This is a printer friendly version of an article from
www.goupstate.com
To print this article open the file menu and choose
Print.
Back
Article published Nov 16, 2003
No
Child Left Behind Act: Misconceptions have cast the president's education
legislation in an unfair light
BARBARA NIELSEN
For the Herald-Journal
When President Bush, with the
bipartisan support of Congress, signed the landmark No Child Left Behind Act
(NCLB) 18 months ago, he sent a clear message to the states: It is time to raise
the standards of education in our country for every child. It is time to leave
no child behind!With any new legislation, there is a period of time during which
questions arise as to the purpose, intent, guidelines and funding. Often, a lack
of understanding of the laws leads to a misinterpretation and misinformation.For
example, there recently has been a portrayal of the legislation as a sweeping
and punitive intrusion without offering adequate remedial help. The reality is
much different.The federal government since 1965 has spent $242 billion in Title
I dollars alone to help states assist schools in educating economically and
educationally disadvantaged children. Under the 1994 Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, states already were supposed to be developing academic standards
and new assessments and providing technical assistance to low-performing
districts.The nation was lagging. It was time to bring accountability for the
large amounts of federal dollars while keeping decision making closest to the
solutions at the state and local level.The combined efforts clearly have made
high standards, rigorous assessments, quality teaching, early childhood
programs, reading by grade three, quality technical assistance, supplemental
services, options for parents and accountability state and national
priorities.Fortunately for our state, providing that plan should not be
difficult. In fact, South Carolina already has enacted most of the reform
requirements contained in NCLB. In 1998, we passed and funded the S.C. Education
Accountability Act that is very similar to NCLB of 2001.Both require high
academic standards, a statewide assessment system that tests all students,
performance criteria, an accountability system, goals, objectives and timelines
for accomplishments, reporting of results, identification of low-performing
schools, intervention, assistance and improvement of teacher quality, remedial
services, annual report cards at state, district and school levels, school
rewards and recognition of academic achievement, flexibility and targeted
technical assistance.An area that has generated great concern is with the
requirement of testing all students, including non-English-speaking students.
Several persons have commented on how unfair this is. NCLB clearly states that
unless a child has attended a U.S. school for three or more consecutive years,
he or she does not have to be tested in English. It is suggested that a
reasonable accommodation be made by the state. In addition, the state is
required to administer a test of English proficiency to non-English-speaking
students and develop a plan for English language acquisition.Our state receives
$2,384,745 a year to assist in carrying out this provision of the law. As South
Carolina already has new assessments in place, we can use some of the $6,179,388
received annually for assessments to help with this task.Unfounded concerns also
have been expressed about the NCLB requirement for achieving proficiency for
students, e.g. "swift and steep improvement on test scores." Title I has always
required improvement in test scores. The truth is that there is a 12-year
timeline to reach this goal. The state determines the percentage (Adequate
Yearly Progress) needed in order to reach this goal. S.C. has chosen 17 percent,
meeting proficiency for the first three years with a jump to 37 percent in the
next phase.Other concerns have been expressed about the "restructuring of the
school and district" language in NCLB. It is important to note that the
requirement is after five years of data and intense technical assistance. The
S.C. Education Accountability Act gives the state superintendent that authority
after a much shorter period of time. One should also point out that the federal
government, since 1965, has required school improvements to be made, and South
Carolina has required improvements since 1984.Certainly real education reform
presents an enormous challenge, but it is the only way to achieve success in our
classrooms. Fortunately, an analysis of the many line items available in the
South Carolina K-12 total budget finds a large, but often duplicative, amount of
dollars to complete these tasks. NCLB provides extra dollars, almost $676
million this year, to do the very same reforms and tasks that are already
required and being funded by the state.Over the past 20 years, we have spent a
substantial amount of state and federal dollars to move South Carolina forward,
including a strong commitment to assisting low-performing schools. It is time to
take a hard look at how we budget and spend these dollars. It is critical that
we look at the effectiveness of programs and not layer on new programs. It is
time to give districts the financial flexibility to support their responsibility
for student achievement. The governor's SMART program is a strong step in that
direction. Hopefully, we can all look ahead with the common purpose of "Is this
good for children?" "Is this the best for our state?"After more than 20 years of
reform and billions of dollars, there is no excuse for leaving any child behind.
The S.C. Education Accountability Act and NCLB provide the opportunity for us to
keep that commitment. Let's get the work done.(A side-by-side analysis of the
S.C. Education Accountability Act and NCLB can be found on the Strom Thurmond
Web site, www.strom.clemson.edu/publications/nielsen/.)Dr. Barbara S. Nielsen,
senior scholar at the Strom Thurmond Institute at ClemsonUniversity, is a former
state superintendent of education.