Jul 21 2008
NCLB= more high school dropouts
Here is antoher article I found: http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/no-child-left-behind-more-high-school-dropouts-15531.html I think it is interesting that what was intended to help students is in fact harming them. I personally have no problem holding teachers accountable as long as students can also be held accountable. We all know that each student learns differently and some are not able to learn as much as others, but the students that do not care about their education need to be held accountable too. Then you have some school disticts who are really trying to get the kids do improve and others that put band-aids over gaping wounds. Well now I am off in other directions. Read the article and let me know how you feel
2 responses so far
Create a free edublog to get your own comment avatar (and more!)
If you read the original study (http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v16n3/v16n3.pdf) you can see first the study was not based on NCLB but on the Texas state system developed before NCLB; the TX system was considered a “model” for NCLB, but the systems are considerably different. And those differences are magnified once NCLB rules are adapted into different state educational systems. Second, the only diffinitive conclusion of the study was that large numbers of students drop out and minorities (excluding Asians) drop out more than whites. That’s hardly surprising and has been known to be true for decades.
The article makes further less-than-shocking statements, such as: “Fine (2005) finds that suburban students in Advanced Placement courses are offered a broad curriculum, whereas the minority students in New York City are offered a narrow, test-prep curriculum under the increased emphasis on high-stakes testing at each grade level.” Wow, suburban students in AP classes are taking a broader curriculum than urban minority students! What about NY students taking AP classes? What about minority students in the suburbs not taking AP classes? This is an apples and pears (sububs and AP students) to oranges and bananas (urban and minority) comparison.
No Child Left Behind does not require any testing to be used as a graduation requirement. If a state uses a standardized test as a graduation requirement, that is a decision of the state and not a result of NCLB. (source: http://answers.ed.gov)
In addition, NCLB has a provision that graduation rates must be considered in AYP specifically so that schools do not try to boost test score averages by pushing out the lowest-performing students. (source: http://www.urban.org/publications/310873.html)
I’m not a huge fan of NCLB. But, I’m also not a huge fan of the old days when barely literate (if literate) students often graduated high school with 3.0 GPAs.
I agree with your last statement, but sometimes I wonder if NCLB means slow down to make sure that no child is left behind, exacerbating the problem and therefore creating more barely literate students that pass high school. I thought I read somewhere that some states, including mine, have rewritten tests and made then “easier.” I do not know what the answer is, but from what I see things are not working now and need to change.