Leaving Our Children Behind

Education has always been an important trademark of the United States of America. Throughout the years, the significance of a well-developed education has been increasing. The No Child Left Behind act (NCLB act) is the Bush administration’s sweeping educational reform, aimed at improving the performance of the nation’s public schools by introducing accountability. Supporters of the act claim that it will increase the performance of all school children by raising the standards and allowing parents greater freedom in choosing the school they want their child to attend. The act also puts in place a system of punishment for schools if their student body does not perform to the standards set down by the National government. As well as increasing standards, this act also encourages teachers to use a curriculum, which the government developed with "scientifically based research" (a phrase that appears 111 times in the act) (United States). While standardized curriculum and increased standards seem like they would improve children’s learning, in reality it hurts them by pushing them too hard academically instead of focusing on social development and denying them specialized attention based upon their individual abilities.

No Child Left Behind was designed by the Bush administration to reduce the “learning gap” between different groups of students and to ensure better teacher equality. However, it sets fourth a method of measuring “Adequate Yearly Progress” which aims at 100% proficiency in 10 years time (from the start of the program) (Hammond). One adverse effect of these high standards is that they substantially weaken the safety nets for under-performing students in the nation’s schools. As schools struggle to meet the act’s impossibly high goals, many incentives present themselves such as keeping underperforming students out, or to hold back those already in the school. A disturbing example of this comes from King Middle School in Ohio. At this school the average scores increased from the 70th to the 72nd percentile from the 2002 to the 2003 school year. In addition, the amount of students in attendance who met the standards increased from 66 to 80 percent. While, on the surface, these results seem to indicate that the act is doing exactly what it is supposed to, there is one piece of information that is deeply troubling. Over the course of this year, not a single student improved his or her test performance. In fact, the scores of every single student in the school decreased over the course of the year. However, because the NCLB act looks only at school-wide averages, the national government praised the school for its marked improvement (Hammond). It turns out that the steep increase in test results is due to a large number of severely academically challenged students leaving the school. This pattern has arisen in the years since the ratification of the act. States with high stakes testing programs tend to exclude students who do poorly on tests, are not native speakers, have poor attendance, or have family problems. This is achieved by counseling them out, expelling them, or transferring them out of the school.

After reviewing these frightening statistics it becomes clear that the No Child Left Behind act is damaging the educational system. How are schools supposed to help under-performing schools if the only way they are able to keep the funding that allows them to teach is by removing the challenged kids from their schools altogether? This is an ineffective strategy and will only result in a further widening of the achievement gap.

Furthermore, for those students who do remain in the school, specialized attention is almost impossible as teachers are required to teach directly to the state mandated tests, not student abilities. With the new pressure to succeed many schools have adopted curricula that teach directly to the state test that their students are required to take. This universal curriculum prevents teachers from giving students the individual attention that many of them sorely need. This type of overarching test not only prevents teachers from catering to lower-performing students; it also prevents them from challenging the exceptional students. When a teacher is required to teach all of the children at the same level, it prevents many kids from learning to their potential; instead, forming an environment in which every child strives for mediocrity.

Many teachers complain that all of the joy of teaching, the very reasons why they went into the profession, has been replaced by pre-made lessons and impossible standards (Boldin). One teacher from Ohio describes how she teaches words by pointing at each letter and having the kids tell her the sound, and then asking the class as a whole what the word is (this lesson coming from a book of 200 pre-made lessons) (Wood). These types of universal instruction abound through all public schools. It is clear that when teachers are required to teach this way they will be unable to cater to specific children’s needs, instead pushing them all toward the same standardized goal. This new method of teaching has led to a reduction in specialized programs and, in some cases, the abolishment of recess and naptime in lower grades (Tyre). The removal of these standard practices will be damaging to students, regardless of the