President Bush and his administration must have felt the need to make changes in the educational system in America., a factor that propelled them to initiate the No Child Left Behind Act. However, they may have been right; their strategies on how to come up with a whole idea somehow proved flawed. What they did not perceive at that moment was that they needed to raise the standards of the schools. Nonetheless, going about it at the expense of a well-rounded education was not the right way of approach. It is an appreciation for President Obama together with Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education, who have tirelessly worked hard to bring an alternative that benefit all students. Therefore, a Blueprint for Reform could hypothetically provide replacements to majority of the demanding standards that No Child Left Behind needs.
One of Obama’s major concern is the assurance to students to receive a well-rounded education. Presently, under No Child Left Behind, the only test done on students is on mathematics, language and reading (No Child Left Behind: A Parents Guide). These have served as decisions that stipulate whether a school has the “adequate yearly progress.” In case such a school is considered as failing, then teachers should focus more time coaching students to pass the test. All states and districts are supposed to lower their standards as a way of ensuring that they are not considered as failures (Obama, 2011).
Under the proposed changes in the corridors of A Blueprint for Reform, states are invigorated and given support meant to strengthen their STEM programs. Under STEM programs, there are various fields including technology, science, mathematics, and engineering (A Blueprint for Reform). Majority of elementary school students have been used to take the Test of Basic Skills (TBS). This tests them on language and mathematics skills, as well as on science and history.
Today, students are tested in similar subjects annually. Even when there is substantial growth in scores from year to year, if they are still underperforming at their grade level, then the benchmark is that they have failed (No Child Left Behind: A Parents Guide). If a student enters fifth grade with reading skills equivalent to that of second grade, and later leaves the fifth grade capable of reading at a fourth grade level, then such a student has made an impressive progress. The teacher may be proved as capable of reading and making a difference with their teaching skills. Nevertheless, the school, the student, the teacher, and the district altogether would be well thought out as a failure since such a student was not reading at grade five level (Obama 2011).
Standardization scores and tests are the best in measuring the achievements and performances of students. The sad truth is that the current education only concentrates on students’ test scores. The intrinsic value of learning in students has started disappearing at a time when the schools’ major target is on the results of the exam scores. The administration of President Bush created No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) to assist schools with their academic improvements. The resultant focus of these improvements was on the nationwide standardized testing. Based on the policy, there was a mandatory shutdown for schools recording low testing scores. It is important to set up a new guideline, meant to evaluate schools and their students.
The exam scores are essential and thus their results cannot be ignored. The intrinsic outcome of education is that students are slowly learning on their own speed under distinct teaching styles. It is important to note is that the policy cannot propel them to perform better when it is beyond their own control and ability. The intrinsic value education is created the moment students appreciate the gratefulness and benefits of their education. The feeling of meaningless has ensued in students’ minds following the institutionalizations of standardized testing in their schools. Many of US nationals are not acquainted with this ‘No Child Left Behind,’ policy because they do take this issue as their concern. The policy deals with how some respective schools operate in certain ways that the government wants to. Since the majority of schools require government funding, they probably lack proper choice except to follow this layout. Following of this layout exposes students to face unfair outcome of this policy.
It has been observed that students hurry into learning how to take part in standardized testing instead of studying what they require to know in life. There is a need for each student to take standardized tests annually, regardless of their age. Notwithstanding the type of learning a person takes, they are supposed to undertake the same kind of test. The arising question is whether standardized tests accurately determine a student’s academic advancement. Some researches have proved that certain students do not necessarily need to perform like their counterparts. Every educator is, therefore, mandated to prepare their students for the test, as possible as they can. Standardization tests are not meant for everyone. It is prudent to use them for some students and not all. Teachers would be affected positively if the needed standards are taught in the best creative ways.
The policy of With No Child Left Behind will be best appreciated if all schools are supposed to be skilful in reading by 2016 (No Child Left Behind: A Parents Guide). The decline by Iowa State suggests that if the same trend continues to the rest of the states, then there shall be no making of a proper decline. All parents should recognize that the No Child Left Behind Act plays a big role in the education, which their children receive. Every parent should be concerned with knowing that the school his or her child attends touches their joy.
Schools have been making tremendous improvements in their test scores, apart from doing all that is required of schools at each level. Various schools have been seen providing tutoring services to respective students who request for special attention in both reading and mathematics. As a result, their scores have soared high by small margin each year following the provision of these services. Any student who studies to become a teacher realizes that these ideas influence their studies and future career. The effect of Obama’s changes to No Child Left Behind have led to the channeling of funds to schools and districts to identify, prepare, develop, recruit, reward, retain and improve operative principals, teachers, and leadership teams (A Blueprint for Reform).
The duration of school timing and intake capacity are some of the topics that help the teacher build the bridge of communication with the students. The inquisitiveness among the students to know about the foreign teacher, in the very class, is much quenched here. This way of introducing oneself is very appropriate in breaking the ice of a cultural gap between the teacher and the students. The initial few words delivered by this teacher create a comfortable zone for the students. This is very effective in managing the space for teacher-student relationship, rather than the binary opposition of being native and non-native, English speakers. This statement can be authenticated by the participation of the students in communicating with the teacher.
According to Cortazzi and Jin (1996), American children on a general note are socialized by the communicative culture of understanding and learning on a scholarly approach. These children are exposed to lay emphasis on developing long-term memory, regular ways of learning through imitation and added by the modes of repetitive practice so that they can sustain the collected knowledge. This is definitely an interesting derivation that makes the motto to ‘think globally, act locally” empirically possible in terms of adopting English as a language. Adoption of English as their second language is a difficult task to accomplish, yet by a well-trained and channelized teaching approach the same can be attained with adequate proficiency.
References
U.S. Department of Education. “President Obama: Our Children Can't Wait for Congress to Fix
No Child Left Behind, Announces Flexibility in Exchange for Reform for Ten States.” 9
Feb. 2012. Web. Press release. 20 Feb. 2012.
Stephanie Morris Malory Klocke No Child Left Behind vs. A (n.d.).educateiowa.gov. Retrieved March 14, 2014, from http://faculty.mccneb.edu/mbklocke/Comp%
Obama, B. (n.d.). White House. “Remarks by the President on No Child Left Behind Flexibility.” Retrieved March 15, 2014. Iowa Department of Education. “No Child Left Behind”. Iowa Department of Education.
U.S. Department of Education. “A Blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.” Ed.gov. 2010. Web. 20 Feb. 2012.
U.S. Department of Education. “No Child Left Behind: A Parents Guide”. Ed.gov. 2003. Web. 20 Feb. 2012.
Cortazzi, M., & Jin, L. (1996). Cultures of learning: Language classrooms in China. In H. Coleman (Ed.), Society and the language classroom (pp. 169-206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
