Essay On Nclb

(Leon-Guerrero, 2014) Education reform scholars argue that racial segregation, funding, inequity and educational inequality go hand in hand. In the 1990s courts began to examine whether the achievement gap between minorities’ and whites was a vestige also known as the former segregated school system. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) Today education analyst contributes this to the achievement gap. Although state courts have held that the quality of education should be fair, the struggle to close the achievement gap still continues. For instance, children coming from a household making over $90,000 have a better chance graduating from college by the age of twenty-four. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) Children coming from families making less than $35,000 have a one in seventeen chance from graduating from college. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) The No Child left behind Act (NCLB), was intended to be the revalidation of the ESEA in 2001. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) The purpose of the NCLB was to close the achievement gap within the races, but ended up failing to drive the educational improvement where it was needed most. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) The NCLB mandated higher scores, but failed to provide low-income schools with resources to make the achievement possible. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) As a result wealthier

When President George W. Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) into law in 2002, the legislation had one goal-- to improve educational equity for all students in the United States by implementing standards for student achievement and school district and teacher performance. Before the No Child Left Behind Act, the program of study for most schools was developed and implemented by individual states and local communities’ school boards. Proponents of the NCLB believed that lax oversight and lack of measurable standards by state and local communities was leading to the failure of the education system and required federal government intervention to correct. At the time, the Act seemed to be what the American educational system

If the schools didn’t make AYP for three years in a row, they had to provide free tutoring and supplemental educational service. Everyone involved felt that the NCLB had unsolved issues. (Randolph & Wilson-Younger, 2012). There are teachers that argue that the testing is not fair with the children that are under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Children with individualized education plans are being forced to take standardized test on their grade level and the teachers argue that the tests might be way above where these children are academically. This also includes the children who have English as their second language because they are struggling when they are taking the standardized tests. Additionally, Choi, (Aug. 2012) describes how many schools struggle to meet the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) under the Act called No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Pressures on the schools to meet the AYP can affect how each school does their testing and teaching policies. While states have been silent, the question has been whether states have a responsibility to intervene.

The American public educational system is filled with an assortment of problems. Most students are graduating with less knowledge and capability than similar students in other industrialized countries. Classroom disruptions are surprisingly common, and in some classrooms, nearly continuous. The public education system is having difficulty adjusting to the no child left behind act. The No Child Left Behind(NCLB) is a landmark in education reform designed to improve student achievement and change the culture of American’s schools.

Abernathy, Scott Franklin. No Child Left Behind and the Public Schools. U of Michigan P, 2007. eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost). In this eBook, Scott Franklin Abernathy, an Associate Professor of Political Science and a Distinguished Teaching Professor at the University of Minnesota, presents a balanced critique of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Abernathy argues that all policy makers must ask themselves “Can we ever really know if a child’s education is good?”, rather than assuming any test can accurately measure the elusive thing called a good education. Along with strengths and weakness of NCLB, Abernathy also presents many new models that law makers have been seeking to replace or use

Briefly describe your employment responsibilities: I oversee approximately 50,000 quality reviews each month to ensure our customer’s medical needs are met and our company’s STAR goals are up to rate.

Bush’s No Child Left Behind (NCLB) federal policy. Both Clinton and Bush administrations regulated freedom of choice within their educational policies. Clinton’s Goals 2000 increased standards for student scores within core subjects. Legislation targeting Title I, required States and school districts to “turn-around” low-performing schools, and in 1993, public charter schools increased to over 2, 000 (www.clinton5.nara.gov). Bush’s No Child Left Behind’s structure demanded high-stakes testing and created provision for privatization of public education, as well as “school choice .” No Child Left Behind not only increased the Clinton’s strong accountability disposition, but it also superimposed a new set of accountability rules that would adversely affect public schools (Porter, Linn, & Trimble, 2005). One significant requirement of NCLB is that each state must adopt challenging academic content standards and challenging student achievement standards. Additionally, states must establish Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) goals for each year from 2002 to 2014—that would culminate in the 2014 goal that all American students would be at or above the proficient student academic achievement standard (P.L. 107–110, 2001). When local educational agencies (LEA) failed to meet their state’s AYP goals, in addition to other criteria, they [LEA] faced the inevitability of losing their accredited status and eventually face school

The No Child Left Behind Act rewards schools when they have made the greatest progress in improving the achievement of disadvantaged students and if so they will be rewarded with the NCLB bonuses. This act also incorporates consequences for those who have failed to meet the regulations. The secretary of education will have permission to reduce federal funds available to states for administrative expenses if the state fails to meet their performance objectives and demonstrate results in academic achievement. Since the beginning of the school year of 2003-2004 at least twenty states and a number of school districts have officially protested the NCLB Act, voting to withdraw from participation, to withhold local

Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act is a renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which is an aid program for disadvantaged students. Although it does sound as if the Act is helping children all across the country, Alexandra Robbins thoroughly explains otherwise in her book, The Overachievers: The Secret Lives of Driven Kids. Within pages eighty five through eighty nine, Robbins thoroughly shows her negativity to the Act and why it’s hurting children rather than helping them. She uses hard facts, such as the emphasis on tests, altered curricula, and the corrupt college admission process to prove her point.

The NCLB Act was created from initiatives originally introduced in the Elementary and Secondary School Act. The Elementary and Secondary School Act designed by then Commissioner of Education Francis Keppel and was passed on April 9, 1965. This was less than three months after the bill was first introduced. President Lyndon B. Johnson launched the 'War on Poverty' this being the most important educational component of the war. (Schugurensky, 2002) Through special funding this act allowed underprivileged and impoverished children a chance to receive education that met up to national standards.

It has been over a decade since the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) was enacted on January 2, 2002. The long title of NCLB says it is “An act to close the achievement gap with accountability, flexibility, and choice, so that no child is left behind.” Although NCLB was created with this in mind, research shows that it has actually managed to widen the educational achievement gap between minorities and their white counterparts. In this paper, my central research question is “What are three factors that have led to the failure of the No Child Left Behind Act among the Hispanic and African American student population?”

No Child Left Behind, one of the biggest social engineering projects of our time, put fifty million students and their three million teachers under pressure ("A Failing Grade for No Child"). On January 8, 2002, President George W Bush’s NCLB Act was signed into law. NCLB is an education reform bill created to narrow the racial achievement gap. Recently, NCLB has made its way back into the news, simply because it has been up for renewal for over four years now and nothing has happened. This is significant because NCLB dictates how students are educated. NCLB has already affected student learning for many years now, and if renewed, it will continue to do so. The NCLB Act has failed in its mission to improve our schools and narrow the racial achievement

The New York City Department of Education (DOE) serves 1.1 million students across schools (“About Us”). During the Bloomberg administration more than 140 schools were closed with no indication that the “administration’s closure policy improved outcomes for students in the city’s struggling schools” (“Standardized Testing Is Counterproductive, Corrosive and Corrupting”). Several studies have detailed the damage and disruption the city’s closure policy had on struggling schools in high-need populations with significant academic challenges (Fruchter). Bloomberg’s education policies were guided by The No Child Left Behind law, which required standardized test-based school reform including annual testing, greater flexibility for states and increased teacher qualifications in order to receive federal funding (Ujifusa). This standardized test-based school reform trend continued under the Obama administration 's with the Race to the Top program. Race to the Top rewarded states that used exams and data systems to track the performance of students and teachers, among other initiatives (Cite).

In this passage of No Child Left Behind, Congress reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the principal federal law affecting education from kindergarten through high school. In amending ESEA, the new law represents a sweeping overhaul of federal efforts to support elementary and secondary education in the United States. This new law focuses on policy and distribution of funds to public schools. Most federal funds under NCLB are distributed to school districts whose populations that are representative of lower economic levels and culturally diverse populations, which consists of African Americans, Native Americans, Asians, and Latinos. Proponents of the No Child Left Behind Act claim that its mission is to diminishing the achievement gap by holding school districts and states accountable, encouraging the use of more flexible educational approaches, and supporting parent’s rights to school choice

The No Child Left Behind act promises many great things for education. It is an effort to “close the achievement gap” for students falling behind in public school systems. (The No Child, 2002) This act also promises and gives parents more of a choice about their child’s education. For example, if the parent feels that their child is in a school that is failing they are able to have their child transferred to another school. Idealistically these goals are wonderful for our educational system, and this gives the tax payers the reassurance that they are getting their money’s worth from education, but what are the consequences in forcing our students to take “high-stakes tests.”