Introduction
This week’s reading focused on NCLB (No Child Left Behind) and its impact on education in the United States. The questions that now arise at this critical moment in our nation’s educational process are, Where do we go from here? What has NCLB done for our level of educational attainment? Does NCLB matter? One reading focused on the data that leads us to think NCLB is helping improve the educational standards and achievement of our nation (Math and Science), yet others retort NCLB and its stringent criterion that some believe are severely reducing the chances of providing our students a citizenship education.
The Statistics Don’t Lie???
Dee and Jacobs (2010) used statistical evidence to show that NCLB has in fact raised achievement levels over the past decade in the areas of Math and Science, particularly in the subgroups of African-Americans, Hispanics, and the group that receives subsidized lunch. I can understand why this has happened. Before NCLB, students who were not meeting academic goals and keeping up with the rest of the class were sometimes left by the wayside because accountability didn’t exist. So, if Johnny wasn’t performing, who cares? But now, a teacher’s job is based on whether Johnny passes the test, so by golly, Johnny is going to get all the help he can get to learn the material. Conversely, I also feel that teachers lower the academic level of the teaching in order to bring the bottom to meet the average, essentially bringing the top down and shifting the bell curve to the left. Further investigation needs to be led into this area.
Great Leadership Will Make or Break You
Singh and Fadhli (2011) researched three schools in the Mississippi Delta and looked into how the administration of each school reacted to NCLB and its subsequent effort to bring up or maintain their schools at the achievement levels mandated by NCLB. Principals have a greater degree of accountability when faced with NCLB, and this causes greater stress but can lead to new innovations to get all parties involved so success can be attained. All-in-all, the researchers found that the administration (principals) were key contributors to policy and structural changes that facilitated a more conducive environment to meet such stringent criteria laid out by the national policy. They found that principals who set a tone for success through parental involvement, professional development, teacher accountability, positive atmosphere, and capitalized on legacy and teamwork created conditions that could meet and sustain such criterion. With any business model, a great leader is the cornerstone of a great team, which equals great success. Without such conditions through superb leadership skills, schools are doomed for failure.
There Might Be a Little Dust on the Bottle, But Don’t Let it Fool You about What’s Inside
Speaking to authoritative structures and what how educational structures are facing a critical path to cross in relation to our educational system, Fleury (2011) discusses the different educational theorists of our recent history and how even today their debates are still salient. In today’s era of standardized testing and high stakes accountability, Fleury reaches back and relates the theories and beliefs of Dewey, Freedmen, and others in order to shed light on the question that is knocking at our nation’s door, “Where do we go from here?” Standardized testing pounds knowledge into our students, while many educators want their students to think for themselves, not merely be memory-recall machines with disjointed knowledge like a lunch buffet counter. He cites those that argue that our nation is corporatized while our youth are lethargic and apathetic. This certainly creates a problem for those that wish to change our system. Without the tools and minds to think critically, we will continue to complain and do nothing about our situation that is threatening our country with extinction. While Dewey’s stance on critical agency and changing culture through the tiers of teachers and education were novel and wild at the time, they seem to be very real and usable in today’s context.
Don’t Ignite the Fire
The last article I read put a personal perspective on all this. Stephen Chandler (2006) gave his personal experience with trying to teach a citizenship education. He used Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States to promote critical thinking and another view of history. Chandler only wanted his students to view history with the lens of the ‘other’ and gain perspectives from all different angles beside the Anglo-centric paternalistic view of American history. In doing so, he outraged parents and nearly created a controversy that was shown on national news. Chandler reflects on his experiences and offers sound advice to those who wish to incorporate teaching that may differ from the traditionalist standpoint. He advises those such as myself (being a future teacher) to get everyone on board and make everyone aware of what may be planned before jumping headfirst into the stream. Basically, get approval and support by knowing the district, school, populace, and the leaders before you ignite a flame that may not be put out until you are whisked right out of town.
Remarks
I think this week’s readings brought to the forefront the critical time our nation is facing is the arena of education. Do we continue NCLB? What do we do if we don’t? What will it take for our leaders to allow teachers to enact educational practices that enforce critical thinking skills and molding our students into successful leaders and citizens who are prepared for our global economy? I guess we will have to keep watching our corporatized news and see who wins the battle….!!!
Dee, T., & Jacob, B. (2010). Evlauating NCLB. Education Next, 10(3). Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/evaluating-nclb/
Singh, M., & Al-Fadhli, H. (2011). Does School Leadership Matter in the NCLB Era? Journal of Black Studies, 42, 751-767.
Fleury, S. (2011). Playing with Fire, or the Stuffing of Dead Animals: Freire, Dewey, and the Dilemma of Social Studies Reform. Educational Studies, 47(1), 71-91.
Chandler, P. (2006). Academic freedom: A teacher’s struggle to include “other” voices in history. Social Education, 70(6), 354-357.
No comments:
Post a Comment