Resolved: That, on balance, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 has improved academic achievement in the United States.
Performance measurement within NCLB/Dept. of Ed:
Letters to Chief State School Officers Regarding an Update on Several NCLB Cornerstones
Final Regulations on Modified Academic Achievement Standards
Mapping America’s Educational Progress 2008
Links:
Center on Education Policy – Answering the Question That Matters Most: Has Student Achievement Increased Since No Child Left Behind?
The Productivity Argument for Investing in Young Children
Urban Education Institute at the University of Chicago
Tracking Achievement Gaps and Assessing the Impact of NCLB on the Gaps: An In-Depth Look into National and State Reading and Math Outcome Trends (PDF)
The 2007, 2006, and 2005 Iowa Educational Research & Evaluation Association Award Winners are papers on NCLB effects
When I think of NCLB, I think of the Dept. of Ed. trying to exert some sort of control over the nation’s schools without stepping on states’ rights more than a policy designed to improve overall academic achievement. NCLB’s most recognizable features are:
Standardized testing – how academic achievement is measured, but the standards of these tests are not the same from state to state
Accountability – more publicized data on how students are doing on these standardized tests; this does create more pressure for schools to teach students what they need to know in order to do well on these tests. And if these tests are what the states have determined to be their academic ideals, is this debate over what the states consider to be academic achievement or if NCLB has created the right structure and incentives for schools to get students over a certain score?
Parent choice – I am skeptical about school vouchers mostly because not all students at “bad” schools do poorly and not all students “good” schools do well – it’s important to consider the student as well as the school. Research has shown that differences in academic ability emerge before formal schooling and are connected to the home environment. How many words a young child hears from his or her parents on a daily basis changes how their brain development. So when we evaluate the performance of a school, it’s important to think about the context in which it exists, what kind of homes its student body is coming from, and what disadvantages they may be bringing with them into the classroom. NCLB puts a lot of pressure on individual schools to show results, but one school’s starting point for improvement may be very different from another’s and I’m not sure how much emphasis is put on equalizing the entry-level capability of each student with adequate parent training, Head Start, and pre-K programming versus standardized testing in elementary schools and beyond.
A pillar of NCLB that I do think could have a direct impact on academic achievement rather than an administrative/logistical/political impact on schools that will steer them toward positive reform is the use of “proven education methods.” It is important for educators to examine and test whether the way a subject is being taught works for the greatest number of students possible and what new ways could work better or reach the kids that couldn’t be reached before. I would look for data that shows schools picking up new teaching systems or techniques that have helped students or revamping old methods so that they work more effectively.
There is a persistent debate over standardized testing and whether it is an accurate measure of academic achievement and whether it’s even measuring what we are truly interested in measuring. Such a debate could have a place in this month’s resolution. But I think there is also plenty to be said about how the federal government can create a policy that could give schools the incentive to innovate the way it teaches students, whether or not such innovation has taken place, and whether or not the innovation has succeeded. We could count up the number of states that have shown better test scores since the start of NCLB and the number of states that have stayed the same or gotten worse, but that would be an overly simplified and boring debate. Standardized testing is the way NCLB chooses to determine if there has been an improvement in academic achievement, but what are the ways schools under NCLB have chosen to create improvement? If those ways work or do not work, was it because of NCLB?
Are there other explanations behind school improvement or decline? What about changing demographics? What about state budgets? What about changes in what we know about child health and development and parental behavior?
NCLB is a regulatory framework imposed upon our nation’s schools. Has it shaped them into schools that help students achieve more? Is standardized testing an essential part of effective education reform? Are there successful charter schools that do not use standardized testing? And if so, why not?
Posted by pfdebater 
