No child left behind

<p>Hahahaha, so now all the lazy kids can pass by just comming to school. Bush did this so we can have another idiot for president in the future.</p>

<p>To all the C students out there, you too can someday be president!</p>

<p>Actually No Child Left Behind is making sure that kids CAN'T pass if they are not up to par with the expected standards. Its better than before, when kids automatically passed each grade, even if they shouldn't have.</p>

<p>Yeah, tests all of those ESL students kids with reading test, fail the school, and cut fundings from school. No Child Left Behind is actually leaving kids. What an euphemism. Did Big Brother get a job in DC?</p>

<p>I like to see kids be able to success in academically, but this act needs to be improved.</p>

<p>Cutting funding allows the school to try better next time. The NCLB Act also gives these kids an option to transfer to another school if their school is not teaching them well.</p>

<p>But wouldn't a school that already has a bad record get cut in funding just get worse? Cause then they wouldn't be able to afford good faculty, upkeep campus, and technology?</p>

<p>No, its simple psychology. Everyone is competitive and wants to be the best. So if a principal sees his school is doing poorly, he'll speak to the teachers, perhaps hire new ones, and make sure that his school does better. Because if you look at it, all schools are very similar. They all have teachers, classrooms and students. Some teachers teach because they want to teach, while others don't have their hearts in it. So if the schools are doing poorly, perhaps teachers and teaching methods need to be analyzed.</p>

<p>Yeah, but what kind of really good teacher can teach kids who immigrated from non-english speaking country 3 month ago reading that is enough to pass the test?</p>

<p>The No Child Left Behind affects my school greatly. My school is one of the best in all Central Florida with an outstanding AP program, tons of extracurriculars, successful modified block scheduling, and etc. We are rated a 5 star school but NCLB act gives us a grade of C. We have the FCAT, a statewide test used to determine the quality of the school and graduation. It is graded by a "gain margin", aka. scored on how much we improve. Lots of us have the same level all through our academic level. No matter how high your score is, if you don't improve, you lose. My school has lost tons of money because of its. My principal had to buy books for 100 AP Human Geography students simply because the school board did not feel it was necessary. </p>

<p>Only a few more years until I'm out of this country and in the UK, where I belong.</p>

<p>poison.ivy, I feel your pain. My school (also in Central FL), according to FCAT, was an A in 2001, and A in 2002, and we didn't improve enough in 2003 and became a C! Is it really possible to become continuously better from year to year? I think the FCAT school ratings should be based on how the school did compared to other schools in FL, or at least other schools in its socio-economic stratum. Stupid Jeb!</p>

<p>the NCLB act also leaves behind students with a learning disability, along with ESL learners. ::sigh::</p>

<p>It seems to me that if students are doing badly, then they need more funding.</p>

<p>By the way, I don't see how it can be expected that a non-English speaking student pass tests written in English. >_></p>

<p>^from my experience, it's impossible.</p>

<p>aluka: If you are going to comment on this, please learn more about NCLB and about teaching and education in general. You have it very wrong.
First of all, all schools are not the same. This is very common: In one city, there is one school that has a full computer lab plus three or four computers in each classroom. There is one special educator, counselor, and ESL specialist for every three teachers. All textbooks are within five years of latest edition. There is a full art, music, and sports program...etc. etc. On the other side of town is a school where there are no doors on the stalls in any of the bathrooms. Students have to share twenty year old science textbooks in groups of ten. There are no computers for student use, no special educators or ESL specialists and only one counselor. There is no arts or music, and only one phys ed class to cover sports etc. etc.
Pick up the book, Savage Inequalities by Johnathon Kozol. A student's progression in school is not based solely on the teacher or teaching strategies. No offense, bu we teachers are not super heroes. You do what you can, but when you don't have the resources, your dealing with a ratio of 1 teacher to 40 students and no aides or help, it's a hard job. Before you judge, I dare you to try to teach for one day.
A principal can't just talk to his teachers and make everything better. It takes money. It takes strategy.
1) NCLB doesn't base it's assessment of schools on the authentic knowledge and progression of students. It bases it on the results of standardized tests that really only ask questions that deal with basic fact and shallow teaching. These tests are NOT written by experts who have gone to college for years and earned Masters degrees and PHDs in education; they are written by business men and politicians you know very little to nothing about educational theory.
2) If you have a school with a very limited amount of resources, and generally these are in neighborhoods where the parents have very little resources also, most likely work full time and don't have the education themselves to help their kids. These neighborhoods are most likely to have kids with problems being surrounded by crime and poverty. How, in any way, can it be fair to expect this school to be on par with the school in the West Hills that has all the best resources and parents that can volunteer and contribute ect.
3) What happens? The school that already has all the resources it needs gets even more money when it passess the NCLB test. The school that is in desperate need for more resources so it can help it's students succeed fails the test and gets no money.
Our children's futures, and therefore society's future, should not be about competition. It should be about doing whatever we can to make sure ALL children get a good education. It's not possible without resources. And, it doesn't make sense to keep giving money to the school that has what it needs to educate children well and to continue to keep money from the schools that so desperately need it.
Since when did business men and politicians get the right to decide how to best teach children. Does that mean that I, with my Masters degree in Education, should take over their businesses and their governments. That doesn't make any sense.</p>

<p>Oh ya, and NCLB also degradates the quality of education because teachers are forced to teach to these ridiculous standardized tests rather than teaching students to be deep thinkers that can infer and evaluate as is necessary in college and in the real world.</p>