07.21.05
Posted in education at 1:21 pm by
I don’t know how much y’all know about the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB ). If you’ve been reading here for a while, you’ve probably guessed that I’m no big fan of the legislation. NCLB, the bi-partisan legislation Bush claims as excellent public school reform, is possibly the worst bit of legislation to have ever been enacted, in my opinion. I’ve written about NCLB before, even parodied it.
Jen and I have a friend who’s a teacher, and NCLB is becoming a bit more personal. I mean, it’s always been personal, to a degree. Under threat of firing, Jen’s teenage english students must meet ‘Adequate Yearly Progress.’ Yep, that’s right, even if a student chooses to NEVER do a shred of homework, even if a parent couldn’t give a shit whether her or his child passes any of their classes, the teacher is held responsible.
This friend of ours is trying desperately to get a job. And, frankly, west Michigan is a tough job market for a teacher to land a job. NCLB, now, makes it even harder. You see, it turns out that just because a teacher is ‘highly qualified’ (has a full college major) to teach ‘English’ they may not be ‘highly qualified’ to teach ‘language arts.’ Likewise, the teacher certified to teach ‘History’ is not necessarily certified to teach ’social studies.’
What that means is that if a teacher certified to teach history applies to teach an identical course with the course name ’social studies’ that teacher is no longer considered to be ‘highly qualified’ to teach the course–even though the course content hasn’t changed a lick. Now, in a school with a tight job market favoring schools, schools survive. Some teachers, like our friend, get screwed but in the end the schools don’t suffer as much as they might. However, in an area facing more financial hardship that has difficulty attracting teachers to begin with, such semantic bullshit may well sound the death bell for a school district.
I suppose schools could go about changing the names of their courses in order to meet the requirements of being ‘highly qualified.’ I think, though, that we need to be asking ourselves, “is this really what we want from legislation?” More beauraucracy? More red tape? More fussing over semantics?
How about we start holding parents somewhat responsible for their actions? Now, nobody wants a deadbeat teacher out there being a loser and not really doing their jobs. Deadbeat teachers should be reprimanded, and if that doesn’t do the job–fired. But legislation that expects that the fundamental problem with the US educational system IS THAT teachers are by and large deadbeats–and make no mistake, this is exactly what NCLB does–is terrible. NCLB puts the responsiblity on teachers to play the role of parent.
Then, if teachers don’t assume that role well enough and soon enough so that their students are able to achieve Adequate Yearly Progress, it gives parents a try at parenting…am I the only one who thinks that this is a little bass-akwards?
Permalink
Trackback URL »
http://www.badchristian.com/2005/07/21/on_being_highly_qualified/trackback/
Posted in education at 1:21 pm by
I don’t know how much y’all know about the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB ). If you’ve been reading here for a while, you’ve probably guessed that I’m no big fan of the legislation. NCLB, the bi-partisan legislation Bush claims as excellent public school reform, is possibly the worst bit of legislation to have ever been enacted, in my opinion. I’ve written about NCLB before, even parodied it.
Jen and I have a friend who’s a teacher, and NCLB is becoming a bit more personal. I mean, it’s always been personal, to a degree. Under threat of firing, Jen’s teenage english students must meet ‘Adequate Yearly Progress.’ Yep, that’s right, even if a student chooses to NEVER do a shred of homework, even if a parent couldn’t give a shit whether her or his child passes any of their classes, the teacher is held responsible.
This friend of ours is trying desperately to get a job. And, frankly, west Michigan is a tough job market for a teacher to land a job. NCLB, now, makes it even harder. You see, it turns out that just because a teacher is ‘highly qualified’ (has a full college major) to teach ‘English’ they may not be ‘highly qualified’ to teach ‘language arts.’ Likewise, the teacher certified to teach ‘History’ is not necessarily certified to teach ’social studies.’
What that means is that if a teacher certified to teach history applies to teach an identical course with the course name ’social studies’ that teacher is no longer considered to be ‘highly qualified’ to teach the course–even though the course content hasn’t changed a lick. Now, in a school with a tight job market favoring schools, schools survive. Some teachers, like our friend, get screwed but in the end the schools don’t suffer as much as they might. However, in an area facing more financial hardship that has difficulty attracting teachers to begin with, such semantic bullshit may well sound the death bell for a school district.
I suppose schools could go about changing the names of their courses in order to meet the requirements of being ‘highly qualified.’ I think, though, that we need to be asking ourselves, “is this really what we want from legislation?” More beauraucracy? More red tape? More fussing over semantics?
How about we start holding parents somewhat responsible for their actions? Now, nobody wants a deadbeat teacher out there being a loser and not really doing their jobs. Deadbeat teachers should be reprimanded, and if that doesn’t do the job–fired. But legislation that expects that the fundamental problem with the US educational system IS THAT teachers are by and large deadbeats–and make no mistake, this is exactly what NCLB does–is terrible. NCLB puts the responsiblity on teachers to play the role of parent.
Then, if teachers don’t assume that role well enough and soon enough so that their students are able to achieve Adequate Yearly Progress, it gives parents a try at parenting…am I the only one who thinks that this is a little bass-akwards?
Permalink
Trackback URL »
http://www.badchristian.com/2005/07/21/on_being_highly_qualified/trackback/
Benjamin said,
July 21, 2005 at 1:38 pm
I had a long talk with a junior high math teacher about this - he was pretty excited that I “got it”, that there were so many variable not under his control that it was ludacris to hold him accountable in every single case. His solution was to give parents a tax credit if their kids did a certain amount of the homework.
Rural areas such as Eastern Montana (Or North Dakota) get it really bad. All the special needs kids tend to get concentrated into a single school, and then get tested alongside the regular population, which blows the “Adequete Yearly Progress”
I think (if you let me put my conspiracy hat on), that NCLB is designed to fail, so that someone (oh who might that someone be) can ride in on a big white horse and save the day by waving Adam Smith’s rotting dead hand around a bit.
Angel said,
July 21, 2005 at 4:11 pm
No, you’re not the only one….but then again, I live in the land of the FCAT. Thus one of the reasons my kids don’t go to public school.
fuzzit said,
July 21, 2005 at 7:02 pm
I have been a teacher for five years. I moved from NY to NC and the differences in the school systems are unbelievable. I don’t really know if I could pick one as better than the other.
My last job was as a longterm substitute and I worked with the “chair of the reading dept”, who didn’t have a masters in reading like I did. She had National Board Certification but not NC cert. as a reading teacher……truly it is strange. In order to get this Natn’l certification you have to already be working in the field for 3 years and it is a year long process with many essays and videos, it costs almost 3,000 bucks.
I don’t even know if I am considered “highly qualified” because I don’t have this National Board cert.
Its just a big freakin mess.
Aerin said,
July 21, 2005 at 10:48 pm
Benjamin– You got it. If you acknowledge that most teachers are doing a good job with the resources they have, you lose the school system as a punching bag. Then you might have to acknowledge the societal factors– poverty, anyone?– that need to be addressed.
Angel– I’ve taught in FCAT land for four years. Not sure where you live, but there are some awesome schools and even some great overall districts. We teachers do our best to work around the idiocy, and I’d like to think we do pretty well.
Fuzzit, you don’t have to have National Board certification to be “highly qualified” under NCLB. If you hold a long-term state certificate in the subject area you teach in, you are considered “highly qualified.”
James said,
July 22, 2005 at 4:30 am
Talking of putting responsibility on parents - I guess you are aware of the move in the UK to force parents to stay at home when their kids get suspended from school? No-one seems to have any idea what that means for unemployed parents, but it certainly did the headline-grabbing trick at the weekend…
ninjanun said,
July 22, 2005 at 12:46 pm
Yes, poverty is definitely an issue that NCLB doesn’t even address–both the underfunded school districts, as well as the parents who may be working two jobs and don’t have the same amount of time to check on their child’s progress like more affluent parents may have. You’re right, NCLB seems like it was a planned failure.
I’ve known many more parents to be deadbeats where their children’s education is concerned, than teachers.
Common Sense said,
August 27, 2006 at 5:09 pm
NCLB was written to ensure the destruction of the U.S. public education. It is statistically IMPROBLE for schools/districts to make AYP - especially those with numerous subgroups, particularly the SPED and ELL subgroups.