Education Reformers Tackle NCLB Flaws

I believe one possible consequence of such provisions would be that competent teachers will be more likely than ever before to avoid poverty stricken schools, as well as all other student populations that are perceived to already be performing below standard. One psychological ramification of monetary rewards for some is that they can be interpreted as monetary deprivation for others, especially in such a low paying profession. This would completely undermine the goals of the NCLB Act.

I urge you to contact your congressional representatives about your opinions on changes to NCLB before they vote on it!

Matthew of GA 3:49PM July 25, 2009

I am scared to see us go from comparing ourselves to each other state-wide with our "school report cards" based on standardized test score for meeting AYP, to a movement of comparing our country to other countries. Since all trends economic and political seem to point to a globalistic society with one "ruling committee", now we see the trend moving into our actual education hearings in D.C. before an overhaul of NCLB- surptise, surprise - no surprise.

My guess is that the bureaucracy at the top will just water down our education system's potency more by getting us to teach to more standardized testing rigor and drop off two things:

1. Real content and skills and lifelong learning tools.

2. Basing student achievement on individual past year scores vs. comparing with an ever higher bar standard.

There are many universal design for learning tools that can support learning and accommodate HUGE print disability issues that many students have that are pulling down achievement scores, but they have to be implemented. We need remediation and real life learning strategies for students - not global comparisons. We can't get it right yet by comparing ourselves to each other at home let alone the rest if the world!

Lon of OR 12:11PM December 26, 2008

You're correct in your assertion that students need to learn reading and math in school; however, if you advocate "teaching to the test" as the best way to convey knowledge of the material, then you must be assuming that the test in question is the best measure of comprehension of the material. This is simply not the case. Standardized tests tend to focus on rote knowledge and memorization. They typically do a poor job of measuring critical thinking skills such as comprehension and application of the material. Teaching to the test will ensure that students know all of the facts about the subject, just not how or why they relate to each other or how to apply this knowledge in real-life situations. If we teach to the test, then yes, test scores will be high and we can all pat ourselves on the back for "saving" the education system. The added bonus will be that American students will enter a world that they cannot comprehend and are powerless to change, because teaching them how to think was never a priority.

Andrew of AZ 3:33PM July 21, 2008

This is quite a scary thing for me. If teachers get paid on student performance, which is based on test scores, then all teachers will teach is the test. Students will only learn the test. If the government wants to evaluate teachers and base their pay on student performance, someone needs to go into the classroom, sit in on a class and observe teacher and student performance. I understand this would cost much more time and money than a standardized test, but I feel the children's futures will benefit from it much more.Teachers will then be able to give students insightful lessons, rather than concentrating on how to get students to pass a test. I feel that basing teacher pay on student test scores will create a lot of anxiety in schools and classrooms that are dry, flat, and non-engaging because the students will have to learn how to test rather than how to use their education in life outside of school.

Adela of MN 9:28AM July 18, 2008