The problem is a system that favors a largely automated accounting of a narrow slice of students’ capacity and then attaches huge consequences to that limited information.
Testing used as a diagnostic or summary instrument for children’s learning can be a helpful tool. It is harmful, however, to use students’ test scores as a lever to drive educational improvement. This use of testing is ill-advised because, as described below, it has demonstrably failed to achieve its intended goal, and it has potent negative, unintended consequences.
Since NCLB became law in 2002, students may have shown slight increases in test scores, relative to pre-NCLB students. Looking at the results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), however, any test score increases over the pre-NCLB trend are very small, and they are miniscule compared to what early advocates of NCLB promised. We as a nation have devoted enormous amounts of time and money to the focused goal of increasing test scores, and we have almost nothing to show for it. Just as importantly, there is no evidence that any test score increases represent the broader learning increases that were the true goals of the policy—goals such as critical thinking; the creation of lifelong learners; and more students graduating high school ready for college, career, and civic participation. While testing advocates proclaim that testing drives student learning, they resist evidence-based explanations for why, after two decades of
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
NCLB reduces effective instruction as well as student learning by causing states to lower achievement goals and teacher motivation. Assertively, I support my argument that students who are disadvantaged or disabled do not reach the same proficiency as other students due to the simple fact that everyone learns differently, has different areas of strengths and weaknesses, and are essentially learning curriculum for a mandated state test that solely measures how well subgroups of children test on generic material based on each
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 was put into place to provide extra money for children who do not have money while trading their knowledge using their test scores. The NCLB Act says that students are to be given yearly tests along with yearly report cards to track how well they are doing in school, in doing so, school is not about fun and socializing but now it is all business. These tests not only do not help the students learn but puts a load of stress on their shoulders, alongside that the tests have no purpose other than grading how well a students is able to retain information.
Standardized tests are exams that are supposed to measure a child’s academic knowledge but have long been a controversial subject of discussion. Although it is one method to see how a child is performing, is it the best method? Standardized testing can be biased or unfair, inhibit both the teacher’s and the children’s creativity and flexibility, affect funding for schools, cause untested subjects to be eliminated from the curriculum, and cause anxiety for children and teachers.
With the NCLB’s focused emphasis on English and math standards, other educational areas such as the arts and sciences have been overlooked. The No Child Left Behind Act also focuses on bringing the lower scores up and not helping in raising the scores of those students who are already at higher levels leaving these higher achieving students behind in a push for equality. Although test scores have risen and the achievement gap between minority and white students has decreased, the No Child Left Behind Act has damaged the United States educational system by not addressing the needs of all students, forcing curricula to exclude arts, civics, foreign language and sciences, and emphasizing testing and not learning. It is time for a change.
“Unintended Educational and Social Consequences of the No Child Left Behind Act” Journal of Gender, Race and Justice, no. 2, Winter 2009, pp. 311. EBSCOhost. In this peer-reviewed academic journal article, Liz Hollingworth, an associate professor in the College of Education at the University of Iowa, explores the history of school reform in the United States, and the unintended consequences of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Hollingworth states that the great promise of NCLB is that schools will focus on the education of low-achieving students, reducing the gap in student academic achievement between White students and African-American, Hispanic, and Native American student populations. Hollingworth states that an unintended consequence of NCLB was that teachers and school administrators had to shift curriculum focus in an effort to raise test scores, but in some cases, they had to also abandoned thoughtful, research-based classroom practices in exchange for test preparation. NCLB also affected teachers, highly qualified teachers left high-poverty schools, with low performance rates especially those schools where teacher salaries are tied to student academic performance. Hollingworth concludes her article by stating “we need to be wary of policy innovations that amount to simply rearranging the deck chairs on the
The NCLB Act has become the largest intervention by the federal government. This act promises to improve student learning and to close the achievement gap between the white students and students of color. The law is aimed at having standardized test to measure student performance and quality of teacher. The Standardized exams are fully focused on reading and mathematics. This law characterizes an unequalled extension of the federal role into the realm of local educational accountability. High school graduation rates are also a requirement as an indicator of performance at secondary level. In low performing schools they get punished by receiving less funds and students have the choice to move to high performing school. The quality of our
However, even if the federal government met the financial obligations to fully fund NCLB, and remove harsh sanctions for schools which do not meet AYP standards, it still would not fix the problem of NCLB focusing solely on teaching to the test. Under the NCLB Act teaching has gone from learning about a wide array to subjects to a “drill and kill” system (Smyth 134). A drill and kill system is when teachers solely focus on teaching to the test by giving assessment after assessment. When teachers teach to the test and require students to only regurgitate information, the students are not using higher level thinking skills. The students are only learning how to take test,
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 use of standardized testing to measure students’ knowledge is an inaccurate reflection of their capabilities. By being forced to take a test that does not effectively show their abilities, students become overstressed, and the tests themselves do not promote true academic achievement. Rather than learning about subjects in order to gain knowledge, students simply memorize facts and formulas to get a decent test score. Standardized tests are not an appropriate measure of student performance, only benefit certain groups of students, and do not prepare students for the real world.
Many people in the United States are concerned with the role that standardized testing has on education. Most of them have very strong views on this subject and as it usually happens with large-scale issues these views are very diverse and often opposite. Some claim that standardized testing is the best way to determine student’s skills and qualities because they are equally designed for everyone and not biased. Others, on the other hand, argue the fairness of these tests. They believe that test scores do not represent student’s knowledge. What is certain, in my opinion, is that this subject needs more attention followed by actions that will actually make difference in the education system.
No Child Left Behind (hereafter NCLB) was one of the largest and most comprehensive reauthorizations of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, created to “to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education.” That this legislation was monumentally important for the American education system, few researchers would dare to disagree — but this is where most agreement ends. Over 70,000 articles have been written on this legislation and it is easy to drown in the myriad of researched opinions on its successes and failures; there are almost as many opinions as there are articles on this topic.
The inequitable consequences that teachers and administrators would have to bare are uncalled for. These exams generate pessimistic attitudes that become contagious and infect the educational environment. Extensive research shows that students who are held back do not progress academically, suffer a loss of self-esteem, and are more likely to drop out of school, according to FairTest (2008).
In what follows I first provide a history and explanation of the NCLB act. As well as the thinking behind this piece of legislation. Then, I show how the NCLB’s rules and standardized testing are destructive to teaching. Finally, I argue how the act is leading to the overall downfall of our educational system.
Although testing has been around for a long time, I instinctively believe that testing doesn’t give a clear picture of student’s achievement. Thus, I make strong connection to the following quote: “A central question has been whether accountability policies and standardized testing helping or harming those children the polices are most often designed to serve” (Skrla, p.11). For instance, when I analyzed and interpreted the TAPR of Richard J Wilson Elementary school, I found valuable information that all teachers should know at the beginning of every school year. Specifically, when I examined the categories of testing and the students’ performance on individual TEKS. This practice would allow teachers to have a clear picture of what exact skills and content knowledge students are expected to achieve throughout the school year.