After six years of of an ever widening circle of chaos caused primarily by the flawed premise in No Child Left Behind that “one size fits all”, last week Secretary Spellings announced that the department was ready to acknowledge that a more “nuanced” approach to accountability might be beneficial particularly to those schools most in need. I don’t mean to sound cynical - well actually I do - they deserve our cynicism. Here is an example of their heightened sense of the obvious: “After six years of NCLB implementation, we have data illustrating that the extent of the academic achievement problems leading to a school’s identification differ widely within states.” (see Fact Sheet issued last week) They go on to acknowledge that some states and districts have “a large percentage of their schools identified, impacting capacity to provide meaningful, intensive reforms.”
You simply must read this two-page Fact Sheet and then I am sure you will concur with me when I ask: Who are these people? The solution that they are proposing is to offer yet another pilot program to up to ten states. They will allow ten states to have the discretion to target resources where they are most needed. This is yet another example of how wrongheaded this administration has been in the implementation of a deeply flawed law.
Connecticut already has over 300 schools identified - nearly a third of its schools. The additional resources promised with passage of the law have never been adequately provided. The cumulative gap between what was promised and actually provided reached nearly $71 billion this year. In Connecticut the gap this year alone was over $121 million and cumulatively $592 million.
While Secretary Spellings has been running around the country touting the administration’s perceived successes of the law, one of its most stalwart supporters, Rep. George Miller, chair of the House Education and Labor Committee, essentially threw in the towel on any hopes of reauthorizing what he described as a law which has become “the most negative brand in America.” (EdWeek Mar. 19, 2008 p.19)
8 responses so far ↓
gary // March 27, 2008 at 11:35 am
It’s troubling to read the specific numbers about the federal government’s underfunding of NCLB when it comes to Connecticut. Now we have news from the Connecticut legislature that state funding of local public schools is not likely to increase significantly. When will lawmakers recognize that education is expensive? They can label schools all they want but where’s the resources to reach each and every child? Why can’t there be a state coalition to get us working together on better resources for schools. Let’s start something!
steve // March 29, 2008 at 2:22 pm
How do I follow which ten states will be allowed flexibility under the new rules? Can you tell me more abut the selection process?
bill // March 31, 2008 at 8:49 am
differentiated, nuanced.
I’m a taxpayer and the educational system is a massive failure and is bankrupting our society. Only the war is worse.
paul // April 3, 2008 at 9:57 am
NCLB legislation was conceptually a great piece of legislation that had too many loopholes. The biggest issue with NCLB was that every state could establish its own path to 100% compliance. That meant, how large does a group need to be to count? It also meant that states could push the burden for qualification on to the backs of educators, which they often did. This allowed states to meet standards and reallocate federal funds elsewhere as they do with “just say no” programs. My wife is a teacher and we don’t understand why there isn’t an effort to create a national standard, one test for everyone. I see lots of remarks about testing but everyone needs to be benchmarked. Schools request funds and people want to know what they are getting for their money. I also think that schools need to be restructured so that kids who aren’t on the college track can be prepared to enter the workforce at the highest level possible.
robjmur2 // April 3, 2008 at 10:34 am
Steve You can look at this eEducation week article http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/03/26/29spellings_ep.h27.html
The requirements for applying are summarized.
Kara Hlavacek // April 3, 2008 at 9:08 pm
In my opinion, the concept of NCLB is brilliant; however, it seems to lack achievable goals for individual learners and does not provide the necessary financial support necessary for intervention. I believe that schools do need to be accountable for providing appropriate instruction and there should be a way to measure grade level achievement and individual student growth. Students are individual unique learners that deserve to demonstrate their understanding of school curriculum in different formats. Overall, I agree with educational reform. I think it would be more beneficial to students if failing schools had more intervention available and less negative consequences. It is time to increase the resources allocated for intervention and provide assessments to students measuring personal growth based on their individual needs.
Sheila // April 9, 2008 at 7:03 am
I agree with Kara. Schools must become more accountable in a proven, transparent way so that outside pressures from taxpayers and parents can force schools to change. The problems with NCLB lie in its implementation — without greater resources, a longer school day and longer school years, how can teachers possibly hope to truly educate our children?
Jen // April 12, 2008 at 10:21 am
A couple of years ago I caught the local educators destroying and discarding school desks and chairs in the name of “they were old and had to be replaced,” yet when the remaining furniture, not much, was offered to the other schools, a private school in West Hartford responded, as well as the public and took all that was left, thus saving the cost of dumpster removal. A few week ago, in the same town, another school is being renovated at a cost of 21 Million with a budget of 1.1 million for new books. I received a call from someone on this job site informing me the books from that school were packed in old lockers and discarded so no one would see. When this fact was published the Superintendent of Schools said the books were old and out dated. Perhaps this is true but why were they hidden and not donated to schools in areas that have no books let alone out dated ones? Perhaps children could learn to read and spell or even add and subtract using these “old” books. People are not stupid, what about the cost to dispose of lockers that are empty and those filled with heavy books. Many of the books were dictionaries that we can all use. Remember this school system has 1.1 million to spend on books. What a shame when these items could be used by others. No wonder taxes are going up in Connecticut. Doesn’t the State Department of Education check on these people? Stop writing checks and ask for accountability! Stop taking the word of local Boards of Education and make it a law that they must submit line item budgets. So far no one knows where the money goes. Try asking sometime. This should be a requirement of the state where anyone interested can find out.
Leave a Comment