I started to write this as a comment to teacherken's
I think we have lost our way. The more I thought about it, the more I realized I had too much to say to fit into a comment.
After reading the above mentioned diary, three things came to mind.
1. individual instruction and diagnosis
2. high-quality, research based instruction and lack of research in HST
3. with increased focus on R/LA and Math in grades 3-5 (and K-2, actually), 6th graders entering social studies and science classes know NOTHING
If you want to know what I mean, see below.
If not, see below anyway. Mr. Foley can wait.
Individual instruction, group results
Part of No Child Left Behind requires individual instruction, meaning that teachers are supposed to teach each child (or at least group of children) based on their own individual strengths and weaknesses. It is certainly possible to obtain these strengths and weaknesses from each child. Where I work, we utilize an assessment called ThinkLink, which is pretty much just a practice TCAP test (that's our state achievement test), yielding very detailed results as to what kids know and where they still need instruction. Also, the psychological testing that is done to determine what students need special education services yield very detailed, individual results. This is all fine and good, until you remember that all these strengths and weakness are going to be ignored, because everybody has to achieve at the same level in the same areas, measured in the same way. The instruction is required to be individualized, the psychological assessments are individualized, but the end product, the NCLB test scores, cannot take into account individual differences, because everybody takes the same test the same way. They are asking us to do something that they are not themselves willing to do. Which brings me to point number two.
High Stakes Testing (HST)
Another aspect of NCLB is that instruction in the classroom must be grounded in research demonstrating its effectiveness. This has also been picked up by the reauthorization of IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), which also requires high quality, research-based instruction in classrooms as a prerequisite to special education placement. That means the instruction in the classroom must be adequate in order to show that this child is struggling because he or she is learning disabled, not because the teacher is teaching disabled. Again, this is fine and good, until, once again, you arrive at the end product, the achievement test that all children are supposed to pass.
There is also research on HST, and it concludes that HST is a rather unreliable measure of a child's academic ability level. They don't get anywhere close to the full, accurate conclusion that this child knows what he or she is supposed to know by the fourth grade (for example). It is equally a measure of a child's test-taking ability. I, for example, am very good at taking multiple choice tests. I have never taken a HST in multiple choice format that I didn't blow out of the water. On the other hand, my Master's comprehensive exam was in essay format. I failed it the first time, and passed with a 76% the second time. I knew the answers, I just couldn't organize it and explain it well enough to get full credit on hardly any item.
The point is, the format of the assessment is a variable, not a constant, and it affects the results of the test. There may be a child who has poor visual discrimination skills, who knows that Columbus discovered America (San Salvador, actually) in 1492, but given options of A) 1942, B) 1294, C) 1429, D) 1492, or E) 1494, the child may get confused and bubble the wrong answer, just because the differences between the answers are hard to discriminate.
The sad truth is, teachers know this. Administrators know this. Parents probably know this. Some children certainly know this. But the mandate to pass the test remains, so administrators and teachers are left with two choices. They can either teach the material and pray that children are adept at taking multiple choice tests, or they can teach how to take a multiple choice test.
I have a nine year old son. Every year since the first grade, beginning in January, all the homework he brings home looks very much like Xerox copies taken out of old achievement test booklets. He starts practicing how to read a paragraph and answer the questions, including the trick of reading the questions first and reading for the answers. He starts learning how to make neat little bubbles with his pencil to make sure the scanner scores him correctly. These practice worksheets, practice tests in class, ThinkLink, all of them cost money, money that is going to making sure children pass the test, not to make sure they are learning what they need to be. Which, finally, brings me to my third point.
What about the other subjects?
Right now elementary school students are only required to demonstrate proficiency in Reading/Language Arts and Math. Science and Social Studies are also assessed, but are not tracked for proficiency. Again, everybody knows this. So from the third grade on, children are receiving loads of extra instruction in Reading/Language Arts and Math, because those are the subjects that "count."
I usually work at the county Middle School, grades 6-8. For most sixth graders, this is the first time they have to change classes, having equal time spent between each subject area. Many of the sixth grade Social Studies and Science teachers are furious, because every year they get a new bunch of sixth graders that knew considerably less than the class before. I have to assume that this is because in grades 3-5 they received a brief, hurried lesson in Social Studies and Science, probably none the second half of the year, when the focus turns exclusively to passing the tests.
No Child Left Behind is not ensuring that every child will learn; it inhibits learning.
So yes, Mrs. Spellings, we are leaving children behind, in the Sciences, Social Studies, History, and Health. Is that what you want, Mrs. Spellings? You want children that grow up to be young voting adults who can read, write, and do math, but have no knowledge about biology, chemistry, health science, US or World history? Judging by the simultaneous campaigns to remove sections of all these courses from the schools, I'd say yes, Mrs. Spellings, that is exactly what you want. What better way to grow conservative voters than by teaching history and science as secondary, unnecessary courses. What better way to maintain the right wing's stranglehold on the US government than by glossing over courses in government, economics, and biology, so that the bulk of knowledge regarding these subjects students acquire from Fox News, ABC docudramas, and church.
Adding the college tuition statistics to this analysis reveals that this isn't a coincidence. The price of tuition has skyrocketed, the interest rates on loans are going up, the chance of getting grants is diminishing, and the cost of health care is so high that many would-be college students have to find a career immediately out of high school just so they have an insurance policy that doesn't keep them from eating dinner sometimes. Knowledge is power, and you don't want to share any of it with anyone.
Thanks to teacherken, Yoss, kissfan, and mkkendrick for not letting me not think about this.