Leaving Behind No Child Left Behind

[courtesy of The California Majority Report]

Julia Rosen at Calitics and the DailyKos has spilled extensive virtual ink battling Speaker Nancy Pelosi's and Congressperson George Miller's No Child Left Behind (NCLB) overhaul. No less than five posts (here, here, here, here, and here) are up refuting the policy, and an ad campaign is circulating around the progressive blogosphere too.

So what's the problem? As Julia explains, "The current proposal still relies on just test scores, instead of multiple measures of student and school success like attendance/graduation rates, a rigorous curriculum and the number of students taking honors and AP classes."

A singular emphasis on standardized testing also ignores regional differences. English as a Second Language and high rates of household poverty will drive scores down at precisely the schools that need the most resources. Indeed, NCLB's nationwide performance review ignores schools that have had marked improvements but still have not reached the federal minimum standard. Rosen again:

"Each state has its own standards and its own method of testing how students measure up to them. Now states had to have their testing processes approved by the Dept. of Education to meet NCLB requirements, but the Dept. of Ed. accepted very few of them, especially at first. California has one of the oldest and most widely-respected accountability systems that began back in 1999. Since NCLB, the state has attempted to mold the exams to also use them for federal purposes. But it’s difficult. And CA’s system is a growth model -- tracking progress over time, rather than setting benchmarks that schools either meet or don’t in any given year, as is the case with NCLB."

How can Californians justify the $56 billion unfunded mandate NCLB imposes on state governments, recognizing that it only complicates statewide efforts to improve education? Suffices to say, our leaders in Washington need to seriously reevaluate NCLB.