Obama offers blueprint for rewriting NCLB
Plan calls for states to adopt standards and assessments that ensure students are ready for college or a career, rather than focusing on grade-level proficiency
From staff and wire reports
Read more by staff and wire services reports
The blueprint goes before the House Education and Labor Committee on March 17.
President Barack Obama on March 13 unveiled a plan to overhaul the 2002 No Child Left Behind education law championed by President George W. Bush. The plan aims to replace a system that in the last decade has tagged more than a third of schools as failing and created a hodgepodge of sometimes weak academic standards among states.
“Unless we take action—unless we step up—there are countless children who will never realize their full talent and potential,” Obama said during a video address. “I don’t accept that future for them. And I don’t accept that future for the United States of America.”
In the proposed dismantling of NCLB, education officials would move away from punishing schools that don’t meet benchmarks and focus on rewarding schools for progress, particularly with poor and minority students. Obama intends to send a rewrite of the law to Congress on March 15.
The proposed changes call for states to adopt standards that ensure students are ready for college or a career rather than grade-level proficiency—the focus of the current law.
The blueprint also would allow states to use subjects other than reading and mathematics as part of their measurements for meeting federal goals, a move that could please some NCLB critics who have said the current law encourages schools not to focus on history, art, science, social studies, and other important subjects.
And, for the first time in 45 years, the White House is proposing a $4 billion increase in federal education spending, most of which would go to increase the competition among states for grant money and move away from formula-based funding.
The blueprint goes before the House Education and Labor Committee on March 17 as Obama pushes Congress to reauthorize the education law this year, a time-consuming task that some observers say will be difficult.
Committee Chairman George Miller, a Democrat from California, praised Obama’s plan.
“This blueprint lays the right markers to help us reset the bar for our students and the nation,” Miller said in a prepared statement.
Meanwhile, the American Federation of Teachers, which represents more than 1.4 million educators nationwide, issued a statement March 13 criticizing the plan, saying “it just doesn’t make sense to have teachers—and teachers alone—bear the responsibility for school and student success.”
“It appears from our first review that despite some promising rhetoric, this blueprint places 100 percent of the responsibility on teachers and gives them zero percent authority,” the statement said.
Education Secretary Arne Duncan briefed a handful of governors, lawmakers, and education groups on the plan March 12, including Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue, a Republican.
“The governor is very supportive of the direction the secretary is going,” said Perdue’s spokesman, Chris Schrimpf.
Highlights from the blueprint include:
• By 2020, all students graduating from high school would need to be ready for college or a career. That’s a shift away from the current law, which calls for all students to be performing at grade level in reading and math by 2014.
• The Education Department (ED) would support the development of better state assessments that measure higher-order thinking skills and not just multiple-choice responses. States would get formula-based grants to redesign their assessments in reading and math to make sure they align with college and career-ready standards. ED also would offer grants to help states develop tests in other subjects, such as science and social studies—though these grants would be awarded on a competitive basis instead of by formula.
• A focus on effective teachers and principals would call on states and districts to develop systems for evaluating and supporting these individuals, based on student growth and other factors. The plan also calls for a new program that would support efforts to recruit, place, reward, retain, and promote effective teachers and principals and enhance the teaching profession.
afprc
March 15, 2010 at 2:10 pm
Though I appreciate the flavor of the changes in NCLB, I think it is important to note that preparing children for careers/college is only one aspect of a well-rounded education. Do we not want children to become good citizens? Do we not want children to become astute consumers? Do we not want children to find understanding and expression in the arts? NCLB did much to narrow the curriculum. Unfortunately, this focus will not expand that narrowing. Further, it is important that we not just evaluate educators or just set standards. We need to find ways to work together to teach all children to meet standards…this will take ongoing professional learning and much public support (not just dollars.)
afprc
March 15, 2010 at 2:10 pm
Though I appreciate the flavor of the changes in NCLB, I think it is important to note that preparing children for careers/college is only one aspect of a well-rounded education. Do we not want children to become good citizens? Do we not want children to become astute consumers? Do we not want children to find understanding and expression in the arts? NCLB did much to narrow the curriculum. Unfortunately, this focus will not expand that narrowing. Further, it is important that we not just evaluate educators or just set standards. We need to find ways to work together to teach all children to meet standards…this will take ongoing professional learning and much public support (not just dollars.)
lonni
March 15, 2010 at 2:36 pm
My problem with the changes to NCLB is that we are still using testing as a means of evaluating kids progress. Not all childen test well. If we still use testing as a way of measuring progress of a school ,then we are still encouraging the method that is being used in my district with my children which is “TEACH THE TEST”. My district placing a month of soild PSSA testing teaching on the kids. I don’t know why I even send my kid to school for that month because they don’t learn anything. I have to teach them their lessons because the homework is just assigned and in class they are taught how to pass the PSSA Test. If we really want to change NCLB then forget the testing and start looking at profiles on each child to show progress.
lonni
March 15, 2010 at 2:36 pm
My problem with the changes to NCLB is that we are still using testing as a means of evaluating kids progress. Not all childen test well. If we still use testing as a way of measuring progress of a school ,then we are still encouraging the method that is being used in my district with my children which is “TEACH THE TEST”. My district placing a month of soild PSSA testing teaching on the kids. I don’t know why I even send my kid to school for that month because they don’t learn anything. I have to teach them their lessons because the homework is just assigned and in class they are taught how to pass the PSSA Test. If we really want to change NCLB then forget the testing and start looking at profiles on each child to show progress.
supremebuddy
March 16, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Why do we focus so much on testing. Data driven instruction is extremely important, yet at the same time we are doing a huge injustice to our youth by NOT teaching in-depth on a few subjects. This is done in the Far East, but by demanding that students learn a pleuthroa of gobbly-gook, most students keep this in their short-term memory and dump what was learned as soon as testing is over. Why can’t we have a beginning of the year test to determine WHAT we need to teach and an end of the year test to see what has been learned. The curriculum objectives could be gleened from this invaluable data and this would free the teachers/administrators to enhance education…not test driven instruction. The two are incomparable. We also need to be teaching a strong social skills curriculum beginning with three year olds and extending to 12th grade. Project Wisdom is an invaluable curriculum that ingrains social skills into the educational culture devoid of bias and prejudice. We cannot begin to teach empty vessels who know nothing about social skills. This is beginning to affect our country in an extremely negative way and must come to a halt. A child cannot learn if the child does not know how to learn and NO test can teach that…only social skills programs such as Project Wisdom.
supremebuddy
March 16, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Why do we focus so much on testing. Data driven instruction is extremely important, yet at the same time we are doing a huge injustice to our youth by NOT teaching in-depth on a few subjects. This is done in the Far East, but by demanding that students learn a pleuthroa of gobbly-gook, most students keep this in their short-term memory and dump what was learned as soon as testing is over. Why can’t we have a beginning of the year test to determine WHAT we need to teach and an end of the year test to see what has been learned. The curriculum objectives could be gleened from this invaluable data and this would free the teachers/administrators to enhance education…not test driven instruction. The two are incomparable. We also need to be teaching a strong social skills curriculum beginning with three year olds and extending to 12th grade. Project Wisdom is an invaluable curriculum that ingrains social skills into the educational culture devoid of bias and prejudice. We cannot begin to teach empty vessels who know nothing about social skills. This is beginning to affect our country in an extremely negative way and must come to a halt. A child cannot learn if the child does not know how to learn and NO test can teach that…only social skills programs such as Project Wisdom.