Literacy Educators and the Public
Deeply Concerned about NCLB
The Council Chronicle Online, September 6, 2006
|
A National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) study of the experiences and perceptions of more than 2,000 literacy educators (April 2006) shows that among these teachers charged with implementing the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), 76% believe that the Act has had at least a somewhat negative influence on teaching and learning in English/reading classrooms. This study confirms findings from several recent public opinion polls that the more people know about NCLB, the more inclined they are to have an unfavorable opinion about its effects on public schools, teachers, and students. |
Virtually every poll shows public support for the four goals established by Congress when the No Child Left Behind Act was passed in 2001. But, literacy educators agree with the public that the law has failed to improve the education system for schools, teachers, students, and their families by not effectively meeting these goals. The table below shows a striking majority of literacy educators see NCLB as being ineffective when asked how well it was meeting its four stated goals:
|
Based on what you’ve seen in your school and classroom over the past four years, to what extent do you think NCLB has been effective in reaching the four reform goals described by the U.S. Department of Education? |
Generally ineffective (1 – 3 on a six point effectiveness scale) |
| Encouraging stronger accountability for results? |
58% |
| Providing more freedom for schools and communities? |
93% |
| Encouraging proven educational methods? |
81% |
| Providing more choices for parents? |
81% |
In addition, only 15% of literacy educators reported that NCLB has been effective in improving educational equity in their schools, a core rationale for passage of the Act in 2001.
Literacy educators are not alone in their concerns about NCLB implementation. As demonstrated by a recent Phi Delta Kappa (PDK)/Gallup Poll, while 55% of Americans still don’t know much about NCLB, among those who know at least a fair amount about the law, 47% have a generally unfavorable view of it compared to 42% who have a generally favorable view. These results are consistent with findings compiled by the Public Education Network (PEN) in nine public hearings held across the country between September 2005 and January 2006.
What’s the Problem with NCLB?
The views of literacy educators who participated in the NCTE study, respondents to the PDK public opinion poll, and those offering testimony at the PEN hearings converged on some of the underlying problems with the way NCLB has been implemented to date.
Results from Statewide High-Stakes Tests Are Poor Measures of School Performance
Seventy-two percent of respondents to the PDK poll who know at least a fair amount about NCLB felt that results from a single statewide test do not provide a fair picture of whether a public school is in need of improvement. Further, 67% of PDK respondents felt that the current educational environment encourages “teaching to the test” and three-fourths of those respondents thought that this was a “bad thing.”
In the NCTE study, participants weren’t asked specifically about state tests. However, overall, comments about the negative effects of testing outnumbered comments on positive effects by more than a fifteen to one margin. Eighty-six percent of NCTE study respondents report that more time is now spent on test preparation, while only 5% agree that students are positively motivated by test results.
Teaching to the Test Is a Widespread, Detrimental Practice
While NCTE members were not asked directly about the efficacy of statewide testing as a means of measuring school performance, 1,248 offered a comment in response to being asked about how the emphasis on testing has affected them most. Here’s a sampling of their comments:
- “Taken class time away from meaningful instruction.”
- “NCLB is strangling authentic learning; very damaging.”
- “Too much time testing/too few interesting projects.”
- “Lost over a month of teaching time.”
- “It has lowered the bar and made teaching robot-like.”
“Growth Models” that Track Learning Improvements for Students over the Course of a Year Are Seen as More Constructive Than Simply Looking at Changes in the Percentage of Students Who Pass Mandated State Tests
Eighty-one percent of those responding to the PDK poll felt that measures that track growth in learning of specific students in a school over a period of time are better measures of school effectiveness than simply looking at the percentage of students earning passing scores on end-of-year state tests. While the NCTE study did not explore this specific question, open-ended responses to a question about how federal policy could best advance literacy education yielded these responses:
- ". . . standardized tests are ONE measure only of ability and preparedness. Testing is not going to reform schools. We need to change the way we deliver curriculum, and we need to redesign the school day. Assessment needs to be more performance based and authentic. How well would you perform your job if someone had you on a timer and labeled you as novice for your failure to meet standards on ONE day without a retest or an alternative measure of proficiency?"
- "Find a way other than standardized test scores to measure student achievement. Look to authentic assessment and portfolio development."
- "Use researched growth models and other forms of assessments instead of high stakes, one time a year testing to measure student success and to monitor teacher effectiveness."
- "Drastic modification regarding how annual yearly progress is measured. Testing results should not be used to drive good people (children and adults) out of classrooms. Remove punitive measures -- we do not 'punish' underachieving students -- why are we punishing schools that are working under conditions, constraints, and burdens no Congressman, Senator, President, or average taxpaying citizen would put up with?"
Emphasis on Math and English (Reading) to Judge a School’s Performance Leads to Less Emphasis on Other Subject Matter Areas
According to the NCTE study, 78% of literacy educators reported that as a result of NCLB, less time is spent in their school on non-tested subjects. This view was echoed in the PDK poll, where equally 78% of all respondents reported concerns that subjects other than math and English would be de-emphasized as a result of NCLB.
Reporting Disaggregated Testing Scores Is Not Constructive in Improving Schools
Seventy-four percent of literacy educators report that more time is spent on improving scores for students identified in subgroups (race, ethnicity, disability status, English-speaking ability, poverty level) but only 39% report that more attention is being paid to actually improving learning for students from these groups as a result of NCLB. Fifty-four percent of the general public responding to the PDK poll oppose reporting scores of subgroups as required under NCLB.
NCLB Seen as Lowering Teacher Retention and Motivation
Sixty-two percent of the literacy educators participating in the NCTE study reported that changes associated with NCLB were having a negative influence on their satisfaction with work as a teacher. Only 12% of NCTE respondents reported that they were more committed to professional growth as a literacy educator as a result of NCLB, while 41% said that they were less committed to remaining in the profession because of the law. A few revealing comments about teacher motivation follow:
- "I have less time to actually help the students because of all the time spent trying to determine what to do to please the government without specific guidelines. Anyone who thinks we can achieve 100% 'meets' or 'exceeds' has no clue about students' abilities or teaching. In addition I have to spend more time trying to motivate staff. They are professionals and are doing a wonderful job, but are demoralized by the government constantly suggesting they are incompetent."
- "My ability to teach all aspects of writing has been taken away. My freedom to be innovative and creative in the classroom has been severely limited."
- "We work under a sense of impending doom--always aware of the mythical 'they' who are going to come in and take over my classroom, and in doing so give my students more than I give them every day. My junior students will leave me not having had time to dive into Mark Twain because they had to drown in a variety of test prep activities. Is doing a succession of 'timed readings' really more valuable than taking the time to tear apart some really good American literature?"
NCLB Has Been Neutral or Has Had a Negative Influence on . . .
Literacy Educators Use of Research-Based Methods
Roughly one-third of NCTE study participants reported that NCLB has made no difference in their decisions to use teaching methods supported by reading or writing research, while 45% reported that the law has had at least a somewhat negative influence on their use of research-based methods.
Collaboration between Parents and Literacy Educators
Nearly half of the NCTE study participants reported that the law had had a negative influence on working with parents to improve student learning while 42% said that it had made no difference at all.
Selection of Materials and Assessment Practices that Promote Student Learning
Forty-nine percent of literacy educators reported that NCLB had a negative influence on their ability to select teaching materials that meet students’ needs, while 36% said it had made no difference, and 15% reported a positive influence. The negative influence of NCLB on the use of literacy education assessment practices that promote student learning was even more pronounced -- 58% of respondents reported a negative influence, while 26% said the law had made no difference at all.
Summary
More than four years after the landmark No Child Left Behind Act was passed by Congress and enacted into law, there is considerable doubt by the public and by educators about its efficacy as a transformative school reform measure. The results from the NCTE study agree with those from the PDK/Gallup poll and the PEN hearings, suggesting that Congress should consult carefully with teachers and local school officials to fashion revisions to the Act as it comes up for renewal. If we want schools that are equitable and accountable, where teachers have more freedom to use proven educational methods to educate their children, and schools where all children have the opportunity to learn to their highest abilities and parents have more choices, we need less emphasis on prepping for a single test, more emphasis on significant teaching and formative local assessment, and much more emphasis on all students learning and teachers teaching.
|
