Teacher Leaders Network - NCLB - (Page 7)

Amy Bailey, an NBCT from North Carolina, noted, “Many teachers now focus very narrowly on teaching the types of things that will be tested, especially for struggling students. This can result in a ‘drill and kill’ mentality that puts little emphasis on writing and higher order thinking skills.” Renee Moore — a Mississippi NBCT, Milken Award winner, and Carnegie scholar — reflected on how NCLB testing has limited her ability to demonstrate what her high school English students from the Mississippi Delta know and can do: Our standardized test covered only about one-third of the state English curriculum, which was originally developed by teachers to assure our students would be able to demonstrate effectiveness in speaking, interpersonal communication skills, ability to work in groups, and complete tasks. The State Department of Education did not immediately eliminate these skills from the state curriculum (which are critically important — both in the African American tradition and in the 21st Century work environment). However, my former district and many others required teachers to give only assignments and grades directly related to the material that will be tested, in order to reduce the embarrassing situations of having students pass our courses but fail the state test. In short, our once well-rounded, rich language arts curriculum has been butchered to fit the mold of a prepackaged, generic standardized test. Ariel Sacks, who teaches in a Harlem middle school, reflected on the indirect damage done to her students when activity-oriented portions of the curriculum are eliminated: My school, which serves a Latino and African American student population, has no recess and students receive gym once a week. In middle school, when children’s bodies are developing at a rate equal only to that of toddlers, it seems criminal not to give them any time to move around 4 out of 5 days a week. The Drive for Data Presents Potential for Significant Change While the Teacher Leaders Network members were skeptical about the many ways NCLB has affected assessment systems, curriculum, and instruction, they were also quick to point out where No Child Left Behind was helpful. The law’s mandate for all students to meet state standards for proficiency in reading and math by 2014 has created more urgency among principals and teachers to use disaggregated data to inform teaching in ways most had not before. Michelle Capen noted: With each teacher in our school getting results on their classes, we’ve been able to identify students’ math or reading difficulties more specifically. For example, most of the kids at my school have a difficult time understanding comprehension questions regarding author’s purpose. We have specifically targeted this area for instruction this year K-5 as a result. Betsy Rogers explained how a more in-depth use of data — both from standardized tests and from other sources “closer to the ground” — has enabled her school to achieve significant growth in the past several years: My school has gone from making 33% of our AYP goals in 2003 to 88% in 2005 to 100% last year. We spend a lot of time matching the data to the individual student. We also analyze our three-year school longitudinal data and grade level data. We do a comparison of our state criterion-referenced test with the norm-referenced tests we use. From the data, we create instructional groupings. These groups change as needed and as we administer benchmark tests throughout the year. We always use an item analysis when interpreting our benchmark test so that our instruction can be designed to meet individual gaps as well as class needs. I really think using data effectively has been one of the keys to our success. Page 7

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.