NCTE Member Responses to the Question:

Please describe the most important ways that your work as a literacy educator has changed since the passage of NCLB.
(April 2006 survey on NCLB). 

"I've had to accommodate the NCLB policies, so that students can score better on these tests. Rather than accommodate the students and provide them with what they both need and want (i.e. for both survival and personal interest in their own lives) in terms of literacy skills for functioning and progressing in real life. Although I feel the tests are helpful in identifying their knowledge in certain areas; I do not believe that they reveal the entire picture of the students' abilities. Also, teaching to the test does not help students retain the knowledge they are tested on or provide them with a truly well-rounded education of skills and knowledge they will need for real life. Thus, neither student or teacher can be held 'accountable' as if these scores are indicative of complete ability or skill. Sometimes it is as simple as, a student does not test well."

". . . for three years I taught in [a] low performing school . . . students who were deemed not able to pass the tests were often neglected, while extra attention was given to students 'on the cusp,' or right on the line of achieving a higher score that would make the school look better. Test prep started in October and continued on an increasing schedule, with nothing but test prep from December to April in my class. I watched kids lose interest in school as we went through workbook after workbook of the same basic reading skills over and over again. We also had full-length practice tests on a regular basis which took away from teaching time. On top of that, students only had science and social studies three times a week, periods that were often eaten up by holidays, practice tests, etc. One time I realized that I had taught social studies to one class once in two weeks.  We are now spending one day a week on direct test prep. for the ACT and PSAE, IL's tests. We have lost two full novels a year, and have had to reduce the poetry we can study. We're creating an inequitable system where rich kids whose schools can escape NCLB because they don't need federal funds can get a well-rounded education, while poor kids are left to drill and drill and lose any motivation to come to school. Classes that motivate my kids to come to school but which are not tested for are no longer options for the lower-level kids who need them and enjoy them most. Furthermore, the system of testing is completely unrealistic."

"Because our demography serves 80 % poverty, predominantly non-standard speakers of English, NCLB has hindered the education process. The teachers sacrifice nearly 6 weeks of instructional time yearly for state-mandated or district-mandated assessments. The children whom we serve, already behind in basic skills, need the instructional time."

"My professional judgment is not important. I am made to use materials that do not reach all students and I am required to use these materials exclusively. As a result I see many students falling through the cracks because I am made to solely depend on these new programs. When the student's fail to past the tests the blame falls on the teachers and we have become very frustrated."

"It has created two camps of students. Those who can pass the test on their own and those who cannot. We have a lot of interventions for lower-level students but do not provide enough attention to servicing our gifted and talented children. I think GT kids are strongly disserviced by the testing mania."

"I feel as if it is increasingly difficult to inspire children to be lifelong readers when their entire self-worth as a reader and writer is being measured by a single test on a single school day. Students hate reading now more than ever and many are being increasingly 'left behind' as they struggle to pass a test that is well beyond what is appropriate for their particular reading level. Some students are slow learners and yet are miraculously gifted individuals in other areas. We're basically discounting any growth that they do make in the areas of literacy by reinforcing the idea that it's not good enough. No matter their accomplishments (2 years' growth in 1 year's time), they are not deemed significant or worthy unless they meet grade-level expectations. This cookie-cutter approach to education assumes that all students are identical when indeed they are not and leaves more children behind than ever before by refusing to acknowledge the care and services they need as individuals."

"We have less time in our schools for integrated, cross-curricular units at the secondary level with time for workshop approach in which students read, write, speak, and listen actively and collaboratively in a 'process approach.' External motivation and pressure -- attaining school and district AYP while increasing test results -- has taken the place of student-directed, motivated, passionate learning."