I am interested in some research results showing poor results of NCLB. My experience in the school system that I work for has shown improvement since the beginning of NCLB. We did critisize the concept initially for “teaching to the test”, but as a school psychologist I have witnessed some very creative and innovative teachers who have developed children’s skills and increased their mastery test scores substantially. I hope you will hear from or about them.

The challenge to Americans today with Public Education, is not testing, but what is the vision for the future of education. The dysfunctional setting that most students have to endure is inhumane if this society deems itself a civilized, and intellectual society. Testing has not just been a winfall for corporations, but mediocre educators who have been blaming testing, students, and families for their own failure as educators. Like the Catholic church we have to not only acknowledge how the current teaching methods are outmoded, but weed out mediocre, and abusive educators from our schools as a priority, in order to save the minds, and spirit of our children. It is not just about money, but how much Americans value our children, which at the moment is not the case.

Of course, it is easy to criticize the ‘Teach to the Test’ mentality. I agree with that assessment. Yet, I also know that it is impossible to measure improvement (or lack thereof) without having some testing.

As a suburbanite who is involved in urban public education, I find it weird to see how few people mention the root reasons for the massive dysfunction in the large urban districts. Many of the students in the system come from households who have even larger problems to worry about (health, financial, safety etc.) and that clearly impacts what a teacher can achieve. Also, 1/3 or more of the students move often from district to district and that lack of continuity also impacts achievement.

A healthy, properly fed child can come to school ready to learn. The achievement gap can be conquered, but it will require political will. That will is not apparent in either of today’s candidates.

And also, I am certain the $100 million paid to Kaplan and Princeton Review could be better spent inside the district.

For a whole year, I studied the interactions of multicultural children in the school system during one of my fellowships at MIT. I designed a methodology based on year video study of how children learn. Then I worked for a company where I had to give standard tests to children in kinder, first, second, and fourth grades. Once the testing period was over, I provided a report to the supervisor of the company where I mentioned that
the testing was not profiting the students or teachers and that I had seen students waste time in the preparation and more appalling the frustration
and anxiety was reflected the day of the tests. In fact the day of the testing some of the kids w pee in their pants and cried. The next year, I applied for the same job and was told that I did not know how to give tests.

The above experience show me how oppressive and out of context with our present educational needs the testing process is. The teacher spent half a semester regurgitating the same material to all students. The process did not consider the student’s background, his or her hobbies, his or her aptitudes, his or her culture, his or her qualifications in the visual,
auditory,or linguistic skills.

I am artist who pioneered computer graphics applications in the 80’s and have designed several internet based projects. My major projects is the
documentation of the two largest urban renovations at the turn of the century: Boston’s Big Dig- 1997-2007 and Berlin, Germany- 1994-2004. I was brought up bilingual, speak and read three languages, and have learned to
navigate other cultures. All of the above are needed to survive our increasingly international competitive interactions in an economy that demands educational leadership.

The testing companies are reaping millions of dollars in contracts without providing innovation, technology and necessary training that address the real needs of our communities. The testing companies are oppressive cookie
cutters that do not consider individuality, freedom of educational choice, and background- the core of democracy.

I dream of the day that all of those testing companies with the millions provide the schools with a self pace computer graphics database with fungames that address science, math, geography, English, history etc. In
addition, the teachers need to be trained to interact as friends that motivate and provide positive self-esteem to students. All children deserve kind human understanding, they must be treated with the highest standards and not with a fearful standard testing preparation that leads to zero creativity.

Furthermore, you’ve finished covering the future of education within the testing system and the word creativity and the role of physical activity, and role of positive social interactions were not mentioned.

Of course, it is easy to criticize the ‘Teach to the Test’ mentality. I agree with that assessment. Yet, I also know that it is impossible to measure improvement (or lack thereof) without having some testing.

As a suburbanite who is involved in urban public education, I find it weird to see how few people mention the root reasons for the massive dysfunction in the large urban districts. Many of the students in the system come from households who have even larger problems to worry about (health, financial, safety etc.) and that clearly impacts what a teacher can achieve.

I agree on both counts. Some kind of testing is necessary because it’s the only way you can evaluate whether your educational programs are working.

Also I think too much emphasis is oplaced on the schools and teachers and not enough is placed on the family and larger society.

My wife taught grade school for 7 years in a Masschusetts city and the lack of engagement by parents was a big problem she’s mentioned from that time. If parents don’t reinforce the importance of education in the home it ain’t gonna happen in the school!

What’s interesting to me is that there are broad differences in educational attainment between different ethnic groups which, in my opinion, reflect cultural values. Jewish and Chinese, students, for instance have traditionally done well. And even though today these groups are economically successful, they produced good students from the get-go when they were poor. I collect folk stories from different cultures as a hobby and what’s striking is that the folk stories from the above cultures have often honored scholars and learned people as their heroes, whereas other cultures (e.g., my own Scandinavian one) are more apt to select warriors as folk-heroes. If the child gets a consistent message that being a scholar, being a learned person, is a great and honorable thing he’s more apt to do well in school.

And, in general, our US culture does not honor scholarship and learning. We honor making money, being a rock (or rap) star, being a sports hero, etc. This message comes through loud and clear to kids. I was a good student and was also an amateur astronomer and ham radio operator as a kid, but luckily I went to school where it was “cool” to be smart. But my wife, who was an even better student than I was, went to a school where it was uncool to be smart and she was very unhappy. Smart students are often picked on and ostracized, especially in urban schools.

The testing companies are reaping millions of dollars in contracts without providing innovation, technology and necessary training that address the real needs of our communities. The testing companies are oppressive cookie
cutters that do not consider individuality, freedom of educational choice, and background- the core of democracy.

They’re just testing companies – it’s not their job to provide pedagogic material or educate children.

The purpose of testing is to evaluate how effective our educational systems are. If different kids have different learning styles then it’s up to the schools to adjust their teaching methods accordingly.

But in the end we need to get to a point where high school graduates know, say, algebra, and the only way to tell whether they do is to test them. The fact that African American kids, Hispanic kids, and WASP kids might need different pedagocical methods to get there doesn’t change the fact that in the end they all have to do it.

Real Ed Reform:

1. Genuine interest is the engine of education.
2. Encouragement works, compulsion doesn’t.
3. More of the same won’t work.
4. Children come into the world interested and ready to learn.
5. Our law does not allow the Legislature to compel ANYTHING regarding education, but it does have a duty to ENCOURAGE. Encouragement and compulsion are mutually exclusive.
6. Real Ed Reform: Parents free to determine the education of their children, our Legislatures and Magistrates limited to encouraging the interests of Literature, etc. per Chapter V, Section II:

Chapter V, Section II.
The Encouragement of Literature, etc.

Wisdom, and knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people, being necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties; and as these depend on spreading the opportunities and advantages of education in the various parts of the country, and among the different orders of the people, it shall be the duty of legislatures and magistrates, in all future periods of this commonwealth, to cherish the interests of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries of them; especially the university at Cambridge, public schools and grammar schools in the towns; to encourage private societies and public institutions, rewards and immunities, for the promotion of agriculture, arts, sciences, commerce, trades, manufactures, and a natural history of the country; to countenance and inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and frugality, honesty and punctuality in their dealings; sincerity, good humor, and all social affections, and generous sentiments among the people.

Enough about the testing involved with No Child Left Behind, it is a liberal canard. Look, if you can’t measure something you can’t compare it to other things nor track how it is doing over time. what’s the big deal, some of the best learning is done against a deadline. Its life.

The unions don’t want you to know how their doing and throwing up a whole lot of smoke so they won’t have to be compared to others. I say just offer a competitive alternative to a public school education and let each parent decide where to send their children and the competitive market place will fix the problem.

“Enough about the testing involved with No Child Left Behind, it is a liberal canard. The unions don’t want you to know how their doing and throwing up a whole lot of smoke so they won’t have to be compared to others.”

Those are grand statements with no facts to support them. Liberals in general end up with greater scholastic achievement than so-called conservatives. American workers (including Union Members) have worked hard these past decades with little to no increase in their wages. The CEO’s on the other hand have had a 400% increase in their salaries-including those who run companies to the ground. Where are the tests to evaluate THEIR lack of competence?
Attacking labor unions is the old slimely republican tactic.

“I say just offer a competitive alternative to a public school education and let each parent decide where to send their children and the competitive market place will fix the problem.”

The “competitive marketplace will fix the problem” as they have with the current housing crisis, the contractors in Iraq, the contractors in charge of cleaning up after Hurricane Katrina, out-sourcing domestic security to private companies who review travel records of congress members?

Even fiscal conservatives have enough shame to use the “competitive marketplace” card, McCain and his supporters appear to be the only people in America oblivious to the failures of the last 7years.

I say just offer a competitive alternative to a public school education and let each parent decide where to send their children and the competitive market place will fix the problem.

The flaw in that thesis is that many parents, especially in low income and disadvantaged communities, do not, themselves, value education!

They don’t know why it’s important, they don’t read recreationally, they don’t take an interest in their kids’ schoolwork or homework, they don’t attend parent-teacher conferences, they don’t set a good example themselves, etc.

I believe standardized testing is helpful, it may not be perfect, but it is a good first step. Without some objective method to measure what the child has learned and how well the child has learned the material, it is difficult to determine whether or not the child has learned the material well enough to satisfy the standards set in society.

Another problem is that different schools and teachers have different standards, an A+ from one teacher/school may translate to a C+ from another teacher/school. This is why the test must be standardized.

I believe in the holistic approach, you must motivate the rational mind and the emotional mind.

Part 1: The Emotional Mind
Before the student can learn he/she must believe that they can learn, that learning is important, that they are not inherently defective, and that they are not destined to be low-achievers. I usually turn to motivational speakers like Zig Ziglar, Anthony Robbins, Napoleon Hill, and Steve Chandler for material. Sometimes I burn some CD’s or upload some Mp3’s so the students can listen to them over and over until they believe. Students first impression is that it is corny and overly sentimental, but once they get over that it starts to have some effect.

Part 2: The Rational Mind
Children and young adults want to learn, but life circumstances and personal habits inhibit the learning. Some students have to work to help support the family and some students have personal issues or “drama”, and some students have families that don’t value education all of which inhibit learning. Also, some students lack the consistency, discipline, and habits to learn.

So what do we do, given that we have limited time, keep it simple:

1. Enforce Attendance

2. Make them study in class. Since many students may not have the time or inclination to develop the study habits to do well on tests, you have to make them develop those habits. I used to give homework assignments which they almost never did, so I made them study and do homework in class. By study I mean actually process information, not just stare at a book. Mostly individual work, no groups.

3. Test them everyday. I compiled a bank of tests, and gave them a part of the test everyday (the complete test is too long to be given in class) and I made sure they improved their scores weekly. Sometimes I took the test ahead of time to determine the fastest and most efficient way to answer the questions. Using the strategies and techniques from the SAT is very helpful.

4. Always keep them busy, if they are done with a test or done studying, have another test or study assignment ready.

P.S. I have had much success using the methods above. One girl who believed she could never learn geometry (a requirement for the test) thanked me because she had finally mastered geometry.

The attitude with which you approach the students, the test, and education matters much as well. You can be very strict but if your attitude is positive, enthusiastic, and helpful then the students will see that, you are strict for their benefit not yours.

Let Mr. Holguin come into my classroom and tell the wonderfully sensitive, kind and perceptive student who has just tried to pass the math mcas for the third time that testing is the only way to measure quality. I can tell you that NO test teaches SKILLS (except test-taking skills) that people need to be good citizens in a free society. Those skills are learned by people (students) who WANT to learn, who are ENGAGED in an INSPIRED process of questioning, discovery, and self-evaluation. There is no ‘quality’ test or standard that induces this process….lots of good teachers who know how to humanize and individualize, but no test.

I agree with Camila Chavez that schools could encourage the curiosity and creativity of students instead of resorting to non-stop teaching to the test (which will of course improve test results but at what cost?). We have always used standardized tests, at least in my lifetime, but they were indicators of achievement and potential rather than ends in themselves.

Another issue is the unpaid overtime that charter schools expect of their teachers. One glowing report said that all the teachers at a “model” school were working at least 60 hour weeks. If workers, as good citizens and community members, are expected to be active in politics, religion or philosophy, the arts, and to keep their bodies and minds in healthy condition, not to mention being good family members and friends — they need time! Young or unemployed teachers may agree to work unpaid overtime but that is not a good solution. Even from the “entrepreneurial” viewpoint those teachers will eventually become stale or burnt-out.

I consider myself an excellent teacher who has learned a couple of languages to keep up with student diversity and who has earned two Masters Degrees along the way. I taught before unionization and after and I will say that the union at least looks out for teacher rights and welfare. I don’t mind being underpaid relative to my level of education but I would mind being exploited by private sector entrepreneurs!

Your caller, Neil, hit it right on the head!!!! Where is parental accountability?!!! Schools and teachers can’t do it all!!!

I can tell you that NO test teaches SKILLS (except test-taking skills) that people need to be good citizens in a free society.

But that’s a straw man argument. Tests are not intended to “teach” anything! Their purpose is to allow society and taxpayers to evaluate how well kids are learning certain subjects which modern societies need their citizens to know. How do YOU suggest we accomplish that goal?

I’ve seen the MCAS tests here in Massachusetts – they’re not very hard. There’s no reason why a teacher should feel a need to “teach to the test” – if the kids just master the basic subjects in the course of their normal schoolwork they will do fine.

Look, I work for a major high tech company and my industry has been one of the groups lobbying for standardized testing. Don’t you care if these kids can hold down a job as adults? Too many kids are graduating from high school unprepared for the rigors of college. Meanwhile US companies like mine cannot find enough skilled US workers so we end up hiring Indian and Chinese workers.

There is no ‘quality’ test or standard that induces this process….lots of good teachers who know how to humanize and individualize, but no test.

But without stardadized tests how can I verify that my community has “lots of good teachers who know how to humanize and individualize”, and that they are doing these things effectively?

The compulsory attendance statute (1853) turned the responsibility for educating children over to government. Given the implied promise to educate, why should parents be involved?
When the authority comes from parents, as it naturally does, and should, teachers act “in loco parentis,” answering to parents, not the Legislature.
Re-institute THAT system and you’ll see parents getting involved again. The bottom line is that the present system, ordering parents to send their children to school as it does, disrespects parents and, by extension, their children as well.

The compulsory attendance statute (1853) turned the responsibility for educating children over to government. Given the implied promise to educate, why should parents be involved?

Because they want well-educated children?

As I said above, there are huge differences in the educational achievement of different cultures and ethnic groups and these differences can be traced directly to the involvement of parents in the educational activities of their children – creating a home environment that teaches respect for scholars and scholarship, monitoring homework and grades, meeting regularly with teachers and school officials, setting a good example with regard to study and work habits, etc.

Here in Massachusetts school control is local – school budgets, teaching methods, resources, schedules, etc are all set locally. There is a huge opportunity for parents to be involved in all aspects of education.

My wife and I don’t even have kids, but we care about education so we sat on school management councils in our town for the high-school and a middle school, respectively, and it was amazing how few parents actually turned out to participate in important matters regarding school operations! And of course, the parents who did turn out were parents of the best students, because those are the sorts of parents who care.

I teach at a school that is presently in school improvement under NCLB. Like most teachers, I care about my students and want only the best for them, so I’ve looked into some of these successful charter school programs like KIPP. They are wonderful schools having great success where traditional schools have not, but they do not have open enrollment in the same way a public school must. They do not accept more students than their set student to teacher ratio; at the school I work at our class sizes are above thirty students–we are over four weeks into school and more students are coming. We are not allowed to turn them away. In order to attend a KIPP school, the students and parents must commit in writing to KIPP’s high academic and behavioral standards. Thus, only students who have parental support are enrolled. If the students or parents do not live up to those standards they return to public schools. A student with special need who wishes to enter a charter school that lacks facilities or staff for that student’s challenges (adult changing tables, elevators, ramps, people to aide in changing adult diapers, feeding) can’t enroll. When that happens (and it has at my school) we must build the facility and hire the staff without receiving additional funds.
Yes, many charter schools are successful, and we in the public schools can learn from them. But unless public schools are given the freedom to turn away students, they cannot be expected to have the same success.
I’m not leaving my public school to look for work in a charter school. We will not turn students away. We are succeeding eighty-five percent of what is asked of us under NCLB. (Of course, any school that is not making a 100 is a failure according to this legislation.) Someone must strive to educate even the students who do not have their parents support. Someone needs the facilities to work with kids with wonderful minds even if their bodies do not match. That is our job. We accept it. Where is our support?

I was struck by your reference to the Mastery Charter schools in Philadelphia. I am an educator, who has worked in many difference parts of education, inner city and suburban, college, consulting in all levels and locations, policy (school board), and state-wide. I have never seen a school like Mastery Charter High School with its unusually high level of community among students and teachers/administrators, inspirational teaching, and safe and orderly environment for all (emotionally as well as otherwise). Teachers and administrators are dedicated and willing to spend many more hours and days including evenings than many of their counterparts (extra time is always a negotiated item). I believe strongly in public education but have been saddened by the stultifying effect of teacher unions (I know they were needed at the beginning), which have protected poor teachers and prevented teachers from spending extra time, schools from extending the school day, and systems from offering more innovative subject matter. I understand that we have a public that thinks we should get something for nothing (lower taxes–always is the cry) and there is nothing I’d like more than higher wages for teachers. But in the meantime we have public schools struggling to stay afloat and students getting away with poor behavior (parents bear a responsibility here) and weak academics. Mastery Charter School is a diamond on the horizon. I am pleased you mentioned these schools and Philadelphia’s innovative superintendent.

The popular educational approach of today is highly decorated with such qualifying terms as a learner’s brain hemispheric orientation,differentiated instruction, cooperation, higher order thinking, critical thinking, and creativity, to name a few. In turn, concepts such as repetition, memorization, practice, drills, competition, and tests, which are some of the necessary ingredients for successful learning and mastery of anything important in life(let alone academia) have been vilified by those who blindly follow the herd without much needed ‘critical thinking’ of their own.

My involvement with the American public educational system during the past 3 years has given me daily opportunities to witness and experience the prevalent approach at work, and it has led me to believe that the ‘progressive’ approach has resulted in its own convoluted set of unique problems.

At the high school level, constructing an edible cell model with various food items, performing a dance while pretending to be molecules, drawing a stick figure cartoon strip to demonstrate the mastery of a algebraic concept, or making a compilation music CD that captures the essence of a literature lesson, are all passed as exemplary authentic assessments; all too often replacing traditional paper- and- pencil based tests. Unfortunately, the focus of such assessments have invariably shifted from core knowledge and skills to cosmetic contributions. While I agree that a variety of authentic and learner-centered assessments are praise-worthy, the frequently misguided zeal for sunny education is employed to the nth degree; a degree at which teachers and administrators alike lose sight of the essential objectives at hand while rejoicing in the idea of idealized education in the current educational atmosphere. Naturally, I find myself asking: for whom are all these frills? The students?… or the adults who are constantly documenting all the ‘good things’ they do for the students?

The most problematic of all, though, is that the popular educational buzz words that reach many students effectively corrode the sense of responsibility they should have as learners. (i.e.” It’s not my fault that I don’t understand it. I am not an analytic learner”, ” I can’t do math, but I am very creative… I doodle a lot and stuff.” ” Can I, like, instead of taking the test, do an interpretive dance…?) This inevitably brings up the issue of self-control, discipline, delaying gratification, and perseverance, which should be reserved for another thread of its own.

All these certainly come to a screeching halt when it comes to the final litmus tests that often tip the scale in our lives; I refer to the various standardized tests (written, performance, or otherwise): from SAT and ACT to a simple driver’s license test, military recruitment test, bar exam, teaching licensure test, cosmetology licensure, etc.

The goal of education is to produce well rounded learners who can keep learning autonomously outside the boundaries of school…,who can successfully apply acquired knowledge, values, and skills in the real world, which, among other things, includes effectively demonstrating what he/she can do even if the assessment format is not to his/her liking without throwing a temper tantrum. Focusing on just a couple of presumed strengths in the training gym that is our schools, is just as limiting as the presumably antiquated fundamentalist educational approach.

Highly coveted higher order thinking, critical thinking, and creativity do not just fall into someone’s lap or cultivate themselves any more than does an open field to productive farmland. A sound base of general knowledge in various subjects is a prerequisite, which standardized tests effectively and efficiently quantify. Therefore, teaching to the test is matter of factly a sensible step for a responsible teacher to take towards leading students to think for themselves; creatively or otherwise. A student who is full of raw imagination, yet does not meet established standards, will be greatly hindered in materializing his/her flares of imagination into something more than a five second thought. Only by owning applicable facts, evidence, and skills as well as practicing how to piece them together will he/she become truly creative as opposed to being just imaginative. The key to becoming more proficient at this is certainly time on task. (i.e. adequate drills and practice)

This summer in Beijing, Michael Phelps earned the gold medal in 100m butterfly by being a creative swimmer. Although taking an extra stroke at the finish is known to be a conventional no-no, noticing that he was behind Cavic, and knowing that he would have no chance at winning if he just glided to the wall, Phelps decided to take the extra stroke. As we all know, he won by a margin of 0.01 second, which made the simultaneously tiniest and biggest difference in the pool that day. The clever leap of thought sparked spontaneously at such an intense moment, combined with the technique and endurance to successfully execute the move is a truly inspiring example of creative problem solving. Certainly, such creativity would not have been at Phelps’ disposal had it not been for the thousands and thousands of days spent in repetitive training; after all, creativity is the product of a single minded immersion.

I am so tired of hearing about education in America. The child will on become a successful student if the parents and the child work together each night studying together. Learning is a long, lonely process that takes discipline and desire. I work a part time job to pay for private school for my two children. I sit along side them each night to ensure they study and quiz them after they are done. It’s going to be a long process for the next 12 years but I look forward to it.

There are so many comments and views about education. There are so many children in so many communities and each is an individual given their own strengths and talents, their own challenges and limitations.

We are country that is committed in principle to the development of individual, in the pursuit of prosperity and happiness. Yet these tests are inflicted on children at younger and younger ages.

Most professionals do pass exams to be certified in their fields. This they do after they have personally selected their strength and chose the education they needed to prepare for the exam.

Little children in our nation’s schools are discovering their strengths and talents, learning about their limits and challenges and should not be subjected to tests that are dubious in assessing their progress.

Please, parents and teachers, we have to stop letting the politicians dictate to the schools. Government should support quality education by listening to educators and providing what children need based on the assessment of the professionals.

[...] Good discussion from NPR’s On Point. [...]

hey im in that trinity picture