What does "No child left behind" mean?
We just keep failing them until they pass? or we pass them anyway, just to say they "graduated"?
- LysaLv 69 years agoFavorite Answer
Public Law 107 -110, which is more commonly known as "No Child Left Behind" is a law that President Bush put into effect in 2001 that states that all states have to make standards and then test their children to make sure that they are learning those standards. The law also states that each year, more and more children have to pass the tests, until in 2014 when ALL children will be passing. Every year that a school doesn’t raise the number of students who pass the tests, the school will be greatly penalized.
For most people the name of the law, and the idea that all children are expected to pass the tests sounds like a wonderful idea. In reality there are good things that are part of the law, but either they are overshadowed by the bad things, or the way the the law is implemented. For example, part of the law is "access to remedial tutoring is mandatory for children who are not making the grade". That is a good point. Sadly, the law doesn’t allow for the funds and time to do this, so many schools are now taking time out of their day to have the teachers teach the tutoring classes. Because teachers now teach remedial tutoring during the day, there is less time for the teachers to teach curriculum. Subjects like history, science, social studies and geography which aren't tested have all but disappeared from most schools.
Another problem with the program is that it is standards based. This is a problem in two ways. First states get to choose their standards. Some states have therefore chosen very low standards to help insure that their schools pass the tests and receive federal funding. Teachers are then forced to teach only the low standards, and the states' level of education is low.
Other states have chosen impossibly high standards, ones that mean that most schools will not be able to pass. I know that sounds crazy, but there is an insane reason to their madness. Schools that don't pass the tests, not only don't receive federal funding, but don't receive state funding as well. This means less money the state needs to pay.
The great discrepancy caused by each state having different standards have led to a great difference in what is considered "grade level". Literally, a failing kindergartner in one state can be an honor roll 3rd grader in another. Some people are working towards national standards. This would fix the problem of varying standards, but it is still limiting in the overall schema of things.
Why? Because when you are "Standards Based" you teach only the standards, nothing else. Children who are capable of more don't get their needs met because teachers are only allowed to teach the standard, not above, causing our best and brightest to be bored out of their minds. On the other hand, when you are "standards based", struggling children also fair no better because teachers once again are forced to teach only the grade level standards and nothing else, including the prerequisite skills for the standard that the struggling students are lacking. Because they can't be taught the skills that they need, the struggling students are forced to attempt problems that they are not ready for, and become frustrated and overwhelmed. By the way, all the good teachers are also becoming frustrated and overwhelmed. They know that what we are doing isn't working, but they are scared to do anything but follow the scripts handed to them for fear of being yelled at or fired. (I do find it ironic that NCLB was supposed to get rid of all the "bad" teachers, and instead, since all they have to do is follow whatever scripted program their district has invested in this year, it is the bad teachers who are staying in the field, all the good ones are leaving or simply counting their days until retirement.)
Lastly, (actually, not last, but the last thing I will address here), there are the educational sanctions placed on schools when they don’t “pass”. Failing schools lose more and more money each year that they are labeled as “failing”. A few years ago my school had $200 per classroom to buy all the paper, pencils, erasers, xerox copies, and so on that it needed, (forget things like balls for PE and recess). Over the years this sum has been lowered to $50. How can we expect all children to succeed when the teachers, especially of our poorest and most needy, aren’t given the means to supply them with basic learning supplies? Some people say we need to have their parents supply it. But most of our parents can't or won't, penalizing our children furtherSource(s): Website with links to multiple articles on No Child Left Behind http://www.montessorianswers.com/no-child-left-beh... A book with all the stats about NCLB is: The Death and Life of the Great American School System by Diane Ravich who was the Assistant Secretary of Education from 1991 - 1993 http://www.dianeravitch.com/vita.html
- 9 years ago
"No child left behind" means that since they cannot "pass" without producing evidence of learning the presented material, the complexity of said material is reduced until there are no children who do not "pass".
It creates a very ineffectual educational system and it produces people who believe that Hollywood movies present scientific truth, who believe that information found on Wikipedia is factual, who think that a university degree actually has meaning.
"No child left behind" is a socialist program that has done more harm to U.S. children than most of the other programs combined.
Teachers (the good ones) have been fighting against the travesty of "No child left behind" since its inception and finally, they have obtained "permission" not to participate.
There is yet hope as long as the teachers will fight for what is correct.
- HrēodbēorðLv 69 years ago
During his 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush said "no child should be left behind" in terms of elementary and secondary school education. The words coined the phrase that led to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which has four main points: increased accountability of schools to the government, increased freedom to communities and states in how they use federal funding, education methods demonstrated by practices including periodic mandatory proficiency testing, and greater control by parents of the schools their children attend in that the parents can now choose a different public or charter school in the same district if their children's schools under-perform for two years in a row. Other important features of the No Child Left Behind Act are that lower-income students in schools that are poorly-rated for at least three years can transfer to better schools, and children in schools with high rates of violence or who are the victims of repeated attacks can opt to attend a safer school.Source(s): http://www.ehow.com/about_5085381_history-child-le... http://ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/execsumm.html
- 9 years ago
It means that you tie the schools funding to tests that are dumb, and then the schools teach the dumb things over and over to make sure they do well on the tests so that the schools get funding.
No Child Left Behind = Slowdown The Smart Kids
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Zachary GLv 79 years ago
It holds the children who are succeeding back so that the ones who are struggling can catch up.
Basically it screws over the ones who earn their education by rewarding the ones who either don't care enough to do the work, aren't trying or are genuinely incompetent or need a little more assistance.
- Anonymous4 years ago
I ve been told by a mom that her child cannot flunk a subject and have to retake that subject the next year, she said they have to pass him, no matter his grades?? I question that,
so just what does this mean,? why an t they fail a subject? and have to retake it? sounds silly to me, why send kids to the next year when they don t understand the subject? just means they will continue to fail that subject and know nothing when they get their diploma.
ARE we now just passing kids, to get them out of schools? sending dummies into the real world with no knowledge.
it is all confusing.
- Anonymous9 years ago
More cheating and less education than before, when it was bad, but not as bad.
Public School Union teachers sent their kids to private schools. They know they are part of and perpetuate, a bad system.
- 9 years ago
No, it means we cut funding to schools that have poor test scores. So they can have even poorer test scores next year.
- Gunny TLv 69 years ago
Libtard doublespeak for "No child left un-Indoctrinated"
- Pamela JLv 69 years ago
It's Republican for, "Screw your the kids, mine are going to private schools."