@Pinochet73,
Pinochet73;34689 wrote:Good program. Without it, there would be no universal standard.
Good program. Really. Would you care to explain the benefits of the "good program"....? It doesn't work....children are being left behind....
Read it ....if you're able....you might be one of those that got left behind.
No Child Left Behind:
Misguided Approach to School Accountability
for English Language Learners
By James Crawford, Executive Director
National Association for Bilingual Education
September 14, 2004
?It is crucial ? to include all students in testing designed to hold teachers and administrators accountable for the education they are providing these students. However, testing students whose language skills are likely to significantly affect their test performance will
yield inaccurate results. ? The aggregate performance of language
subgroups that are inappropriately tested can be seriously misunderstood,
and decisions influenced by invalid test results
can have a significant impact on their lives.?
? National Research Council (2000)
?There is always an easy solution to every human problem ?
neat, plausible, and wrong.?
? H. L. Mencken (1917)
Holding schools accountable for results is a goal with broad support among the American public, policymakers, and educators themselves. There is a growing recognition that our children deserve no less ? especially children whose academic needs have often been ignored, leading to achievement gaps that no just society should tolerate. The consensus falls apart, however, when it comes to means: how to design accountability systems that yield fair, accurate, and useful information on which to base decisions about school improvement. What kinds of oversight will ensure that students are achieving to their full potential, yet avoid arbitrary, one-size-fits-all mandates that disrupt the educational process? In short, how can we ensure that the ?solution? does not exacerbate the problem?
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is the latest attempt to resolve this question. The law?s aims are worthy. Unfortunately, its approach to school accountability is overly rigid, punitive, unscientific, and likely to do more harm than good for the students who are now being left behind. Nowhere is this more true than in the case of English language learners (ELLs).
In 2001, the National Association for Bilingual Education (NABE) supported passage of this legislation. We hoped that its stress on high standards for all students, combined with enforceable requirements for meeting those standards, would lead schools to pay increased attention to the academic progress of ELLs. That has indeed occurred. But experience has also shown that NCLB is not bringing the kind of attention that would benefit these children.
2
To the contrary, the law does little to address the most formidable obstacles to their achievement: resource inequities, critical shortages of teachers trained to serve ELLs, inadequate instructional materials, substandard school facilities, and poorly designed instructional programs. Meanwhile, its emphasis on short-term test results ? backed up by punitive sanctions for schools ? is narrowing the curriculum, encouraging excessive amounts of test preparation, undercutting best practices based on scientific research, demoralizing dedicated educators, and pressuring schools to abandon programs that have proven successful for ELLs over the long term.
After just two years, NCLB is clearly failing to meet its goals. By setting arbitrary and unrealistic targets for student achievement, this accountability system cannot distinguish between schools that are neglecting ELLs and those that are making improvements. As achievement targets become increasingly stringent, virtually all schools serving ELLs are destined to be branded failures. The inevitable result will be to derail efforts toward genuine reform. Ultimately, a misguided accountability system means no accountability at all.
For the full article: users.rcn.com/crawj/langpol/Crawford_NCLB_Misguided_Approach_for_ELLs.pdf -
