NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT: CON
Where's the money to meet lofty goals?
By Amy Isaacs
When the Bush team rolled out its 2000 election campaign plan, education was front and center. Post-election, however, what educators and students got was a long list of questions and unfunded mandates in the form of the No Child Left Behind Act.
We all agree on the need for higher standards and accountability, but the path of high-stakes testing is filled with pitfalls. Tests can be a useful tool, but they must never be the only measure.
A wider range of assessments of students' performance must be used to measure their progress accurately. Teaching geared to the test has become the reality for too many teachers depriving students of a well-rounded education, including subjects such as music and physical education, and encouraging independent thought and analysis. The penalties for failure under the act include sending children to other schools, firing teachers and disbanding school districts or leaving them further underfunded. Instead of encouraging excellence and innovation, the law stifles it.
Among the more damaging aspects of the act are the resources — or lack thereof — provided for implementation. While the Bush administration finds ample funds for tax cuts for the wealthy and an unjustified and unjustifiable war, it is only paying lip service to its professed priority — education.
The U.S. Department of Education contends that education financing is at a historic high. While that may be true technically, funding levels in real dollars continue to fall drastically and do not take into account the mandates facing school districts under the No Child Left Behind Act.
In fact, funding for the act is $8 billion short of the levels prescribed. It gets worse though: President Bush recently asked Congress to cut funding for the act in the 2004 federal budget by an additional $300 million. That means that the burden for implementing the law will ultimately fall on cash-strapped states and localities.
An analysis in Vermont found that the cost of implementing the law in the state would be three times what's provided to the program under current funding formulas. This disparity could be devastating to current programs and long-term needs of school districts.
Another problem with the act is the lack of resources for students eligible to transfer out of a failing school. According to the U.S. Department of Education, students must be allowed such transfers regardless of available space and class sizes. The burden of taking on more students has created massive overcrowding in some school districts. Additionally, schools may be asked to take on new students without any additional funding to provide for their education.
While all agree that no child should be left behind, the law is a setup for failure. Requiring every child to pass the state assessments by the year 2014, combined with the inadequate funding provided for implementation, increases the pressure on local districts to create miracles out of nothing. Instead of providing adequate support for needy schools, the Bush administration is consigning them to the trash heap and piling an almost insurmountable burden on others that, inevitably, will fail as well. The result will be every child left behind. Lofty goals need to be backed up with viable programs. The act does not meet that basic standard.
The No Child Left Behind Act is relatively new: Educators and communities are still struggling to understand its specifics and its costs to them. Yet, if the Bush administration were to be held to the same standards it imposes on local governments and school districts, it would receive a "failing" grade.
Amy F. Isaacs is the national director of Americans for Democratic Action, www.adaction.org.
