Standardization and Imperialism…

  • View

  • Download

Embed Size (px)


Standardization and Imperialism…. How do state or federal mandates affect education and society?. No Child Left Behind (NCLB). - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Text of Standardization and Imperialism…

  • Standardization and Imperialism

  • How do state or federal mandates affect education and society?

  • No Child Left Behind(NCLB)

    These reforms express my deep belief in our public schools and their mission to build the mind and character of every child, from every background, in every part of America.President George W. Bush January 2001

  • PurposeClose the achievement gap with accountability, flexibility, parental choices, and research-based reforms

  • HistoryPresident Lyndon B. Johnson signs Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965Title I and ESEA coordinated through Improving Americas Schools Act, 1994Reauthorization of ESEA - No Child Left Behind, 20021965-2002

  • GoalsALL students will attain proficiency or better in reading and mathematics by 2013-2014ALL limited English students will become proficient in EnglishALL teachers will be highly qualified by 2005-2006ALL students will be educated in safe, drug-free environments ALL students will graduate from high school

  • Key pointsAccountabilityTeacher QualityOptions and Choices for ParentsInstructional Methods Flexibility

  • AccountabilityTesting RequirementsAdequate Yearly Progress (AYP)ConsequencesPublic Reporting

  • Adequate Yearly Progress - Example12002200220032003200420042005200520062006200720072008


  • Teacher qualityAll core academic subject area teachers not highly qualified must meet the requirements by 2005-2006.

  • Options and choices for parentsIncreased parent notification and reporting requirements for all districtsEmphasis on parental involvement School Improvement Status Schools:Transfer option to schools not identified for improvementSupplemental services provided outside the school day

  • SummaryAssessment for ALL studentsAccountability for ALL studentsPublic reporting for ALL schoolsIncreased options for ALL parentsHighly qualified personnel in ALL schoolsDollars to classrooms in ALL schools

  • Key dates2002- Annual assessment of Limited English Proficiency students2002- Biennial NAEP testing in grades 4 and 8 in reading and math2002- States and districts distribute annual report cards based on NCLB requirementsAnnual assessment in math and reading/language arts at least once in grades 3-5, 6-9, 10-12 2005- Annual assessments of reading and math in grades 3-8 (fall)2006- All public and charter school teachers must meet standards of high quality2006-States must have science standards established 2014-All students must be proficient in reading and math

  • What are the pros and cons to federally mandated educational policyProsCons

    Diane Ross - Brainstorm in groups....debate each team picks a side. I need to get copies of a summary of this for the class....

  • NCLB??No Child Left UntestedEvery Child Left BehindNo Teacher Left UntestedNo Puppy Left UnfedNo one could possibly be against leaving no child behind, just as no one could be against starving puppies! Test and BurnFront: No Child Left BehindBack: As long as you are white, middle class, and ChristianNo Child left on Their Behind!!!!!!!! That is what we say in the Physical Education world. aNother Conservative-initiated program for Liberals toBitch aboutMany Children Left Behind by Debra Meier, Alfie Kohn, etc.

  • Secretary of Education- Rod PaigeNational Education Association (NEA) is a terrorist organization for criticizing NCLBApril 2003- All things being equal, I would prefer to have a child in a school that has a strong appreciation for Christian values where a child is taught to have a strong faith.

  • Equity Claims for NCLB dont pass the testA huge increase in financial responsibility to schools with no more federal money providedSome estimates say that the new federal law will require states to give more than 200 tests at a cost of more than $7 Billion dollarsMany studies show that standardized testing does not lead to increased student achievement but may in fact reduce it and lead to higher dropout rates. (New York Times, 12/28/02)

  • May narrow the focus of what teachers do in classLimit the ability to serve the broader needs of students and their communitiesPushes struggling students out of schoolAdopt developmentally inappropriate practices for young children to get them prepared for the test

  • All the focus on test scores means that little energy is left for imagination, creativity, intrinsic motivation, intuition, spontaneity, and children

  • HQTMakes understanding the process of teaching and learning take a back seat to knowing the facts of a subject area93% of white teacher candidate passed the testing necessary73% of African American candidates passed the same testOver-reliance on high stakes testing of teachers mirrors the existing race and class inequities and ultimately denies many teachers of color access to the teaching field.Attack on teacher education programs- leading to alternative licensure and deregulation and for-profit programs

  • HQT?Kati Haycock, 2000 (Education Trust)Students in high poverty schools were more than twice as likely to have teachers who werent certified in the subject areas that they were teachingStudents in schools that had a population of 90% of more of African American and Latino students were twice as likely to have teachers with no certification at all

  • HQT?July 2001 The New York Times50 percent of the teachers in urban schools leave teaching within their first five years

  • Empirically Researched Instructional Methods?Education and the Cult of EfficiencyAcquisition of earning (not learning)Education that does not promote the desire for earning is not worth the getting.

  • Accountability?Laws punitive measure to not passing high stakes test is problematicAny extra funding will go to magnet schools through vouchers or school choice programs, not to ensure improvement of present conditions

  • Accountability?Adding special education students and students with limited English language proficiency does not improve their situation and holds schools responsible to an unfair expectation

    Diane Ross - sports analogy... run faster with a broken leg.... or in the mud...

  • Accountability?Testing requirements are so high that in some states over 90% of the schools will not meet the standards

  • Accountability?Inequality in test scores is one indicator of school performance. But test scores also reflect other inequalities.

  • Accountability?Ten percent of white children live in poverty whereas 35% of Black and Latino children live in poverty.

  • Accountability?14% of whites have no health insurance whereas 20% of Blacks and 30% of Latinos have no health insurance

  • Accountability?Why isnt our political system addressing this inequity.

  • George Bush has run a privatizing maniaWe are defending the very concept of a public sector that serves the common goodWe must promote policies for equitable funding, smaller class sizes, programs to enhance teacher quality, regardless of race, color, nationality, or zip code

  • The administration likes to talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations and how this law fights that. But what about the hard bigotry of high expectations without adequate resources? (Washington Post, 1/2/03)

  • Dr. Sobol- (initiator of the standards movement) the high stakes nature of testing affect those that are usually poor and disproportionately of colorthis is beyond illegal and unfair-this is immoral. (cited in Kozol, 2005)

    First signed into law in 1965 by President Lyndon B. Johnson, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act focused on disadvantaged, low achieving students. This law has been referred to by many names, including HR 1, Public Law 107-110, ESEA, Reauthorization of Title I, and, most recently, No Child Left Behind.

    This law is typically reauthorized every five years. In 1994, the Improving Americas Schools Act coordinated Title I and ESEA. In January 2002 President George W. Bush signed into law the reauthorized ESEA to continue to reach disadvantaged, low achieving schools and increase accountability by enhancing the focus to ALL students. This law is in effect through 2007, when it will again be up for reauthorization.

    PRESENTERS NOTE:Another recent act of note is the Hawkins/Stafford Act, 1988; Title I focused on equity to help break out of the cycle of poverty in 1988, this act introduced accountability factors for Title I and school-wide assistance status.

    This graphic illustrates the concept of Adequate Yearly Progress.

    As you can see, the baseline target or starting point, shown as an example*, is established using data from 2001-2002. The amount of growth needed each year to make AYP will be determined using the AYP formula being finalized by the Department of Education.

    By 2013-14, the goal is that 100% of students will reach the target. This graph depicts an example of how a districts or buildings achievement toward 100% proficiency might look.

    * PRESENTERS NOTE:We will have separate starting points in math and reading for elementary, middle school, and high school.