Who benefited from the No Child Left Behind?

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I'm not a teacher, but I'll hazard a guess that the teachers feel threatened that they are being assessed on the children's performances on one test when, no matter how good a teacher they may be, there are many other factors that determine how successful a child is on said test, including all the other teachers that have ever taught that child! Should an 8th grade math teacher be judged on how their students do on this test when, in reality, the child has been behind in their math skills since 1st grade?

So the problem isn't the teacher, it's the teacherS? I'm much happier with that analysis than the demonizing of a set of standards (with the subtext of complaining about being judged based on performance, as happens in every other professional field).

It just seems like we speak in absolutes and platitudes when discussing NCLB - if the family has such a big influence on kids that they become essentially unteachable, why even have schools? If the previous teachers sucked that badly, shouldn't that be borne out in the data? If SpEd and ESL students are such a drag on the numbers, why are they included and/or why aren't these individuals placed in a location that can be fairly judged against standards (i.e. another program/school)?

This seems so eminently fixable that it sucks to hear about how much it, well, sucks. I've long held that the problems in education (ranging from teacher pay to classroom size) are largely a function of bloated and ineffective administration - is that, combined with legislative inertia, enough to remove our ability to enact seemingly straightforward standards?

[epchick]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

If SpEd and ESL students are such a drag on the numbers, why are they included and/or why aren't these individuals placed in a location that can be fairly judged against standards (i.e. another program/school)?

Because the government, per NCLB, want them included. They can't segregate the special needs kids (well the ones that can function on their own), it's what is called "inclusion." Once they get to certain grade, they are put into a 'normal' classroom, whether they are ready or not. It's why my legally deaf cousin, is part of a normal 3rd grade monolingual class. It's called "inclusion." So he'll be taking the same TAKS test (Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills) that all the other 3rd graders take. It doesn't help that his teacher doesn't know how to teach him and because he's already been put into the "normal" class, he doesn't get his special ed classes anymore.

His test will be the same, except he won't have the field questions (i.e. the questions that are meant to be so difficult that the kids can't pass that question---but they aren't included in the final score).

Really unless you are a teacher, you won't really 'get' why there is so much hostility towards NCLB. It is a good system, in theory, but it hasn't been implemented properly.


ETA:

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

And, unless I've missed something major, NCLB doesn't really require that anyone do anything to teachers based on the results of the test.

That's actually not true. NCLB may not be directly responsible for it, but there are consequences if schools don't meet AYP. If a school doesn't meet AYP, they get put on a growth plan (like i mentioned earlier). If after the 5th year, a school doesn't meet AYP (in any area) then the school will be taken over by the "government." It will be up to them what would happen to the teachers..they could keep them, dismiss them all, or just dismiss some of them.

That has been something that has been in place since the beginning of NCLB. I never had to take the TAKS (the TAKS started the year after me) but even then I heard that if the students didn't pass the TAKS, then teachers could be fired.

Like I mentioned before, there is one school in this area that is on their 5th year not meeting AYP's graduation rate (and we've already talked about that). If they don't bring up their graduation rate, then the school will be taken over.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by epchick

Because the government, per NCLB, want them included. They can't segregate the special needs kids (well the ones that can function on their own), it's what is called "inclusion." Once they get to certain grade, they are put into a 'normal' classroom, whether they are ready or not. It's why my legally deaf cousin, is part of a normal 3rd grade monolingual class. It's called "inclusion." So he'll be taking the same TAKS test (Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills) that all the other 3rd graders take. It doesn't help that his teacher doesn't know how to teach him and because he's already been put into the "normal" class, he doesn't get his special ed classes anymore.

His test will be the same, except he won't have the field questions (i.e. the questions that are meant to be so difficult that the kids can't pass that question---but they aren't included in the final score).

Ah, OK - so it's the high-functioning children, who would still ordinarily qualify for Special Education classes?

Also, if he's legally deaf, does he get a sign interpreter? Does he read lips? What's his retention rate? It seems odd they'd throw a deaf kid into class to just sit there and watch.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Also, if he's legally deaf, does he get a sign interpreter? Does he read lips? What's his retention rate? It seems odd they'd throw a deaf kid into class to just sit there and watch.

Long story short: because he can barely hear out of one ear--he's not "deaf enough" to need anything else but hearing aids which, after his big fall last year, don't work very well anymore. The teacher uses an FM trainer which is just a microphone she wears to amplify her voice. It works well at times, but this teacher has gotten into the habit of speaking too fast and moving through the material too quickly. My aunt has gone to talk to her numerous times, and the teacher supposedly is aware of what she is doing and always promises to fix it....but she never does. They've taken a few benchmark tests (they are like practice tests to gauge how the students are doing) and he's scored EXTREMELY low (but apparently not enough to be worried?)

If there is a substitute, well forget the FM trainer being used (some subs have refused to use it, some say they "prefer not to"). So whatever lesson is being taught for that day, pretty much is useless to him because unless the sub spends some time with him, my cousin isn't gonna learn crap from that day.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by epchick

Long story short: because he can barely hear out of one ear--he's not "deaf enough" to need anything else but hearing aids which, after his big fall last year, don't work very well anymore. The teacher uses an FM trainer which is just a microphone she wears to amplify her voice. It works well at times, but this teacher has gotten into the habit of speaking too fast and moving through the material too quickly. My aunt has gone to talk to her numerous times, and the teacher supposedly is aware of what she is doing and always promises to fix it....but she never does. They've taken a few benchmark tests (they are like practice tests to gauge how the students are doing) and he's scored EXTREMELY low (but apparently not enough to be worried?)

If there is a substitute, well forget the FM trainer being used (some subs have refused to use it, some say they "prefer not to"). So whatever lesson is being taught for that day, pretty much is useless to him because unless the sub spends some time with him, my cousin isn't gonna learn crap from that day.

That sucks - it kind of ruins the entire point of having a legally-defined standard for "deaf" huh? Wow.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

That sucks - it kind of ruins the entire point of having a legally-defined standard for "deaf" huh? Wow.

yep, but our family is kind of used to it. He wasn't diagnosed until he was almost 3, and they still want to give the family a run around as to what kind of "treatment" is available for him.

After he took a fall on the playground last year, he was eligible for the cochlear implant on his right ear. But once he was in the operating table, opened up, they realized he couldn't get the cochlear implant in that ear. So he went home with nothing.

[UGAalum94]

Epchick,

I think your family needs to make some legal noise to advocate for his needs. If the district won't do what they are legally obligated to do in terms of providing an appropriate education and modification without your suing them, then you may need to sue. I'm pretty sure the district won't want to explain in court that because he isn't completely sucking at his benchmarks, that it's appropriate for him to go some days completely unable to experience instruction*. If your district is anything like 99% of the districts out there, they will become much more interested in doing what they can long before it looks like it will go to court.

Of course, suing might won't help you get a job in the district when you get certified.

* on the other hand, complaints about speed of speech and going over material might not be best way to approach it, unless you specifically make the case that it's hearing impairment that has created language delays. I say that because almost any kid who isn't doing so well is going to complain that the teacher goes over it too fast, and you all probably want to make the district feel accountable specifically to special education law.

I think it was super-nice of you all to try to resolve it by working with the classroom teacher first, and I even think that you're probably going to realistically expect some issues with substitutes not knowing what to do. But at some point, your aunt might need to start pushing the district as hard as she can and fear of lawsuits seems to drive most districts.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by epchick

Really unless you are a teacher, you won't really 'get' why there is so much hostility towards NCLB. It is a good system, in theory, but it hasn't been implemented properly.


ETA:

That's actually not true. NCLB may not be directly responsible for it, but there are consequences if schools don't meet AYP. If a school doesn't meet AYP, they get put on a growth plan (like i mentioned earlier). If after the 5th year, a school doesn't meet AYP (in any area) then the school will be taken over by the "government." It will be up to them what would happen to the teachers..they could keep them, dismiss them all, or just dismiss some of them.

That has been something that has been in place since the beginning of NCLB. I never had to take the TAKS (the TAKS started the year after me) but even then I heard that if the students didn't pass the TAKS, then teachers could be fired.

Like I mentioned before, there is one school in this area that is on their 5th year not meeting AYP's graduation rate (and we've already talked about that). If they don't bring up their graduation rate, then the school will be taken over.

All the examples mentioned about outcomes for individual teachers are things the district COULD do, but they aren't things required by NCLB. There's nothing that requires that teachers from reorganized schools will be terminated, and honestly, I don't expect them to, especially if they are performing in the average or above range for the particular kids they serve. And in my experience, principals and districts know who teaches classes with more kids less likely to do well since in practice most places, they aren't equally distributed. If the particular teacher is performing worse that other teachers with comparable kids year after year, then he or she probably should be evaluated accordingly.

Districts taking tests scores seriously may be a product of NCLB, but how they respond to those test results is pretty much still up to them and I think anyone would be hard pressed to find examples of teachers getting fired for their special education students' performance. Pressured? Sure. Compelled to attend ridiculous time consuming meetings that do nothing to increase student performance, sure. But actually formally evaluated in a way detrimental to their careers, not so much.

And the thing about any special ed issues is that you kind of have to ask if special education STUDENTS were actually receiving better academic instruction before they counted in the data this much. If we're honest with ourselves, I think it's pretty clear that they weren't. They were much more likely to be in programs that didn't really push them very much academically, especially if they had parents who the district wasn't worried would sue. The present system may judge schools for their performance in a kind of unfair way, but I think the cases where it harms the kid are outnumbered by the benefits to kids who receive much more targeted academic instruction.

I'm not saying NCLB is flawless certainly, but it isn't really the great ruin of public education the way some educators and parents would make it out to be.