|
|
|
 |
AEP Online |
New Reports Make Recommendations for Sweeping Changes to NCLBIn recent weeks many voices have joined in the debate on what the reauthorized version of the No Child Left Behind Act should look like. President Bush and the U.S Department of Education have indicated a strong commitment to following their current policies with small changes, and the Commission on NCLB has been partially in agreement. Now, other groups with a stake in the educational future of our children are venting their concerns and providing recommendations that would significantly change the law. One of these groups is the Forum on Educational Accountability (FEA), an alliance of education, civil rights, religious, children's, disability, and civic organizations, whose overarching goal is to improve federal education policy. FEA Director Monty Neill has been working on the issue of educational accountability for some time in his position as director of Fair Test, a national center that proposes multiple measures of achievement as opposed to the high stakes tests that are the basis of NCLB. According to Neill, the FEA is an outgrowth of that work, it's primary goal being "to de-emphasize the test and punish approach and turn the law into a tool to help improve schools." The combination of high stakes testing, AYP, and sanctions have created an "educational disaster," he says. Neill believes that the states should be held accountable, but not with sanctions. The Federal Government should have a "positive role in funding and support assessments." He described the FEA's approach as one that will substantially increase professional development and family involvement, in addition to the changes in assessments. Instead of being judged against arbitrary Adequate Yearly Progress testing targets, schools, districts and states should be held accountable for implementing the following systemic changes in professional development and leadership, family involvement and accountability: * A significant investment and commitment to professional development such as intensive professional development programs, instructor collaboration and mentoring, and restructured funding that would earmark 20 percent of Title I funds for professional development and require matching funding from states * New requirements for family involvement, providing literacy and family skills programs and mentoring at Title I high needs schools, dedicating five percent of Title I funding for this purpose * Replacing the current system of AYP with a system based on a positive trend in learning outcomes, also including the requirement that Title I schools and districts plan for the change and include all stakeholders in the planning process * A Substantial increase in Title I investment You can read the entire report at: http://www.edaccountability.org/pdf/FEA-CapacityBuilding.pdf The Institute for Language and Education Policy also released a report, theirs specifically addressing concerns about ELL students. In an outright rejection of the standard, the group claims: "After nearly five years of implementation, there is considerable evidence--from scientific research, surveys of state and local officials, and educators' reports from the field--about the impact of NCLB. Based on this evidence, the Institute concludes that the law is failing to work as promised and needs a thorough overhaul. "Not only has NCLB failed to increase the achievement of 'left behind' groups relative to other students. It has also had unintended consequences that have impoverished the school experience for the most vulnerable students." The report went on to list what it described as "perverse" outcomes of NCLB such as: * Teaching to the test, stressing low-level, basic skills rather than enrichment programs that develop critical thinking and problem-solving abilities; * Basing decisions about school programs solely on standardized tests, which are in many cases--e.g., in the case of English language learners--neither valid nor reliable in measuring student progress; and * Failing to address formidable obstacles to school achievement, which for ELLs include poorly designed and poorly funded programs, opposition to research-based practices such as bilingual education, and inadequate training of teachers in how to serve students with limited English proficiency. The report then outlines principles that a new system should be based on. These "Authentic Accountability" guidelines include Accuracy, Reasonableness, Equity, Balance, Flexibility, Constructiveness, and Decentralization. Accountability would be based on the Castañeda v. Pickard test, a civil-rights tool currently used to determine whether school districts are meeting their obligations to ELLs, could be generalized to all students and enforced by states. Assessments would significantly change under the structure that is recommended by requiring the use of multiple measures, not a single standardized test, to determine whether students are making adequate progress. Assessments in the native language would also be created. Professional development or qualifications would be set by the state, but development for ELL teachers would be significantly increased. To read more on this report, go to http://www.elladvocates.org. Questions, ideas, or in need of more information? Please contact Stacey Pusey at 856-241-7772. |
To find out what other groups are saying about the reauthorization of NCLB, please visit AEP's Government Relations section. |
|
©
2008 The Association of Educational
Publishers
|
||
