By CAITLIN LUKACS
Observer Staff
March 5, 2008

With No Child Left Behind up for re-authorization again this year, the debate surrounding the law is based on the longstanding issue of what test scores actually tell us. Do high numerical scores reflect greater learning? Do they reflect a successful school? Is it true that no child is being left behind, or is the name misleading?

The Department of Education strongly believes in No Child Left Behind. It has been touting the act’s success since it was passed into legislation in 2001.

However, teachers and board of education members around the country are not as positive. They say that it is an unfair law and that standardized tests can’t possibly be used as a measure of achievement for students.

Photo by STEPHEN ROSS HILL
A student works on her chemistry homework.

One reason for the disagreement is that National Assessment of Educational Progress test scores are improving.

“The real issue is there is improvement, but is it a result of No Child Left Behind or what was going on already in states?” said Reggie Felton, director of federal relations for the National School Boards Association.

The administration said the increasing scores prove that No Child Left Behind is successful.

“Absolutely, No Child Left Behind is working. The recent data on the nation’s report card shows that students are improving, at the third grade level especially. Those results aren’t occurring by accident,” said Rebecca Neale, a spokeswoman for the Department of Education.

“There have been small improvements,” said Iris Rotberg, research professor of education policy at George Washington University. “But whatever trend in [National Assessment of Educational Progress] scores was a trend that’s been going on for a number of years. There is no valid link between the trend and No Child Left Behind.”

Another reason for the disparity in opinion is the issue of standards. Some people say there should be national standards that all students are held to, while others believe that students need to be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

“If there’s really no child left behind, every child should meet the same standards across the nation and it’s my understanding that this is not the case,” said Hal Keller, the executive director of fiscal services for Frederick County’s Board of Education.

Photo by MARCIA COTTRELL
Elementary students at Sodus Central School, in upstate New York, complete worksheets at a reading center.

Within the constructs of No Child Left Behind, each state is required to create its own definition of “proficient” and produce annual tests for all its students to take. The states are also responsible for setting their own yearly goals in terms of reaching the ultimate objective of having all students become proficient in math and reading by the year 2014.

Rotberg agrees with Keller that without national standards there won’t be any way to make sure that all students are performing at their grade level.

“High scores on state tests are not equivalent to high scores on the national proficiency tests,” she said.

The National School Boards Association’s Reggie Felton said that the standards are not enacted in such a way as to provide useful information about the abilities of students.

The No Child Left Behind program “doesn’t accurately assess students or schools,” he said. “It’s not a fair way to do it. You ought to have assessments – that’s fine. But when you start looking at how it operates, it’s a problem. You’re testing fourth graders this year against different fourth graders next year.”

Felton believes that each individual student’s progress should be tested over several years rather than testing different children every year. It doesn’t tell us anything about the program, the test, or the students if there are different kids taking the test each year, he said.

Lisa Lentz, a social studies and language arts teacher at Meade Middle School, in Maryland, said that she is not a fan of No Child Left Behind and that she doesn’t believe it is a successful program.

Photo by MARCIA COTTRELL
Elementary students at Sodus Central School, in upstate New York, work with a teacher on their reading skills.

Among the problems Lentz has with the act are the standards the schools are held to each year.

“Schools must continuously be improving, even when they had high scores to begin with,” she said.

A school that scored poorly on the initial test, but has been able to show improvement on subsequent tests is considered more successful under the No Child Left Behind act than a school that scored well at the beginning and therefore doesn’t show as large of an improvement each year, according to Lentz.

The other reason Lentz does not believe in No Child Left Behind is that students with learning disabilities are required to take the same test as students without disabilities. Such students can receive extra help, but only in the form of extra time, the use of a calculator, or having the test read to them, Lentz said.

“There is no way they will ever be able to pass the tests and that’s not my lack of faith in their intelligence,” she said. “They can learn, but they will not be able to grasp abstract concepts.”

Paul Theobald, a scholar at Buffalo State University’s Center for Excellence in Urban and Rural Education, said that he doesn’t agree with standards in any form.

Theobald cited American philosopher and education reformer, John Dewey’s, thoughts about public education. “What standards do in particular is take knowledge out of any useful context,” he said.

In terms of his own personal opinion about public education, Theobald explained that he prefers a local curriculum.

That is “putting math into relevant contexts so that students really understand the impacts on the community. Learning has to be grounded in a context,” he said.

Yet another reason there are so many different opinions about No Child Left Behind is that people don’t agree on the act’s effect on teachers and the classroom experience.

On the one hand people, teachers mainly criticize No Child Left Behind because it limits the range of lessons possible in public school classrooms. They say that the program forces teachers to “teach to the test” instead of exploring subjects further or subjects other than reading and math.

Professor Rotberg said that “many teachers feel that [No Child Left Behind] narrows the curriculum and lowers the morale of both students and teachers.”

But there are a few teachers who believe that No Child Left Behind has had a positive effect on the classroom. By concentrating on teaching the test material, students will be that much more prepared, they argue.

Some also believe reading and math are the two basic subjects on which all other subjects should be built.

Rotberg explained that “some would say [No Child Left Behind] helps focus the subject matter.”

These differences in opinions were supposed to be worked out last year when the act was originally up for re-authorization, but Congress decided to push the decision to 2008 so that they could give it the time and attention that it deserves, according to a November 2007 New York Times article.

There has yet to be a resolution or even a major move toward one so far this year. According to a Washington Post article, President Bush has continued to press Congress to re-authorize the law. He has even said he will veto any legislation put forward that weakens the accountability system of No Child Left Behind. However, with attention on the 2008 presidential election, it seems unlikely that any decision will be made before a new president is voted into office.