1. Web Pedagogies Week 8: Systems Approach The No Child Left Behind Policy

2. Schedule NCLB discussion Break Lab

3. Systems Approach: Policy Aimed at Fixing the Problem Why the NCLB policy? What problems was (is) it trying to solve? What are the underlying assumptions of the model?

4. A systemic view Community school clas s home Public Policy Technology

5. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: the Political Impulse Came out of Clinton era policies in part Seen as Bush initiative Generally enjoys bi-partisan support, or at least not enough opposition to change legislation

6. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: What does it say? Stronger accountability More flexibility and local control More options for parents More funding for reading programs More resources for high-poverty schools

7. Accountability through testing States must develop standards System of annual testing 1.Same tests 2.Aligned with school content and standards 3.Tests must be valid and reliable 4.Proven technical quality 5.Testing in grades 3-8 6.Test higher order thinking skills

8. Accountability through information dissemination States must issue report cards Results must be broken down by race, ethnicity, disability and English language ability

9. Accountability through reward and punishment States must make progress in bringing students to proficiency AYP a key part of the bill Failure toward AYP brings federal aid to improve Continued failure brings sanctions –Replace teachers, charter school conversion, change curriculum

10. What are the arguments of the proponents: Testing highlights problems that might otherwise be undetected Accountability will let parents choose the best education for their children Tests will be thoughtfully designed Poor and minority children will be helped the most – less likely to fall through the cracks

11. What are the arguments of the opponents: Testing leads to one size fits all model Teachers compelled to teach to test Results won’t measure true ability to think Studies suggest that most tests don’t measure what happens in classrooms Testing system causes minorities to drop out and don’t pick up external factors Cost will far exceed Congressional outlay

12. What has been your experience?

13. Implementation issues: key aspect of policy analysis By 2003, serious implementation of NCLB At Federal level, technical assistance to states States very active: plans submitted, schools identified, set annual objective, report cards Local level: community outreach and explanation, published lists of schools not making AYP, began assessing and reporting on Title III funds Highly controversial year

14. Outcomes Media coverage mostly negative –But public is mostly unaware or confused Congress: wait and see attitude, generally supportive, though partisan differences on funding levels Federal officials: generally satisfied with state performance State and local views: generally positive expectations but still challenges

15. Challenges Little lead in time for many of the provisions Students with disabilities not treated well in provisions; districts often complain of unrealistic expectations State capacity: too little capacity to assist schools; provide services Cost estimates are rising; state fiscal crises

16. Assessment and NCLB In 2003, accountability plans being worked on Lot of confusion because of different measures of AYP and differences across state measuring systems, not quality More school districts affected: 21% vs 15% and 16% of schools up from 13% year before Concrete actions have not typically included punitive measures

17. Policy and Systems Policy Outcomes Implementation Inputs