Published: March 01, 2007 11:53 am      

Will ‘No Child’ act get left behind?

Many want program changed, not just re-upped

Federal “No Child Left Behind” legislation has done a lot to change the way Cheryl Tansey puts together her lesson plan. But, she says she’ll have to think twice about whether she wants her congressional representatives to reauthorize the program.

“I kind of look at it as getting the most bang for your buck,” said Tansey.

Still, she has concerns about how schools are evaluated.

That sort of lukewarm acceptance of the program can be found throughout the community when speaking to the politicians who will soon be asked to consider reauthorizing the program and the educators who daily have it to consider.

Tansey teaches reading recovery and is the Title I coordinator at Silver Street Elementary School in New Albany, where President George W. Bush is scheduled to visit Friday. During the visit, the president is expected to remark on the need for Congress to reauthorize the program.

The act essentially seeks to measure and improve accountability for school districts and provide parents more flexibility in deciding which schools their children attend. It measures a school’s progress based on various student subgroups.

There are some positive parts of the program, Tansey said during a phone interview Wednesday afternoon. The professional development funds, the in-service training and the continual assessment aspects of the program are definite positives. Additionally, she said, it helps a teacher contour the lesson plan to the students’ needs.

But her biggest concern is the way it’s all added up. In general, she said, the bar might be being set too high.

One subgroup — special needs for example — can bring an entire school down because No Child benchmarks are all factored together. It’s something to say that an entire school is failing just because one subgroup is lagging behind, she said.



Change it or chuck it?

Tansey is not alone in her concern about that particular aspect of the program.

Rep. Baron Hill, D-Ind., said he doesn’t have a problem with holding schools accountable. But he will not vote to reauthorize the program unless some changes are made.

Everyone who has come to him within the education community consistently voices the special needs concern, he said. Counting the special needs children in with a school’s general population unfairly lowers an entire school’s score, he said.

Additionally, the consequences for a school that consistently fails — which Hill describes as a federal takeover — are far too harsh, he said. The federal government should not be permitted to come in and take over, fire staff or close a school’s doors.

Hill voted for the legislation when it was originally passed. He claims that the only reason he voted for it back then was because a piece of legislation that called for smaller-sized high schools — which he authored — was rolled into the bill.

When Hill cast his vote in favor of the program, he was joined by other Indiana lawmakers, such as Sen. Richard Lugar, a Republican, and Sen. Evan Bayh, a Democrat. Lugar is still in favor of it, according to Andy Fisher, his press secretary. There might be a few adjustments that need to be made, Fisher said, but generally Lugar still supports the legislation. Bayh or his staff could not be reached for comment.



Doomed to fail?

Terry Smith, superintendent at West Clark Community Schools Corp., believes the legislation had a sinister purpose when it was created.

“When you hear the catchy title — No Child Left Behind — it sounds like something that no one could be against,” he said. “But the devil is in the details.”

Smith says the legislation was passed on two levels: the surface level of raising accountability and the hidden agenda of giving more vouchers for private schools.

The way it’s currently set up, all school systems will eventually fail, he said. And once that happens vouchers — given to parents to send children to private schools — are going to take over, he said.

People at all levels want to improve education, he said. But they need to be told the truth — something that Smith says hasn’t been done yet with this particular piece of legislation.

Like Hill, Smith said the legislation needs to be changed to an improvement model rather than having schools pass the test or else.