Literacy

My views concerning NCLB are mixed since I was teaching in the public schools prior to NCLB and witnessed the impact of the legislation. As I think of NCLB, teachers need to employ best practices and there needs to be a level of measurement to determine if students are making progress. Student progress can be measured by comparing standardized test scores to note progress. I see the need for state testing as a method to ensure students are exposed to the same standards, regardless of economic status. For me, the problem is with the interpretation of the scores and the need to compare districts and professionals. Teachers can only move a child forward by using best practices and providing an enriched learning environment. 

When applying the accountability to low-income and ELL students, I have a concern. We recognize students do not arrive the first day of kindergarten with the same life experiences. As educators, we recognize the background of each child and work to provide engaging educational opportunities. In the example of ELL students, picture a case where a student has been engaged in learning English for one year. Chances are this student lives in a bilingual home so the only English instruction happens in the school. Would this child be ready to pass a state standardized test after only a year? I would argue no. I don't feel it's realistic to expect all children to perform at the same level at the same time.

My opinion concerning NCLB would be to use the testing portion included in the legislation as a tool to measure the progress of each student - not as a tool to show how "excellent" our schools are or aren't.