« Delegates Say Yes to Peer Review | Main | Randi Attacks NCLB »

Delegates Vote For NCLB Repeal

| 8 Comments

Will the two national teachers' unions never get on the same page, even with NCLB, which both dislike?

Just this month, the NEA finally appeared to have come around to the idea that it should work to improve the No Child Left Behind law, rather than oppose it completely. But even as it released a list of suggestions to improve the law, the AFT—which a number of years ago released its recommendations for improving NCLB—has gone and declared that it wants the current version of the law thrown out the window.

Delegates voted this morning, with no arguments against, to support the repeal of NCLB after efforts to "radically reform" it have failed. The resolution says that instead, the AFT should develop a proposal that builds on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Here we go again.

8 Comments

If you are teacher and you have doing things properly, then you have to overjoyed with the elimination of NCLB. I am so overjoyed by this news that I can not stop smiling.. Thanks AFT and NEA for upholding this vote.

"If you are teacher and you have doing things properly, then you have to overjoyed with the elimination of NCLB. I am so overjoyed by this news that I can not stop smiling.. Thanks AFT and NEA for upholding this vote."

I think that the data leads to several possible conclusions. One, not all teachers have been doing things properly and this has led to serious achievement gaps both within and between schools. Two, changing the things that teaachers do has in some cases led to improved results. Three (again--this is only a possible conclusion), some kids cannot learn as well as others and they are unequally distributed according to SES and ethnicity.

Sorry. No smiles here.

If you enjoy all the paperwork of mandatory CSAP forms for each student failing student,meeting with Counsellors for Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions, then meeting with parents and the pschologist before failing each student. This takes the greater part of the year to fail one student without any teaching going on.
If you want to call inner city schools as failing schools because the students do not test well on a particular test for AYP, then, of course, NCLB is for you with all its paperwork. If you have small class sizes then its easier but with 39 in a class in the inner city NCLB is a excrusiating and does not educate anyone any better.
In addition, if you have student teachers that are introduced to NCLB, they give up and decide not to pursue being an educator. What kind of future does NCLB give the future teachers most especially for inner city school??

The testing data and the school comparisons do nothing to educate our kids along with NCLB that leaves every teacher behind.
So get on board, start "smiling" maybe without NCLB we can get back to teaching our students instead of doing meaningless paperwork and we can get our classrooms back by being able to fail a student who does not do the work without the tons of paperwork. The smiles is because we can get back to teaching again without NCLB.
This gives us something to smile about.


Carolyn:

I challenge you to find CSAP forms, Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions or any requirements related to the failing of students mentioned anywhere in NCLB. I also would love to see any research to substantiate the notion that there are students (who seem to be primarily located in urban areas, oddly enough) who don't "test well" on a certain test. What does that mean? They really know and understand the content, but just can't answer any questions about it?

You are right, the testing data and school comparisions do nothing to educate students. Neither does not testing and not comparing. I can tell you that without some data to show that it makes a difference to have a smaller class size, there is no reason to assume that 49 students is anything but just right.

I don't know if you are a teacher, but if you are, you are the first to admit to expressing joy at the possiblity of failing students.

Margo,
You can get a copy of the Csap and Tier l and Tier 2 forms from any elementary or high school or from your school district office that the teacher must use for NCLB. Failing a class is as disappointing to a teacher as it indicates something missing in the student. Without being able to fail a student based upon student effort and accomplishments, then the teacher loses an important consequence in classroom management. If a student believes that they can make no effort and still pass a class or be promoted to the next grade then the student loses respect for the teacher and what is to be mastered. You can not have meaningful success if there is no possibility of failure..that is just life. In no Child Left Behind if failure is not possible when the student makes no effort, then there is no incentive for success. Think about the name NCLB means that everyone basically passess classes no matter the effort. That is not success for the student or the teacher. If a 2nd grader can not read at grade level then rather than being held back to attain the 2nd grade reading level they are passed to 3rd and then to 4th grade all the while still reading 2nd or less...that is NCLB. If a child recognizes that if they do not do the work then they will not pass gives incentives to achievement. Without incentives to achieve or consequences to bad behavior and not achievement, we learn! We have created 8 years of students that have been rewarded for non achievement and expect to pass.. this is not teaching either. The testing comparisons of schools is called AYP which designates if the school has achieved testing success or not. I hope this helps as to why for the most part we teachers want to get rid of NCLB but it is because we desire to teach according to multiple intelligences that enhances both teacher and student success. WE teachers are on your side and we delight in our students success but we also recognize failure and we are always glad when we get support from parents so that we can achieve true success and partnership in education. Thanks for your interest in understanding why No Child Left Behind leaves every student, teacher and public education behind. Carolyn [email protected]

Carolyn:

The problem with the things that you are saying is that they have no basis in fact. Tiered systems of support are an example of intervention aimed at improving the school's ability to respond to varying level of student need. Students have varying levels of needs--this was true both before and after NCLB--and will continue on into the future even if you are successful at making the law go away. NCLB does not prescribe the use of a tiered system of supports. That would be a decision made at the state or local level. I have no ideal what CSAP is, but I suspect that it is also a local requirement.

To assume that a second grader who reads below grade level "indicates something missing in the student" is a great leap from the data into something closer to a belief system, that has some rather yucky implications attached. To further assume that the "something missing" is a desire to learn that must be boosted by the threat of failure is not only reprehensible--but is exactly the kind of thing that teachers perceive and respond negatively to in NCLB when it is schools (or perhaps teachers) who face failure.

I don't know how it is that you have twisted the goal of having every child read and do math (and science) at grade level into a requirement that every child be passed on, no matter what. When individual students are not achieving at grade level, schools are supposed (not saying it happens, because in my experience it doesn't always) to be providing a more intensive learning experience to bring them up to grade level (this would include teaching according to multiple intelligences). You seem to be bothered by this or prefer to just hold them back for another year of more of the same thing that didn't work the first time around.

I fully understand what AYP means. It sets a slope of improvement for various demographic groups to ensure that there is attention paid to the improvement of them all. The initial AYP goals were set at somewhere around the 20th percentile of achievement with a trajectory to ultimately reach 100%. In most states, the actually score required to meet AYP is still fairly low (due to the assumption that schools would need some time to implement meaningful reform). I happen to have a kid who falls into a couple of those groups. NCLB has resulted in a new focus on whether or not he actually achieves. I can tell you that the first year that scores had to be reported, there were some single digit groups in school in our district. This in areas where people thought that they were really doing pretty well with "those kids." Things have gotten better.

By your comments, you suggest that things (with regard to learning) have gotten worse. I wonder what you metric you use to determine this?

Carolyn,
I suggest you become a teacher and then comment on NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND and then try to implement the policy for 33 children. Teachers are leaving the profession in droves because we do not make enough money and there are not enough hours in the day. You are weclome to do the job as there are tons of openings. Yes indeed there is a Tier I and Tier II, I have no reason to lie, I am off for the summer. If you are not doing tons of paperwork, then you are not following NCLB.
... Bye

Carolyn:

While you are off this summer, you might want to actually read the No Child Left Behind Law. It simply doesn't say all the things that you believe it does. This doesn't mean that those things don't exist. It means that they are caused by something else--and making NCLB go away won't change them.

Do you advocate a complete shutdown of Title I? This is the funding that drives the accountability requirements of NCLB. Would you advocate federal funding without accountability? To what end (that is, why should the federal government be providing funds to states for the provision of education)? Are you aware that the purpose of Title I funding from its inception was to provide a more level playing field of opportunity to students who came from disadvantaged backgrounds in disadvantaged areas. After somewhere near 40 years, has it made a difference? How would we know? Should we continue the funding if it doesn't?

Comments are now closed for this post.

Advertisement

Recent Comments

  • Margo/Mom: Carolyn: While you are off this summer, you might want read more
  • Carolyn Whitfield: Carolyn, I suggest you become a teacher and then comment read more
  • Margo/Mom: Carolyn: The problem with the things that you are saying read more
  • Carolyn Whitfield: Margo, You can get a copy of the Csap and read more
  • Margo/Mom: Carolyn: I challenge you to find CSAP forms, Tier 1 read more

Archives

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here