{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

No Child Left Behind

No Child Left Behind - Outline Thesis The No Child Left...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Outline Thesis: The No Child Left Behind act should more adequately address the needs of individual students. Policies enacted in the spirit of generalized legislation should be removed to allow local, state, and community governments to decide the provisions necessary for their children and schools. Public awareness must be raised to accomplish these goals. I. NCLB schools are uncreative and lifeless. a. Students are not able to grow creatively. b. Too great of a focus is placed on standardized testing, while too little is placed on educational development. II. Standardized testing doesn’t work. a. Too small a subset of students is actually tested. b. Students are not tested in all subjects, rather in just a few. c. Forcing students to take too many standardized tests centers education on testing rather than on learning III. Statistics are misleading a. Reports used to support NCLB are inherently flawed b. Reports show no improvement since NCLB c. Schools can fake statistics to show greater success under NCLB IV. Teachers are not evaluated based on classroom success; only on credentials V. Funding levels are not adequate The Elementary and Secondary Education Act signed into effect by President
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
George W. Bush in 2002, euphemistically called No Child Left Behind, establishes provisions intended to service public education and increase the overall quality of schools in the United States. According to the US Department of Education website, NCLB establishes four primary facets of public school improvement: Stronger accountability for results, more freedom for states and communities, encouragement of proven education methods, and more choices for parents. The primary problem addressed by these individual innovations, it is said, is the issue of an achievement gap between individual students. Unfortunately, many of the critics of NCLB assert that this goal is unrealistic and the proposed solution does more to weaken education at large and less to bring lower-performing students up to the ranks of their peers. Many also assert that by punishing schools that do not perform as expected on standardized testing by removing federal funding will only make the problem worse and forces schools to teach their students to pass the tests for the much needed funds rather than actually provide a specific education. It is a major problem, these critics say, that the solutions are proposed in the form of broad-sweeping, generalized reform rather than focusing on individual students. Teachers forced to teach under the new system also provide the same concerns, saying that they simply do not have the resources to provide some of the services demanded by the act and instead have to lessen their individual attention to start incorporating the standardized lessons. As a response, many of the critics argue that the NCLB bill should never have been passed to affect public education and that it is a blight on an already faltering system. Others, however, take a less dramatic stance, instead offering solutions to help the system provide more individual attention rather than generalizations.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}