A column by Chris Hedges. Comment is invited.
"We spurn real teachers—those with the capacity to inspire children to think, those who help the young discover their gifts and potential—and replace them with instructors who teach to narrow, standardized tests. These instructors obey. They teach children to obey. And that is the point. The No Child Left Behind program, modeled on the "Texas Miracle," is a fraud. It worked no better than our deregulated financial system. But when you shut out debate these dead ideas are self-perpetuating."
I have mixed feelings on this one, not because I approve of No Child Left Behind (or, as I tend to think about it, Every Child Left Behind), but because I have seen teachers either manage to perform despite the system or become assimilated, resistance being futile. Absolutely I have also seen "instructors" who obey. I can't really call them teachers, because they don't really teach. I get the feeling that those teachers I have observed excel despite the system were teachers long before NCLB came into existence, and so were able to overcome challenges that came in their way. Younger teachers haven't had the chance to develop their teaching methods outside NCLB, so they likely don't know anything else, and won't get the chance to discover anytime soon. What we get, then, are a bunch of teachers stuck in a perpetual cocoon that an overly concerned government system is keeping them in. The end result? A country of mediocrity where no one is able to excel, and everyone is left to fail.
ReplyDeleteLief, I understand your point, but I disagree with your statement that "Younger teachers haven't had the chance to develop their teaching methods outside NCLB, so they likely don't know anything else, and won't get the chance to discover anytime soon". When I began teaching in 2004, the NCLB was in full effect. Now this does not mean that I do not address the standards, but when you are working with students who are surrounded with difficult circumstances (as I experienced when I began my career in one of the most chaotic high schools in Los Angeles), a teacher has to come up with creative methods to engage the students, otherwise the teacher has no ability to control the classroom. Now back to the standards, they were somewhat helpful for me in the beginning because they helped me develop some kind of structure, but once I had an idea about the structure, I found my own way, using more experienced teachers as a resource. Although the standards tied to the NCLB (at least to me) are not such a big deal, standardized testing is another story. The tests are not an accurate account of a students progress. Just a snapshot, but unfortunately too many politicians do not feel this way. I have no qualms about assessing student performance, but would likes to see a better method. What would be a more ideal way to assess an English teacher would be: at the beginning of the year students on a teacher's roster should take a test measuring the students reading comprehension skills and writing skills, then at the years end another test should be given assessing the same skills. This would be a much more effective way to measure the performance of a teacher, but it would be way too expensive, so the politicians would probably disagree. So, yes I agree the NCLB is ridiculous, but teachers who enter the profession for the right reasons and have the ability to work with children, then they will survive and be successful educators.
ReplyDeleteNow in terms of mediocrity, in some ways the NCLB opens the doors for innovation and a more creative approach. There is no one answer and I am not a huge charter school fan, but a little competition is a good thing. For example, the school that I now work at is know as a middle college. The school is located on a junior college campus and students take college level courses in conjunction with high school curriculum. Granted, students have to apply to the school and we have the ability to be more strict with them than a transitional high school, yet the school targets minority students of poverty, who typically come from a home where the parents did not attend college. The results are phenomenal,our school is one of the higher scoring high schools in Los Angeles and we have students who come from difficult impoverished neighborhoods, whose parents do not speak English and the students get full ride scholarships to Harvard, Berkley or John Hopkins on occasion, along with a majority of the students getting an associates' degree free of charge.
So allow me to reiterate, although I dislike the NCLB, it does not have to breed mediocrity. When there is a will, there is a way. Who really needs to be held accountable is a government who prefers to fund wars as opposed to education. It is our government who is leaving the children behind. Maybe it is about time that we form a NALB bill: No Americans Left Behind. Well, that is my rant regarding the NCLB.