NONE TOO QUICK ON THE UPTAKE:

The Seven Deadly Absurdities Of No Child Left Behind (Gerald W. Bracey, 2/09/05, Portside)

1. The No Child Left Behind law (NCLB) uses the phrase 'scientifically based research' 111 times and demands such research from educational researchers, but no scientifically based research-or any research--supports the law's mandates. There is no research that supports
NCLB's contention that the way to improve schools is to test every child every year and to fail schools and districts that do no make the required Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). In fact, research argues against the use of high-stakes testing as an instrument of school reform.

2. NCLB lacks research support because NCLB depends solely on punishment. As schools fail to make arbitrary AYP the law imposes punitive, increasingly harsh
sanctions. The law is in the tradition of 'the beatings will continue until morale improves.'

3. Even those who think punishment can motivate people would never use it as NCLB does. It punishes the entire school for the failures of the few, often the very few. If a school's special education students fail to make AYP, the whole school fails. If a school's English language learners fail to make AYP the whole school fails. If 95% of any group fails to show up on test day, the whole school fails. NCLB requires schools to report test score data by various student categories---gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, etc. Most schools have 37 such categories (California has 46). Schools thus have 37 opportunities to fail, only one way to succeed.

4. All students must be proficient in reading, math, and science by 2014. In his 2003 presidential address to the American Educational Research Association, Robert Linn, projected it would take 61 years, 66 years, and 166 years, respectively, to get fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-graders to the proficient level in
math. Alas, Linn's projections are wildly optimistic because he reported national data, not data disaggregated by ethnicity. In the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress, only 5 percent of African-American eighth graders and 7 percent of Hispanics were proficient in math. Only 37 percent of whites, 43 percent of Asians, and 15 percent of Native Americans reached this plateau. At least one author has written that the 100% proficient requirement is so irrational that it might be unconstitutional.

5. As a consequence of #3 and #4 above, California projects that by the deadline year of 2014, NCLB will label 99 percent of its schools 'failing.' California students don't do all that well on tests, but Minnesota is one of the nation's highest scoring states. In the Third International Mathematics and Science Study, only 6 of the 41 participating countries outscored it in mathematics and only one of 41 attained a higher science score. Yet Minnesota projects that 2014 will find 80 percent of its schools wanting. Most states have been afraid to see what their projections look like.

6. Any school that fails to make AYP for two consecutive years must offer all students the option to transfer to a 'successful' school. Thus, if a school's special education students fail to make AYP one year and its English language learners fail the next year, the school must offer all students the 'choice option' in spite of the fact that the school worked for the other 36 student categories.

Why not just call a program that guarantees failure and then "punishes" failure by imposing vouchers what it is: a voucher program.

Posted by Orrin Judd at February 12, 2005 6:19 AM