, my kids can't be learning new material, because the kids who are being tested would miss out. So...all the students in the school lose a TON of time to instruction because if the school (which is Title I) doesn't make 'adequate yearly progress', they're penalized.

When you add into that the time my kids lose to instruction because 70% of the kids also need ESL testing AND the time that they lose because some at the state decided that the ESL kids (a) had to be taught grammar and (b) the non-ESL kids couldn't be taught content while the ESL kids were taught grammar, my children have very little time for science, social studies or humanities. It's a shame. The focus is solely on reading, math and writing.

If they could take 3/4 of the time spent for testing and devote it to a project or two, I'd be thrilled. If they would stop taking the ESL kids out for separate instruction but rather work with them in the class so everyone could learn content (and language), I'd be more thrilled.

I'm also frustrated because our school has a very high turn-over rate (35% of the kids change schools every year). But our school is judged not only on the kids who've been there, but kids who just transferred in several months ago, or in some cases, several weeks before the test. They're not accurately assessing what the school is doing, because only about 50% (maybe less) of the kids are with them throughout their whole K-5 career. If you take those 50%, they're doing amazingly well (especially the poor kids who are ESL -- our school does a great job with them). But the school can only do so much if they've only got a child for a year or less. I feel bad for the teachers because the teachers work so hard, and are judged so unfairly.

[lindberg99]

Wow, kids can retake the state tests if they don't pass?? I didn't know that.

[Coral123]

I've never heard of anything like that, either, about retaking the test.

I have mixed feelings about Obama, but one of the things I was certain he would do is get rid of NCLB, or at least drastically rework it...what a huge disappointment that he has not.