Last week I had lunch with some colleagues, including a woman who was our parent coordinator a couple of years ago. She now works full time in our district's Title 1 office. We've been waiting with bated breath for our Title 1 budget in order to plan staffing for next year. We have several people whose salaries are paid through Title 1 in order to have more Reading Recovery support.
This woman mentioned that she was concerned that our budgets would be smaller this year. She expected that the district would get the same amount as last year (which already means less in buying power), but more of it would have to got to support outside tutoring programs for schools that did not make AYP last year.
So, rather than have funding for staff, professional development, training, etc. we will be funneling money to for profit business that offer tutoring. These programs are not affiliated with the schools and there is no communication. This means that the work they do with children is completely unrelated to the work that is happening in the classroom.
I find this to be incredibly sad and exceptionally maddening.
Showing posts with label NCLB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NCLB. Show all posts
Monday, April 14, 2008
Monday, August 27, 2007
NCLB & GT
We in education seem to be addicted to acronyms. NCLB (No Child Left Behind) is probably one of the best known, however.
Several years ago, when NCLB was just getting started, Carol Ann Tomlinson spoke extensively about the damage it would do to our gifted students(GT = gifted and talented). Faced with having to make all students meet benchmarks, teachers would not be able to focus any real attention on students who were likely to pass tests without our support.
I believe, and it seems I'm not alone, that she was correct in her prediction. In some ways, this seems like a no-brainer. Of course schools will focus on students who might not pass the test. We will be judged harshly based on those scores. If students are likely to pass, with or without us, they can go ahead and do so.
As a result, those students who naturally do well in school or who have lots of family support for their education or who simply test well are likely to be allowed to float along without being challenged academically. It seems to me that all that NCLB has done is change which children are left behind.
Several years ago, when NCLB was just getting started, Carol Ann Tomlinson spoke extensively about the damage it would do to our gifted students(GT = gifted and talented). Faced with having to make all students meet benchmarks, teachers would not be able to focus any real attention on students who were likely to pass tests without our support.
I believe, and it seems I'm not alone, that she was correct in her prediction. In some ways, this seems like a no-brainer. Of course schools will focus on students who might not pass the test. We will be judged harshly based on those scores. If students are likely to pass, with or without us, they can go ahead and do so.
As a result, those students who naturally do well in school or who have lots of family support for their education or who simply test well are likely to be allowed to float along without being challenged academically. It seems to me that all that NCLB has done is change which children are left behind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)