NCLB

[DolphinChicaDDD]

Originally Posted by Kevin

But let's go back to your classroom.. you say you have 5 kids who are doomed to fail.. that means you have what..25 kids who are possibly going to succeed? Would you say that just about every teacher in your district is going to have similar results due to the kids coming from fairly similar backgrounds?

Assuming your classroom is composed of a fair cross section of the community, you, personally shouldn't be in trouble. Maybe the school, but as I recall, there are allowances for lower expectations of schools in certain areas.

At some point, there has to be a choice made between what's best for our students and what's best for our schools. I'm completely convinced that NCLB is great for our students and can be devastating and even unfair to some schools. In my mind though, the benefits definitely outweigh the costs.

I think it's really great that a quality education is now available to basically anyone who wants one... or is that bad?

My classroom is not a fair representation, at all. I'll be first to admit it. The computer that made the schedules somehow came out with my teaching 3 college prep (level a) classes and an elective. I have 5 students that deliberately failed the standardized test. I won't know until June how many people failed the test. I have about another 10 who are failing for the year, and about 10-15 who are sitting on the fence, of about 60 total students. I am fortunate that I mostly have students who care about their studies and want to go to college. My mother is the opposite. She teaches inclusion on a general level. She has the students who don't care, are behavior problems, and generally don't want to be there.

I agree with some parts of the law. I believe that reform in education does need to occur. I'm not entirely sure how it going to occur, but I don't believe that NCLB is the answer. There needs to be some changes in the law.

My main disagreement with the law is how the students are being tested, particularly with the middle/high school cohort. I teach Biology. The students are tested on Chemistry, Biology, Physical Science, and Envrionmental Science, for the most part. I am held responsbile for the student failing the entire test. He may have gotten all the questions correct in Biology, but because he didn't learn anything in Chemistry the year before, he failed that part, he didn't do so hot on the environmental science because its not a required class-not to mention the last time he had any teaching on envrionmental science was in 6th grade and hes now a junior in high school, and Physical Science he is supposed to remember from freshman year.

On a state level, for science, NJ is petetioning to allow the testing after the year of the test. I support this fully. So now, after taking Biology, the student will be tested on only Biology. This grade comes back to the teacher teaching the subject, not the unfortunate person who is held accountable for the previous 10 years of teaching.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by DolphinChicaDDD

My main disagreement with the law is how the students are being tested, particularly with the middle/high school cohort. I teach Biology. The students are tested on Chemistry, Biology, Physical Science, and Envrionmental Science, for the most part. I am held responsbile for the student failing the entire test. He may have gotten all the questions correct in Biology, but because he didn't learn anything in Chemistry the year before, he failed that part, he didn't do so hot on the environmental science because its not a required class-not to mention the last time he had any teaching on envrionmental science was in 6th grade and hes now a junior in high school, and Physical Science he is supposed to remember from freshman year.

On a state level, for science, NJ is petetioning to allow the testing after the year of the test. I support this fully. So now, after taking Biology, the student will be tested on only Biology. This grade comes back to the teacher teaching the subject, not the unfortunate person who is held accountable for the previous 10 years of teaching.

Are you in NJ? And you all count science towards NCLB goals?

Weirdly, in Georgia we only count high school English and Math for high school AYP. (All the school rhetoric is about all the content areas, but only Math and ELA count towards the official AYP.) And so far, I haven't heard about any teachers personally being held accountable for results since it's the graduation test, and theoretically it tests all the years through 11th when they take it for the first time.

What parts count toward a states measurement of AYP in your states, everyone?

[UGAalum94]

http://www.state.nj.us/education/new...0aypreport.htm

That link says that New Jersey also only considers Math and English. So no doubt the schools are breathing down the necks of science teachers to improve science test performance, but it has NOTHING to do with NCLB AYP in New Jersey or Georgia.*

Now, DolphinChicaDDD may not even be in New Jersey and some states may have made science part of the AYP measurements. But this kind of stuff is what I mean about how the rhetoric around NCLB and the actual law often don't overlap much.*

At my school, the administrators will talk about AYP and graduation tests scores in all the areas, but really all the kids could fail the social studies and science grad. test, and we'd still be okay if everyone was good on ELA and Math.*


* Actually, although this was correct in the past and for this year, in 2007-2008, according to the New Jersey website, high schools do have to add science assessment. Maybe DolphinChica's school is just really forward thinking and they've been assessing "accountability" all along. No school in New Jersey could have failed to make AYP because of science so far, however. That part was right, and since I can't really find anything saying Georgia is adding science to the mix next year, I don't know if it's a NCLB deal or not. Anyone know?

[DolphinChicaDDD]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

http://www.state.nj.us/education/new...0aypreport.htm
* Actually, although this was correct in the past and for this year, in 2007-2008, according to the New Jersey website, high schools do have to add science assessment. Maybe DolphinChica's school is just really forward thinking and they've been assessing "accountability" all along. No school in New Jersey could have failed to make AYP because of science so far, however. That part was right, and since I can't really find anything saying Georgia is adding science to the mix next year, I don't know if it's a NCLB deal or not. Anyone know?

The state has been giving the science test for awhile, and starting next year they need to pass Science in order to graduate. Social Studies is in the works. Next year, we're going to start being held accountable for science test scores.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DolphinChicaDDD

My classroom is not a fair representation, at all. I'll be first to admit it. The computer that made the schedules somehow came out with my teaching 3 college prep (level a) classes and an elective. I have 5 students that deliberately failed the standardized test. I won't know until June how many people failed the test. I have about another 10 who are failing for the year, and about 10-15 who are sitting on the fence, of about 60 total students. I am fortunate that I mostly have students who care about their studies and want to go to college. My mother is the opposite. She teaches inclusion on a general level. She has the students who don't care, are behavior problems, and generally don't want to be there.

I agree with some parts of the law. I believe that reform in education does need to occur. I'm not entirely sure how it going to occur, but I don't believe that NCLB is the answer. There needs to be some changes in the law.

My main disagreement with the law is how the students are being tested, particularly with the middle/high school cohort. I teach Biology. The students are tested on Chemistry, Biology, Physical Science, and Envrionmental Science, for the most part. I am held responsbile for the student failing the entire test. He may have gotten all the questions correct in Biology, but because he didn't learn anything in Chemistry the year before, he failed that part, he didn't do so hot on the environmental science because its not a required class-not to mention the last time he had any teaching on envrionmental science was in 6th grade and hes now a junior in high school, and Physical Science he is supposed to remember from freshman year.

It would seem though that when compared to your peers, you should fit right in... I mean they all have exactly the same challenges to deal with don't they?

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by DolphinChicaDDD

The state has been giving the science test for awhile, and starting next year they need to pass Science in order to graduate. Social Studies is in the works. Next year, we're going to start being held accountable for science test scores.

Oh, yeah, Georgia's had a five-part graduation test (writing, ELA, math, science and social studies) for years, too. But my point was just it's not actually a NCLB thing.

(And it looks like, despite what the NJ website says, that science might not really be required to be assessed next year. Neither of the states that I looked up yesterday has any mention of adding science in 2007-2008 on the NCLB national website and the documents were updated in 2006. Surely, we’d be hearing more about it in Georgia since the graduate test scores came out this week, but maybe not.)

There may be problems with testing in general, but it bugs me when people attribute stuff to NCLB that doesn't really have anything to do with what the law requires.

NCLB is scapegoated by the education establishment for everything that's wrong. Especially at the building level, administrators give NCLB as the reason behind any unpopular decision or initiative.

You all may be held accountable for scores way beyond your control, but more of that is a local decision than a NCLB thing. Most of what NCLB measures is very basic reading and writing, really.

[sherbertlemons]

Originally Posted by DolphinChicaDDD

My mother is the opposite. She teaches inclusion on a general level. She has the students who don't care, are behavior problems, and generally don't want to be there.

Story of my life. What's really bad is they're disrupting the few students who would like to learn, and it's next to impossible to get them out of the class.

I agree with some parts of the law. I believe that reform in education does need to occur. I'm not entirely sure how it going to occur, but I don't believe that NCLB is the answer. There needs to be some changes in the law.

Ditto that. I really don't think it's going to work until the law also includes some measure of student and parent accountability. Student accountability should especially be in play at the high school level.

I was actually wishing the people supporting NCLB were sitting in my class the day I handed out progress reports. Several students were delighted with their scores- "Yes! Only one F!" That's just the climate with the students I have. It's a problem much deeper than one English teacher. It's certainly a problem that this poor little first year teacher has no idea how to fix.

My main disagreement with the law is how the students are being tested, particularly with the middle/high school cohort. I teach Biology. The students are tested on Chemistry, Biology, Physical Science, and Envrionmental Science, for the most part. I am held responsbile for the student failing the entire test. He may have gotten all the questions correct in Biology, but because he didn't learn anything in Chemistry the year before, he failed that part, he didn't do so hot on the environmental science because its not a required class-not to mention the last time he had any teaching on envrionmental science was in 6th grade and hes now a junior in high school, and Physical Science he is supposed to remember from freshman year.

On a state level, for science, NJ is petetioning to allow the testing after the year of the test. I support this fully. So now, after taking Biology, the student will be tested on only Biology. This grade comes back to the teacher teaching the subject, not the unfortunate person who is held accountable for the previous 10 years of teaching.

The previous teacher problem is especially exasperating with high school reading scores as well. When you've got a kid that comes to you at below a sixth grade reading level in ninth grade, there is pretty much no miracle that's going to have them passing the FCAT reading by February of tenth grade. They're just too far behind. It's especially aggravating when they flat out refuse to work!

Unfortunately, I cannot teach by osmosis, however much I wish I could.

[Kevin]

Well NCLB is obviously not a great thing for teachers... I mean it expects them to produce results which admittedly are often beyond their control. Most teachers' complaints, however, stem from a very front-lines approach.

What the rest of us are concerned about is the system in general. Before NCLB, there was really no alternative to public schools and there was really no incentive for public schools to improve themselves.

Now, there's incredible pressure, there's free choice for students to go to whatever schools they choose to, there are a lot of excellent choices in charter/magnet schools, etc.

It's not great for y'all on the front lines, we get that, but the legislation wasn't made to force teachers to improve, it was to force the entire system to improve. Despite what the NEA says, from where I'm standing, NCLB has been a pretty successful program.

[ASUADPi]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Well NCLB is obviously not a great thing for teachers... I mean it expects them to produce results which admittedly are often beyond their control. Most teachers' complaints, however, stem from a very front-lines approach.

What the rest of us are concerned about is the system in general. Before NCLB, there was really no alternative to public schools and there was really no incentive for public schools to improve themselves.

Now, there's incredible pressure, there's free choice for students to go to whatever schools they choose to, there are a lot of excellent choices in charter/magnet schools, etc.

It's not great for y'all on the front lines, we get that, but the legislation wasn't made to force teachers to improve, it was to force the entire system to improve. Despite what the NEA says, from where I'm standing, NCLB has been a pretty successful program.

I get where you are coming from but step into my shoes for a time and then you will see what a crock NCLB really is.

The main problem with NCLB is like my administrator "lots of talk and very little action". NCLB and the government want and demand all these things from teachers yet they aren't giving us the SUPPORT that we need to accomplish these tasks.

The support we need is MONEY. It all comes down to money. Teachers need to have higher salaries. This will fill the spots that so many teachers leave due to cost of living increases and our pay decreases.

Classroom supplies- I spend over 3000 a school year on supplied OUT OF MY OWN POCKET! I do this to get my kids to succeed BECAUSE of NCLB. That is a crock of shit! I SHOULD NOT have to spend that much money to buy my kids the supplies they need to be successful in school because of a FEDERAL LAW!

The government needs to start caughing up the money, otherwise in reality EVERY child will be left behind!

[UGAalum94]

Don't you think they'd need those things even without a federal law?

I think the issue of how teachers should best respond to NCLB is an interesting one, but I don't think that teacher were comfortable not letting kids have necessary materials before the law went into effect either.

Kevin, I don't think you have really thought it through far enough. I agree that the short to medium term results might seem really good, but long term, I think we may end up with an even worse system.

School choice by people who make bad decisions has the potential to be terrible. With our current public schools, we have some limited oversight and control over what schools have to do and what they have to offer. (Theoretically, if you thought your local schools were terrible, you could elect new local school board members to whom the current system would have to respond.)

Often charters are even less accountable to the local system and board than regular schools. While in some ways this could be great, it also has potential for disaster. Why do you think the same people who feed their kid McDonalds several times a week are going to choose when it comes to education: a rigorous, demanding program that holds students accountable for being ready and willing to learn or a school that pretends their kids are learning even if they aren't?)

If we want to do away with public schools totally, I could be cool with that, but as long as I've got to pitch in my tax dollars for a kid's education, his or her parents don't get completely free choice what to buy with the money. I want to make sure they are buying something worthwhile, and with public schools, even as they presently are, I get to help choose multiple levels of political educational oversight. What will really get with charters? Who knows?

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

I get where you are coming from but step into my shoes for a time and then you will see what a crock NCLB really is.

The main problem with NCLB is like my administrator "lots of talk and very little action". NCLB and the government want and demand all these things from teachers yet they aren't giving us the SUPPORT that we need to accomplish these tasks.

The support we need is MONEY. It all comes down to money. Teachers need to have higher salaries. This will fill the spots that so many teachers leave due to cost of living increases and our pay decreases.

Classroom supplies- I spend over 3000 a school year on supplied OUT OF MY OWN POCKET! I do this to get my kids to succeed BECAUSE of NCLB. That is a crock of shit! I SHOULD NOT have to spend that much money to buy my kids the supplies they need to be successful in school because of a FEDERAL LAW!

The government needs to start caughing up the money, otherwise in reality EVERY child will be left behind!

While I agree that you should not have to spend out-of-pocket to supply your school room, your anger here is incredible, and quite misdirected.

Teachers' salaries are likely not the problem with education today - also, you may want to consider that if the pay becomes higher, you would likely be driven out of the profession due to competition. Think about that before wondering why the federal government isn't "caughing up the money" or other such emotive crap.

Perhaps you should look at how your community and school district divide up the money they DO have - how many administrators does your district have? How much do they make? Is there really a need for a liaison between principals, or other such 'trendy' admin positions that feature prominently in many districts?

NCLB is an easy target for teachers - my main problem with the program is that it distracts teachers and teaching unions from the real, largely internal issues that plague school districts.

[ASUADPi]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

While I agree that you should not have to spend out-of-pocket to supply your school room, your anger here is incredible, and quite misdirected.

Teachers' salaries are likely not the problem with education today - also, you may want to consider that if the pay becomes higher, you would likely be driven out of the profession due to competition. Think about that before wondering why the federal government isn't "caughing up the money" or other such emotive crap.

Perhaps you should look at how your community and school district divide up the money they DO have - how many administrators does your district have? How much do they make? Is there really a need for a liaison between principals, or other such 'trendy' admin positions that feature prominently in many districts?

NCLB is an easy target for teachers - my main problem with the program is that it distracts teachers and teaching unions from the real, largely internal issues that plague school districts.

Not enough people are going into the teaching profession because the salaries suck (amongst other reasons I'm sure)! I remembering hearing an estimate a couple of years ago saying that eventually the USA would be short 1 million teachers. How is that not a problem? A district in my state started the school year 100 teachers short. My district always starts the school year without enough teachers (for reasons I won't get into why). I believe in general Arizona is going through a teacher shortage.

I think the reasons there isn't enough teachers comes down to the following.

1) crappy pay. Yes, starting salaries for teachers are higher BUT after that your lucky if your raise is 500 a year, unless you get an advanced degree (MA) or additional graduate hours (MA +15/30/45/60). Let me give you an example.
My salary (which I'm not afraid to say) was $39,202 this school year. Not bad for a 3rd year teacher (but first year regular certified, not emergency). My contract amount for next year 39,790. I went up a whopping $588. Now, I will get another $1000 in August for my MA+15 but it doesn't really seem to compensate for the over 5,000 I've spent on graduate tuition does it? Now, the other stipend will be for my ESL Endorsement, which is also $1000, and that endorsement has cost me over a grand as well.
This is a consistent problem in the state. AZ legislaters like to go on and on and on about our "high starting salary" but the amount afterwords is pathetic. With the rising cost of living, my raise of 1.5% is pretty much gone.

2) Aside from the pay, my district has mismanaged money for years now, so we are so screwed it's not even funny. I get $50 at the beginning of the school year to buy supplies. Big whoop de damn do. $50 bucks won't buy much of anything, so basically if my kids need it, guess who's pocket it comes out of. While my district has mismanaged funds, I worked in another district and I only got, as a new teacher $100. Again, $100 buys more, but not alot. (Especially when we are given purchase orders and we have to use them in teaching supply stores and those stores totally rip you off).


3) long days. My job doesn't end at 3:15 when my contract is over. If crap needs to get done, it needs to get done. I'm sure people who are contracted employees get this. But we also have to do so many additional hours of unpaid evening events, whether we want to or not. We are expected too. This next school year alone, my school board (who totally screwed teachers over) added another parent teacher conference night, another 4 hours of unpaid meeting a month, and another 3 parent nights, all unpaid.


So, teacher salary does play a part in the problem. If you don't have the teachers you have increased class sizes. If you have increased class sizes as a teacher you:
A) have less one on one time available
B) increase of discipline problems, even if your classroom management is awesome

Would you want your child sitting in a room with 34 other students and one teacher? What kind of education is your child going to receive with 35 kids in a classroom?

Our kindergarten classes are hovering around 25. Statistics say that Kindergarten shouldn't have more than 15 students for maximum oppurtunity for learning. Heck, our stupid reading program is only designed for 15 students (I have 21).

Obviously, salary isn't the whole problem. I'm not going to say it is. It is a part of the problem. And until society changes their views on teachers, it's not going to change.


I could tell you horror stories about my district (other than what I have mentioned above)!!!!! What my district has done would make every teacher run for the hills screaming

Now I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm just trying to say my opinion.

I hope I'm actually making sense. I'm exhausted and my knee is killing me.

Let's debate

[DolphinChicaDDD]

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

Not enough people are going into the teaching profession because the salaries suck (amongst other reasons I'm sure)! I remembering hearing an estimate a couple of years ago saying that eventually the USA would be short 1 million teachers. How is that not a problem? A district in my state started the school year 100 teachers short. My district always starts the school year without enough teachers (for reasons I won't get into why). I believe in general Arizona is going through a teacher shortage.

<<snip>>

And this post is the reason I am not teaching when I move to Arizona next year. Its a damn shame, because I love teaching. But I also love my sanity and not living in poverty better.

[kstar]

Originally Posted by AGDee

It's interesting that the charter schools are doing well in OK.

They aren't, really. While Kevin's wife's school may, in fact, be doing that well, I'm leaning on the side that he's talking out his ass.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by kstar

They aren't, really. While Kevin's wife's school may, in fact, be doing that well, I'm leaning on the side that he's talking out his ass.

Really? While there are a few schools that aren't doing too well -- namely, Harding Fine Arts, and Seeworth Academy, consider that Dove Science beat everyone in the state while Harding Charter Prep and ASTEC beat Oklahoma City's magnet school and came very close to Edmond, Norman, beating the Putnam City schools.

Not talking out my ass. My wife teaches at one of these schools so I'm fairly close to the issues.

If that's not good enough, my mother teaches in Edmond.