Who benefited from the No Child Left Behind?

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by G-Kue 1911

The NCLB act also helps SINI (schools in need of improvement) with free after school tutoring from test prep companies like Princeton Review and Kaplan as long as the student receives free or reduced lunch. I agree that this too can be a complete failure if the educator is only teaching the students to pass state exams!

Implying that only poor kids who don't pass the test need tutoring? That's absurd.

The real problem with this philosophy of blaming the teacher and the school system when kids don't learn is that there are a million factors that determine where a child is academically. My kids would pass any standardized test in the world no matter what the skill level of the teachers who taught their courses was. They are intelligent kids who get good nutrition, don't live in fear of crime 24/7, who have parents who value education, who have an innate desire to know things and takes initiative to learn things on their own, whose parents have heat in the house and electricity and a computer for every person in the house, who don't have learning disabilities or mental or physical illnesses that prevent them from learning, who get their hearing and eyes checked regularly, etc. They've had good teachers and not so good teachers and when the teachers were not so good, they learned it on their own or asked for more help from their educated parents. A far cry from a kid who is living in poverty with no heat or electricity, who might eat the one free meal a day from the school, who has a learning disability and needs glasses but can't afford them, who is in a high crime area and is far more worried about staying safe walking home from the bus stop than getting their home work done, who don't sleep well because they live in fear of an alcoholic, abusive parent, etc.

Education is about so much more than how well a teacher can teach a subject.

[G-Kue 1911]

Who implied that free or reduced lunch made you poor...I didn't. And the eligibility requirements are only that you receive free or reduced lunch (not your State Standardized test scores). But you hit the nail on the head with your thoughts on other factors why students fail to achieve better grades. This is what so many people educators included fail to realize.

Originally Posted by AGDee

Implying that only poor kids who don't pass the test need tutoring? That's absurd.

The real problem with this philosophy of blaming the teacher and the school system when kids don't learn is that there are a million factors that determine where a child is academically. My kids would pass any standardized test in the world no matter what the skill level of the teachers who taught their courses was. They are intelligent kids who get good nutrition, don't live in fear of crime 24/7, who have parents who value education, who have an innate desire to know things and takes initiative to learn things on their own, whose parents have heat in the house and electricity and a computer for every person in the house, who don't have learning disabilities or mental or physical illnesses that prevent them from learning, who get their hearing and eyes checked regularly, etc. They've had good teachers and not so good teachers and when the teachers were not so good, they learned it on their own or asked for more help from their educated parents. A far cry from a kid who is living in poverty with no heat or electricity, who might eat the one free meal a day from the school, who has a learning disability and needs glasses but can't afford them, who is in a high crime area and is far more worried about staying safe walking home from the bus stop than getting their home work done, who don't sleep well because they live in fear of an alcoholic, abusive parent, etc.

Education is about so much more than how well a teacher can teach a subject.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by G-Kue 1911

Who implied that free or reduced lunch made you poor...I didn't. And the eligibility requirements are only that you receive free or reduced lunch (not your State Standardized test scores). But you hit the nail on the head with your thoughts on other factors why students fail to achieve better grades. This is what so many people educators included fail to realize.

To get free lunch, you have to be at poverty level. To get reduced lunch, you have to be at 25% above poverty level. That's why those students get free or reduced lunch. I know because I looked into it when my ex husband got laid off. I thought that at 50% of his pay, he would be eligible, but making $25K a year with 1 dependent, he is not. Living on less than $25K with a kid is most definitely not middle class.

[G-Kue 1911]

Wow...good information. I know that variety of the schools in NYC are on a universal system which allows all students to qualify for free lunch and SES services. You situation sounds close to my family's when I was younger...I remember it being tough...hope things are better.

Originally Posted by AGDee

To get free lunch, you have to be at poverty level. To get reduced lunch, you have to be at 25% above poverty level. That's why those students get free or reduced lunch. I know because I looked into it when my ex husband got laid off. I thought that at 50% of his pay, he would be eligible, b$25K a year with 1 dependent, he is not. Living on less than $25K with a kid is most definitely not middle class.