September 21, 2005
THE GENIUS OF NCLB:
10 Schools Run Out of Time to Catch Up: Nine campuses in L.A. and 1 in Visalia top the No Child Left Behind law's seven-year limit. Their fate is uncertain. (Duke Helfand and Joel Rubin, September 21, 2005, LA Times)
The federal No Child Left Behind education law gave schools seven years to meet achievement goals, laying out increasingly dire consequences — including the removal of school staff — for those that fell short.But now, 10 schools have exceeded that seven-year timetable, leaving them in undefined territory and spawning renewed criticism by education officials about the fairness of the law. [...]
In an effort to boost achievement at schools serving low-income children, No Child Left Behind established a system of prods and punishments.
These so-called Title I schools are required to meet annual testing targets in English and math for their campuses overall as well as for subgroups that include races, special education students and children from poor families.
The schools also have to test at least 95% of their students each year.
Campuses that fall short of the goals are placed on a watch list for two years.
Those that continue to miss their targets enter a five-year period during which they face "corrective actions" and increasingly severe sanctions.
Initially, the schools have to offer their students transfers to higher-performing campuses and free tutoring.
In cases where schools still falter, their districts are required to develop "restructuring" plans that can include state takeovers or the removal of staff.
The plans are implemented in the seventh and final year of the No Child Left Behind timetable.
Give the kids their vouchers. Posted by Orrin Judd at September 21, 2005 12:00 AM
Emergency cycle breaking comment.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at September 21, 2005 9:28 AMAnd you gotta love those unnamed "education officials" who, because THEY weren't able to give the kids their promised education in a seven-year span, fault the law that exposed their shortcomings. Surely if teachers were as important as they keep telling us they are (of all the bumper stickers I see bragging of the driver's job, at least 80% pat the back of teachers), they'd welcome the same public scrutiny that greets doctors, lawyers, and similar occupations.
Posted by: John Barrett Jr. at September 21, 2005 10:04 AM"Give them their vouchers"
Then those students can go to a "higher performing" school and the students presently in "higher performing" schools can get vouchers to go to the poorer performing schools. I predict next year the results will be precisely reversed.
Posted by: h-man at September 21, 2005 11:31 AMI guess my public school could have used those vouchers or maybe I just fell asleep at work for too long. How does a 7 year deadline pass from a law enacted in 2002??
Posted by: Rick T. (Rip Van Winkle) at September 21, 2005 12:15 PMRICK:
It's the New Math the kids are being taught, silly.
Posted by: obc at September 21, 2005 12:58 PMMary Landrieu doesn't want them poor vouchered kids going to school with her children, so she might be punching George Bush about this, too.
Posted by: jim hamlen at September 21, 2005 1:30 PM