Teacher Leaders Network - NCLB - (Page 13)

A review of the entire transcript of the Merrow discussion reveals a balanced view of NCLB’s contributions and conundrums. Miami-Dade teacher leader Linda Emm’s comment about the moral pressure created by NCLB, for example, was strongly supported by other members of the focus group: The one thing NCLB has done is to shine the light into the dark corners of inequities in our education system. We can no longer pretend not to know where students are being well served by the system, and where they are not. The fact that the majority of the low achieving schools are in high poverty areas, populated by families of color, many not native to this country, may not have surprised many who have worked in education for any amount of time — but now we have “hard data” to back up what we have always known in our hearts. The path to true accountability, these teachers believe, is more complex than accumulating standardized testing data. Podcast: Our Best & Brightest Nancy Flanagan and Mary Tedrow articulate the hazards of emphasizing standardized tests to the detriment of higher-order learning. Drawing on the insights of these experts, I offer the following recommendations: 1) To create world-class standards and assessments, states must draw deeply on the advice of a large and diverse sample of successful teachers. These teachers want to see many of the billions of dollars currently spent on standardized tests reallocated so that students can be judged systematically on how they perform over time using assessments like essays, research papers, and science experiments that encourage higher order thinking skills. The TLN participants want to be accountable at a higher level. They seek comprehensive approaches that include long-term data on student progress captured by performance assessments as well as multiple-choice tests. 2) To identify effective teachers, schools and districts need to be given the latitude to reconsider narrow evaluation measurements. For instance, a district might determine that teachers can demonstrate student improvement effectively by using what students and parents report about their teaching and the successes of their graduates. Valdine McLean, a Nevada-based Presidential Award winner in science, recently testified on Capitol Hill and invited accountability for herself based in part on whether her students take elective science courses and even major in the discipline in college.x Special education students and English-language learners should be expected to meet standards, but their success needs to be determined differently — with the input of those who best understand the learning processes involved. 3) To truly designate “highly qualified” and effective teachers, major changes must be made to the NCLB provisions. Good teaching cannot be defined by solely testing a teacher’s subject matter competency. While it is critical to certify that teachers have the knowledge to teach, the current highly qualified teaching provisions ignore the realities of good teaching. A truly highly qualified teacher knows the best ways to help students learn, and an effective teacher spreads that expertise to others. Page 13

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Teacher Leaders Network - NCLB

Executive Summary The Future of American Education in the Making It is Time to Align NCLB Intentions and Consequences The Teacher Leaders Network Encounters NCLB from the Classroom NCLB Demands Results and So Do We Attention Alone Does Not Equal Effective Accountability Standardized Tests Fall Short of 21st Century Demands For What Future Is NCLB Preparing Students? As Testing Expands, the Curriculum Shrinks The Drive for Data Presents Potential for Significant Change Data Systems Don’t Keep Pace with Real-Time Instructional Needs AYP Highlights the Good, Bad, and Ugly of NCLB Does “Highly Qualified” Set the Teaching Bar Too Low? Teaching Quality Must Be More Than a Number Every Student Deserves a Highly Effective, Well-Trained Teacher Conclusions References

Teacher Leaders Network - NCLB

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.