The current debates surrounding the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 are both positive and negative. Many politicians and people that previously supported the Act are now standing against it. In the beginning many supported the new Act because everyone was aware that a change needed to happen in the education system and the proposal of No Child Left Behind seemed like the answer we were looking for. As the No Child Left Behind requirements began to be felt in the school systems across America and the assessments results started coming in, everyone took a step back and really began to look at the new law. The results were not what everyone expected, what was once considered an answer was now becoming the problem.
The National Education Association in the beginning supported the No Child Left Behind Act but knew that it needed some revisions before it would be the effective in the school system. The NEA felt that the Act met the requirements of ensuring equality among the school population but they disagreed with the Act’s accountability and testing requirements. Democrats and Republicans both showed great support when the Act was initially proposed by President Bush, but as time went on they to began to question the outcomes. Democrats and Republicans began to debate on the provisions in the Act of state accountability. “The National Conference of State Legislatures called the bill’s testing provisions “seriously and perhaps irreparably flawed.” (Rudalevige, 2003). This was due to the law not having any set way to account for the testing that was supposed to be part of the Act; it left that process up to the individual states.
“NCLB's measurement of proficiency, or "Adequate Yearly Progress" (AYP), has largely been discr...
... middle of paper ...
.... Retrieved from Education Week: http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/08/22/01gallup_web.h26.html
Huffington Post. (2011, August 16). No Child Left Behind Debate Centers On Federalism . Retrieved from Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/16/no-child-left-behind-reauthorization-federalism_n_927718.html
NEA. (2013). No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)/ESEA. Retrieved from National Education Association: https://www.nea.org/home/NoChildLeftBehindAct.html
Rich, M. (2013, July). Education Proposal in House Could Replace ‘No Child’ Act. Retrieved from Washington Post: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/19/us/politics/education-proposal-in-house-could-replace-no-child-act.html?_r=0
Rudalevige, A. (2003). The politics of No Child Left Behind. EducationNext, 3(4), 63-69. Retrieved from EducationNext: http://educationnext.org/the-politics-of-no-child-left-behind/
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001’s main purpose was to enhance the education system and hold schools accountable in its attempt to bring equality in the fight against poverty for poor and minority groups. Once this Act was signed into law the American public expected an overhaul of the education system with only good outcomes. The public assumed our children would be receiving the best education available and the economic issues that plagued schools would no longer be a problem. In the beginning of its implementation No Child Left Behind was expected to bring America up to standards with other nations, this was something that America has struggled to do for many years. Our children were now being put first according to Act and the public and many political figures were ecstatic over the possibilities.
The implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act applied a market approach to school reform as a way of improving the school system. This new law promised an era of high standards, testing, and accountability in
Neill, Monty. "The No Child Left Behind Act Is Not Improving Education." Education: Opposing Viewpoints. New York: Greenhaven, 2005. 162-68. Print.
Education is the foundation of American society. It empowers the youth of America to become the successful leaders this country needs for the future. Education has been one of America’s top priorities since 1965, when the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was passed. Now, education is controlled by the No Child Left Behind Act, which was launched in January 8, 2002. This act was passed with intentions from the government to provide Americans with a more superior education system. However, The No Child Left Behind Act carried many flaws which were left unseen to a vast majority of the public. This act limited American students by not allowing them to demonstrate their full academic potentials while proceeding in school. While the act was still fairly fresh, there was already evidence to prove that it had already gotten off to a bad beginning. For the crucial math and science courses, statistics showed minimal improvements which had begun around the time period in which the No Child Left Behind Act was passed. The act was also supported by a number of educators who voiced themselves by testifying against having the right to teach at their own free will. Teachers across America claimed that because of this new act, they felt a constant heaviness upon their shoulders from the state government to “Teach the test.”
Retrieved from http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/univpresch.pdf Rich, M. (2013). Few States Look to Extend Preschool to All 4-Year-Olds. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/14/education/early-education-far-short-of-goal-in-obama-speech.html Samuels, C. A. (2009). The 'Standard' of the 'Standard'.
24 Mar. 2014. “The DREAM Act.” Immigration Policy Center. N.p, n.d. Web. 18 Mar. 2014
...it: Greenhaven Press, 2013. At Issue. Rpt. from "The Future of Immigrant Children." The Future of Children (Spring 2011).Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 21 Apr. 2014.
Liebaman, J. S. (2003, May). "The Federal No Child Left Behind Act and The Post-Desegregation Civil Rights Agenda. North Carolina Law Review 81.
...erformance. The biggest issue seems to be accountability, which is an important aspect to students, teachers, and school boards. The final issue deals with the goal for 2014. To predict that 100% of students would be college-ready by this year is impossible. Some students will always need help- this is a simple statement that must be first understood before setting realistic goals. Additionally, some students will always be ahead. The goals of this act were farfetched, and should have been viewed as impossible from the beginning. Governer Rick Scott believes these misunderstandings provide a chance to gain “more local control” (2012, Armario) which he is very “enthusiastic about” (2012, Armario). The No Child Left Behind Act was started with high hopes that were never fully accomplished, but I believe that it can be successful after modifications and reevaluations.
Since the No Child Left Behind Act has come into effect, it has caused some concerns with teachers and parents alike on how well it is working for the students. There have been issues to be addressed and instead been overlooked. Because in “Is No Child Left Behind Effective For All Students?” Parents Don’t Think So, a school who fails to meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for four or more years is considered under corrective action and the state board must make serious changes to the school. Randolph and Wilson-Younger, (Oct. 22, 2012). Our government has offered states the chance to waive requirements but the states have to make specific reforms in exchange for flexibility. During the first round of waivers offered, 11 states applied. The states had to fill out applications. Each state must put in an application for a waiver and if a state receives a wavier it will last for two years and then they can reapply. These waivers are needed because the No Child Left Behind is broken. The laws can identify which schools that are in need of improvement based on their achievement targets. The law prescribes interventions but the interventions are not working as well as they could be. Lawmakers have proposed to move a bill to the Senate or House floor. However, the Republicans had p...
Rushton talks about the funding for the No Child Left Behind is being held back if the students don’t do well on the standardized tests. So if the students don’t do well on the testing the teachers are being affected in the way of how much they are getting paid, also affects the school districts funding. This is encouraging the teachers not to teach the way they should, but they are teaching in the way of let’s just make the students do well on the standardized tests. In this article Rushton talks about how the brain of the student learns. Rushton talks about how the pre-frontal lobe is responsible for the thinking skills, creativity, and also making judgments. For the students that are taking the standardized test they may not have this area all the way developed, and that could be one of the major reasons that the teachers are not make the criteria of the test scores. If that is happening should the teachers really be counted responsible for what the student is not learning? Teachers need to create the environment where the students can grow at their own independent rate. “Effective teachers support brain development by encouraging children to make discoveries in well-planned environments that support student autonomy” (Rushton 89). The NCLB provides the funding for the school districts that make the grades on the standardized test but the schools that don’t make the grade has a disadvantage because then the NCLB doesn’t give the funding to the schools. “Research has shown that the teachers employed at low-preforming schools often are less qualified teachers while the students may have less extensive academic preparation” (Rushton 91). The connection in this resource is that it may not be the teacher’s fault...
The Heritage Foundation - Conservative Policy Research and Analysis. Web. 10 Mar. 2010. . Nick. "Basic Information about the DREAM Act Legislation | DREAM Act Portal."
Pulitzer Prize winner for editorial cartoons, David Horsey, in No Child Left Behind, displays the effects of the No Child Left Behind system in schools. Horsey’s purpose is to demonstrate how No Child Left Behind has negative effects in the way schools teach in today’s society. By using contrasting colors and exaggerated images, he illustrates the way schools are forced to teach children in order to prove to American voters that this system needs to be changed. Horsey uses this cartoon to argue that the No Child Left Behind policy is not as salutary to schools and students as it may seem on paper.
The No Child Left Behind Act, a federal social program that tries to encourages after school programs should be eliminated and the extra funds given to schools to decide where it goes.
noble, kenneth. "THE NATION; PRO & CON: HOW MUCH GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO FOR PARENTS." New York Times 1 may 1988, Print.