What Would It Mean to 'Fix' No Child Left Behind? - Room for Debate - NYTimes.com:
What Would It Mean to ‘Fix’ No Child Left Behind?
Evan McGlinn for The New York Times
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act is up for reauthorization, and Congress is busy
reviewing the federal education law, which since 2001 is often referred as No Child Left Behind. At issue are
fundamental issues like whether the federal government can direct states on how to hold schools accountable.
What would it mean to “fix” the legislation?
READ THE DISCUSSION »
DIANE RAVITCH, AUTHOR, "REIGN OF ERROR"
The original purpose of the 1965 law was to distribute federal aid to schools and districts that enrolled large numbers of poor children.
TERRELL HALASKA, FORMER ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF EDUCATION UNDER GEORGE W. BUSH
Now Congress needs to rebalance the federal-state relationship, and give states more flexibility on education and parents and educators more choice.
RANDI WEINGARTEN, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act need to return to its roots to focus on poverty, equity, funding, the joy of learning and the whole child.
WADE HENDERSON, LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Critics who claim the annual assessments, reporting and accountability have been failures aren’t paying attention to the vast improvements.
STEPHEN LAZAR, HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER
Because of misguided incentives in the education law, too many schools are designed to get students to do well on a one-time test.
