No Child Left Behind Act: An Enormous Impact On Children And Their Families

After the No-Child-Left-Behind (NCLB) bill was introduced by the Bush administration in 2001, the use of standardized tests skyrocketed because all schools in the country were required to assess students using these tests to evaluate the student, teacher and school’s performance. A standardized test is any examination that is administered and scored in a predetermined, standard manner (Popham 8). The use of these tests have not improved education in the United States because teachers teach to the test, which means that they only focus on what is going to be on the exam and do not spend time on other material; tests like the SAT which evaluate the student solely on the outcome of the test and upon the score the student is placed where “appropriate”; and that one assessment is not enough to evaluate students, teachers, principals

Since the passage of the No Child Left Behind law in 2002, standardized testing has been at the center of attention in the educational system. Several schools and teachers have been forced to drill children on the information they will be tested on. Teachers are forced to demonstrate other important topics in order to teach test material. Similar to majority of tests provided in the school system, standardized test have both pros and cons. Generally speaking, standardized testing is a great way to determine a baseline for a child. As Miller (2016) indicated, tests have a multitude of benefits, which include student enthusiasm, peer learning, self-improvement and retention, transfer of learning, student self-assessment, and teacher instructional guidance. Teachers are able to use the data from the standardized tests to build an entire academic plan around the results. Additionally, students and parents are able to understand the strengths and weaknesses of each child in order to determine the next steps needed to help bridge any gaps within their academic studies.

The education system is deeply flawed. It does not fight social injustice, but rather exacerbates the issue. The majority of people in the U.S are blind to the fact that there are still inequities within the education system, much less everyday life. A system based on standardized test scores inadvertently oppresses poor people. The Governments ' decision to judge a schools ' success by its test scores evidently created a faucet of running water for systematic oppression. The flowing water of oppression floods poor schools; drowning students with dreams, and giving no mercy. The only ones safe from the water are the privileged, who are oblivious to the fact that it exists.

Following the signing of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002, it has not only sparked fear in students but teachers as well. High stakes testing has taken a toll on student creativity and achievement as well as the closing of schools and termination of teachers and administrators. In 2011 Secretary of Education Arne Duncan stated that “82 percent of schools could be failing by the end of 2012” (US News, 2013). Proponents of testing such as taxpayers and parents approve of this process as it increases accountability of the schools and teachers.

A never-ending issue has loomed over the head of our nation-- education. According to the Institute of Education Sciences, 63.7% of American students are below proficient in reading and 65.7% in math. In order to improve educational standards and increase student achievement, Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act (also known as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) in 2002. Designed to increase the role of the federal government in education, it holds schools accountable based on how students perform on standardized tests. Statistics show that the average student completes about 110-115 mandatory, standardized tests between pre-kindergarten and end of twelfth grade (an average of eight tests per year). Standardized testing utilizes

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

Good intentions are no excuse to continue a fail policy. Since the No Child left Behind Act (NCLB) became in effect, teachers have been restricted to teach in a certain way.

The No Child Left Behind Act requires schools to test students on reading and math through grades three through eight and at least once in tenth through twelfth grade. “The exclusive emphasis on tests has left students sick with stress in even the youngest grades; some schools reported that on testing days, up to two dozen children vomit on their test booklets.” As stated by Robbins. Because of how emphasized tests are, a student’s performance is only based on test

She claims that the problems that occurred with No Child Left Behind were not due to the tests themselves, but were due to “the misuse of testing for high stakes purposes, the belief that tests could identify with certainty which students should be held back, which teachers and principals should be fired or rewarded, and which schools should be closed.” (p.150). Ravitch also ventures to explain that the information acquired from national testing can be extremely valuable, but only if the tests themselves are valid and reliable. For instance, they can show students what they’ve learned, what they haven’t learned, and where they need improvement. A popular alternative to standardized testing is performance-based assessment.

First, what is the achievement gap? According to the achievement gap in education refers to systematic variances in the ability to learn between students from majority populations and students from minority populations. The most significant effort made by the federal government to improve the nation 's schools and student learning is the 2002 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). The ESEA was largely designed to address the achievement gap in multicultural education. However, improvement in the academic performances of poor and minority students has been slow over the last forty years.

Federal involvement in education began in 1954 with the National Defense Education Act (NDEA), which initiated federal funding to schools in the United States. NDEA marked the beginning of a long line of education policy bills over the course of more than forty years. No Child Left Behind, or NCLB, was not a novelty piece of legislation; its ancestry dated back to 1965 with President Lyndon B. Johnson’s passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act—a more descriptive mandate for the usage of federal funds and the requirements of schools in the United States (Anderson 3). Through Title 1 provisions, ESEA intended to alleviate the inequality in public schools by providing federal funding for schools in areas with high percentages of children

The article discusses how teachers are discovering that the No Child Left Behind idea is flawed, developmentally unfitting, lacking funding, and leaving more students, educators, and schools behind before the bill was passed. Later the article presents a short history about educational testing, investigates the argument of teaching to the test, and focuses on subgroups of school populations that are negatively affected by No Child Left Behind bill, distinctively students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, minorities, second-language learners, and students with special needs.

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.”

The No Child Left Behind Act should tremendously be re-examined and amended because the focus on the standardized tests decrease the quality of other subjects not on the tests, the tests are not an efficient tool to make certain that a student is receiving an excellent education and the tests create unnecessary stress for the students, teachers and administrators. The purpose of No Child Left Behind is to provide every student with the opportunity to receive a top-grade education. This is a great proposal to strive towards but, legislation plans on achieving this proposal by making schools responsible for their students’ proficiency and to measure their proficiency with the use of standardized tests. After the students take the

As stated, “On the basis of our multicultural/ social justice work in the public schools and building on the ACA advocacy competencies, We offer the following 16 practical recommendations. These recommendations are presented to assist counselors in avoiding or moving beyond NCS so that they might become more effective multicultural/ social justice advocates and organizational change agents in educational settings.” This quote perfectly sums up the entire article and how it directly relates to the No Child Left Behind Act. By guiding counselors to move past NCS in order to provide the proper support for the success of students who fit into the multicultural/ social justice achievement gap is in direct correlation with the NCLB