Washington has become the first state to have the "No Child Left Behind" waiver revoked. The act required states to develop assessments for students in basic skills, in order for the school to receive federal funding they have to give out these standardized tests to all grade levels. Its based on the premise that setting high standards can improve individual outcomes in education. The problem is that without the waiver any school that is underperforming will have to set money aside for private tutoring, the school also runs the risk of being labeled as "failing." Washington lost the waiver due to pressure from the teachers union argument over whether standardized testing scores should be used to evaluate a teacher's performance in teaching. This can be a social problem if all states decided not to abide by the conditions of the No Child Left Behind act. Education is important and teachers should be doing what they can to provide their students with the proper education. Its important because students are supposed to learn basic English, math, and science through their elementary and high school years. That is what's going to prepare them for their career choices in college. If the proper education isn't offered students will not be successful in life and society will be the ones affected by it. From a functionalist perspective, education is important because it teaches generations of kids the proper training and skills necessary to use in jobs that our society needs. It education fails it becomes a dysfunction. People will be barely surviving in minimum wage jobs and struggling to get by. I think that standardized tests are important because it gives teachers that incentive to actually teach and make sure that their students are learning. I have known people that have felt discouraged in school because teachers wouldn't teach at all, that made them not want to keep going to school. As a solution I think we should keep the testing requirements for evaluating teachers. By doing so, we will know if students are getting the proper education they need in order to be successful and if teachers are actually doing their jobs.
Washington has now lost waivers to the No child left behind act. What does this mean? When this laws come out basically the school and the government make a contract with each state and if schools do not meet the standards of the contract then they get money taken away. Why do you say this is a problem, well that is the money that the school uses to provide the students with the material they need like transportation and tutoring. Now these schools in Washington are going to have to find other ways to come up with money for these essentials. Why did they lose their funding you ask well its because they did not hold there part on evaluating the teachers based upon the standardized testing. To be honest I don’t think that teachers should be feeling evaluated on standardized testing because it can lead to the dishonesty of teachers who can alter the testing so that they don’t get into trouble. Also a test should not be the only thing used to evaluate a student because teachers have no control over what happens in the test. For example, I remember while I was taking standardized tests sometimes I would get so bored because they were dumb and stupid to me that I would just bubble in the answer. So does that mean that a teacher should be hold accountable for my testing when I was just being lazy.
A functionalist would say that this is how the system works. The government sends out what they expect out of the schools within that year and if schools do not meet those expectations then they get punished. By them setting out the rules they are supposedly seeing if the schools are teaching the students what they need to know. They test out if the teachers are doing their jobs by looking at the standardized testing scores of the students. If the students performed at a proficient and advanced levels then the schools get rewarded. Those schools are labeled as good schools versus the schools that underperform are labeled failing schools.
To be honest, I think there should be other ways to punish Washington because it is not the student’s fault that the ones in charge of the school district did not want to evaluate the teachers by using standardized testing. The students should not lose just because someone made a mistake. Standardized testing should be one of the factors to see how the school is performing but it shouldn’t be the main one. To be honest, I don’t even think they should give the school funding based on how well they perform on the standardized testing because then it is just making the teachers teaching kids how to memorize and they aren’t teaching them how to think abstract so then in the long run it is hurting the students. Teachers should be able to concentrate on the important subjects like history and art not just math and English because that’s what is going to be on the standardized testing. Why is it that sometimes the private schools perform better overall, it is because they do not concentrate on teaching for the test instead they do more hands on things and they teach them how to be abstract thinkers.
Daniel J This entire thing is completely childish. Washington had standards to go by. It was very clear that if they wish to keep receiving money from the federal government they need to ensure that it goes to good teachers. Apparently the teachers union decided they did not wish to be evaluated this way. Maybe using standardized tests isn’t the most efficient way of evaluating teachers, but that is how it works for now. From an interactionist point of view, the union seems to be accountable. They complain its not fair to judge us this way and thus put pressure on the standardized tests. So they essentially bit the hand that feeds them and now the victims will be children in Washington. They need better communication between the two. I don’t know if that’s also a problem on the governments behalf but that is a different issue. If they disagree with how they are to be evaluated they should instead propose other solutions which would replace the guidelines for the no child left behind act. It’s a shame for the people involved and the children, but in the end the government drew a line in the sand and they crossed it. We need a better solution for evaluating teachers and they need better communication with the government. If we do that all the students will receive a better education and the future for Washington will be better off.
Kristina S. Education has been a controversial issue for a long time. Because overall education was declining, the government has been focusing on a solution such as the No Child Behind Act. In this article, Washington waiver for the act was revoked due to pressure from the teacher unions. Therefore, their school funding will be affected. Although the act promoted participation from teachers to give their best efforts to increase proficiency in basic skills for students, schools have to face some harsh outcomes. For example, these standardized tests force to label many good schools as failing. Also. it causes lack of critical thinking, and it may drive states to lower their standards in order to meet higher scores since states can make their own tests. This act makes room for "behind the scene" unfair actions such as principals providing inaccurate test results in order to save face. In addition, when these standards are not met, funding is taken away which affects students and their quality of learning. Punishing schools for not meeting certain criteria only adds to the problem. Clearly, solving the education crisis is not an easy task, but it essential and completely necessary to call for a reform.
From a functionalist point of view, the act serves as a function by enabling pressure on teachers to provide more attention to students and their basic skills in order to succeed on these tests which in turn will increase the quality of education. Moreover, this act calls for improvement and supports core academic subjects that are needed for college and future job positions.
I chose this article because I strongly believe that the quality of education is crucial for the youth and up coming new generation. In order to improve the system, it is mandatory to take action on reforming the educational plans to shape the future of our children. I believe the best solution would be to raise the taxes, and provide more funding for schools to offer materials, well thought out academic plans, tutoring services, and more qualified teachers. Education as well as health care should be top priorities in a country in my opinion. Therefore, it is worth every penny because it is an investment for the quality of life and overall well being of the country. Standardized tests should be done, but not be taken so seriously in the sense that the rights to funding will be taken away or to label schools as failing or passing. Teacher assessments should be taken, and the qualifications for teachers should be more strict. Finally, salaries for teachers should be higher in order to guarantee more qualified teachers.
In general, this article depicts the consequences the State of Washington is going through. The No Child Left Behind Act in the state of Washington has lost their waivers. With this being said, school districts get orders they have to meet in order for them to receive waivers. However, Washington became the first state to not meet the requirement that was vital to the Osama administration. Therefore, their waivers have been revoked. The Obama’s administration goal is to evaluate teachers by having students take a standardized test, which will portray how well teachers are at educating. This is a great idea according to Randy Dorn, the Washington Superintendent of Public Instruction. On the other hand, the state legislature does not like the idea. Consequently, Washington school districts are now at a disadvantage because it is the year that no student should be left behind, which means some children attending K-12th grade will loose some school benefits. For instance, they will loose school transportation, free tutoring services, and better school meals. Randy Dorn also depicts that if state legislature is against using standardized testing to evaluate teachers, schools will now demand skilled students only. All this is a social problem to our Country because I believe that teachers should be evaluated on how well they teach by any method that will help students have teachers that will make them succeed in their education. Unfortunately, there are teachers that may be dishonest and change their students test scores so the school and their ability of educating do not appear negative.
Fallowing this further, a functionalist theorist would say that the institution of education contains two functions. The manifest function is simply to educate individuals so they can contribute to the society. Without having educated human beings, our society becomes abnormal. The latent functions focuses on how society controls the labor force of young individuals. Moreover, the social problem described in the article, is that a functionalist would illustrate that school districts receive orders from the state government and if they do not meet those requirements they are punished. They are in danger of loosing school funding and awards. The United States education institution is evaluated by given tests to the students in order to evaluate how well teachers are instructing. This basically defines the better schools from the worse schools. For example, schools located in better areas are often rewarded with things than those schools situated in deprived neighborhoods. Schools in better neighborhoods have more education opportunities, and are known as the Blue Ribbon Schools.
I believe sate legislature, should focus on evaluating teachers with the with standardized test scores. They have become vital to our country for the past years for a reason. Teachers focus on educating subjects such as, math, history, science, and English at the beginning of the school. This method is very helpful to see how well students learn from their teachers. Some solutions may be providing extra private tutoring for schools in disadvantage neighborhoods, so they can have the chance to succeed academically as well. Also, getting students parents involved in their education by volunteering in school activities, such as science fairs or book fairs. I think the standardized testing evaluation demonstrates how the education institution has achieved many goals. It also helps society see what school districts are doing their jobs properly in order to gain successful students for our future.
This article discusses the No Child Left Behind Legislation. In order for a state to receive federal money for education the state must uphold certain standards and expectations. The state legislators must approve of the terms of the Federal Government is suggesting, if not the waiver is revoked. If the waiver is revoked then schools must put money aside for private tutoring and may also be labeled as failing. This article specifically discusses the state of Washington. In this situation the federal government is assessing teachers based on standardized testing. The teachers union in Washington did not approve of this method of evaluation. This issue is a social problem because thousands of students will be affected due to the loss funding from the federal government. On the other hand, the argument of teacher evaluation based solely on student performance can be considered unjust because of all the circumstances and obstacles they face (class size, curriculum, and not having enough materials for the class). Although the act can motivate teachers to increase their students proficiency levels, it can also hinder education as a whole because teachers will be preoccupied with "teaching for the test".
From a functionalist perspective, this legislation would be considered necessary in order for the educational institution to run properly. In order for schools to receive funding from the federal government they must uphold their end of the contract which states that teacher evaluation is based upon the students success rate. The consequences of not abiding by federal government standards negatively affects students who are struggling in school.
I chose this topic because my mother is a teacher in LAUSD and experiences many of the political injustices surrounding education. Personally I believe that students should be allowed to think critically and not be forced to take standardized test to prove intelligence. Many students learn in different ways and educators should be allowed to expand their teaching abilities based on the demographic of students they have in their class. Teacher evaluations should not be based on standardized testing but based on how they interact and get students to engage in the material they are presenting.
The state of Washington was punished by revoking the waiver for No Child Left Behind Act, because the schools didn't do good on the standardized tests. With that being said, the schools can’t support the students anymore by providing them materials, giving them transportation to school and they might be labeled as a “failing school.” The teachers were not evaluated, they didn't know how much the students are learning and how much they know, so when the standardized tests came, they didn't score enough to pass the tests. I believe that education is an important institution in the society because it reflects their performance in their future roles. If the teachers are not being evaluated and students are not educated properly, then this will become a social problem. A functionalist would say that it is essential to punish the state for not following the Obama administration. The teachers are pressured to make sure their students are prepared to do the standardized test. If the students are not prepared, then they are considered behind, which can affect their roles in the society in the future. I think that teachers should be evaluated, knowing how much the students learn can help the school know what they need to fix. Living in poverty and knowing that your school can’t support you because they are not funded can affect my education. I remember I had this teacher who tutored me after school, unpaid, just so I can score better in the standardized tests. If every teachers are like this, not pressured and connected with the students, then I think students will perform better in the standardized tests. In other hand, teachers should be evaluated, feeling comfortable and connected with their students.
I chose to discuss Desiree's comment further since she gave a very good summary of the overall issue concerning the No Child Left Behind legislation and Washington's refusal to comply with the given terms. I strongly agree with Desiree's argument that students should be taught to think critically instead of studying for the test. While students end up being prepared for the specific test, they do not learn to think further and their knowledge cannot benefit them in other subjects, in their later educational career or outside of the classroom. A teacher who might have greater focus on critical thinking skills rather than studying for the test, might encounter difficulties since students are not used to a teaching model like this and thus many might fail the standardized test. The federal government automatically considers the teacher as unqualified, even though the quality of his or her education exceeds those of other teachers who simply make students memorize. This is a social problem on many levels including a child's education and a state's economy. A state such as Washington, that does not comply with the terms, looses funding leaving schools struggling and unable to provide quality education due to the lack of resources. This forces teachers to agree with teacher evaluations based on standardized tests, forcing them to study for the test instead of teaching critical thinking skills. This leaves students ill prepared for their future careers. There might be higher school dropout rates and a higher rate of unskilled workers, which then brings down the state's economy and the US economy as a whole.
While Desiree discussed the Functionalist perspective, I want to focus on Conflict theory and the power struggle between the federal government and teachers. The federal government and the Department of Education enforce standards and punishes states for not complying with their terms, which ensures the federal government always remains in power. Meanwhile teacher's seem to have little choice and freedom and must follow the federal government's instructions. Cutting the money supply is a very effective way to keep the population in check. No money means no resources, which in turn means less opportunities for teacher's to change things within their state. The Department of Education remains in power and has control over all important decisions.
I agree with Desiree that standardized tests should not be the base to evaluate teacher's performance since there are many different factors contributing to a student's performance on a test, which the teacher does not have influence over such as troubles at home, lack of focus or not having studied. While test scores should be considered in the evaluation, they should not be the main factor in determining the quality of education. While I agree with Desiree's statement, she did not offer a comprehensive solution to the issue of teacher evaluation and alternative models. I believe there should be a stronger emphasize on regular classroom observations by fellow teachers and outside entities and the student's opinion should be considered as well by filling out teacher evaluation forms. A combination of teacher observations, evaluations and test scores gives a well rounded image of the quality of teaching.
I agree with Jennifer M's comment because not all students want to equally participate in standardize testing. All students learn differently and the tests students are imposed to are not culturally sensitive. It is hard for a test to be generally equal to all because many factors such as SES, race, ethnicity even gender are not taken into account. Tests are mostly composed of Math and English segments which correlates to a person's cultural capital not all individuals are exposed to the same kinds of learning and socialization to generalize test questions. Jennifer's comment about how students are punished on basis of their poor achievement stood out to me the most because if the government is seeking for improvement it is ironic that they are removing aid from them instead of backing them up. Schools who are in the verge of failure need greater resources if what is given to them now isn't supporting their students education. I chose this topic because minority children who tend to occupy poor achieving schools are placed in a cycle of poverty because of the poor education delivered to them.Minority parents are less educated and with less resources to provide their children with greater access to tutors or other extra curriculum activities already restraining them and the school districts and government creates an even greater education gap. This is a great social issue because people with less education tend to have greater health issues such as mental disorders, addictions,and stressful poverty lifestyles. Generations are not finding an end to their suffering Low SES lives, limiting their political power and poor access to general factors such as a good education. The government is just using standardized testing as an excuse to further the minorities progress and placing them in unskilled jobs.
In the conflict perspective, they would view how children of higher SES are given more advantages than the Lower SES population. Students are placed in schools based on their area of living and depending on the taxes reported by the surrounding the schools are funded. Higher SES students are given the advantage of more funding and being able to achieve greater educational goals. Unlike,lower SES students have to conform to poor schools budgets that sometimes don't meet their needs restraining them from a prosperous education. Therefore, when standardize tests are delivered not all the populations are not given the same access and opportunity in order for the results to reflect accurate data. With a restrained education lower SES are further behind even more because the government decreases their funding based on a biased test. Higher SES students are given greater advantages preparing them for college to become professionals. The U.S is a credential society and unskilled workers are seen as less valuable in society diminishing their importance and granting professionals more importance throughout their lifetime.
I believe that Jennifer's solution is feasible if the educational system can provide some fair standards and allow teachers to teach it can improve the quality of education. The rates of money the U.S spends on education is already too high and the educational system is poor the problem is the regulation of the system and the stems(teachers,parents community,etc). A student should learn how to critically think aside from standards imposed by the government because children are not learning on the basis of this tactic. A solution I would encourage would be from a macro perspective that the government should remove standardize testing and remove the factor of children having to attend home schools and instead give them the opportunity to attend the one of their choice that can meet their needs and goals in life. Students can learn goals from the beginning of their education that can later reflect in the job market with greater professionals who are productive improving our educational system and our job market. Students are strained in limited opportunities not given the opportunity to learn based on their needs. Teachers should be encouraged to increase their competence and attend workshops in the summer and winter or whenever students are in vacations for a certain amount of time to receive more adequate training, new skills and improve their teaching for each unique individual. This can greatly create motivation between the society as a whole because it implements unity. The managing of money should not be taken into account primary but instead the essence of learning for all equally. Teachers should be evaluated by officials checking on them by surprise and allowing students and parents to give their positive notes and concerns. Teachers not motivated should be removed from premises until they demonstrate the capacity of their teaching and the workshops should help aid those who are "burned-out", as well as provide them with segue professions that can create greater motivation within them and improve the labor force.
10 comments:
Juliana D.
Washington has become the first state to have the "No Child Left Behind" waiver revoked. The act required states to develop assessments for students in basic skills, in order for the school to receive federal funding they have to give out these standardized tests to all grade levels. Its based on the premise that setting high standards can improve individual outcomes in education. The problem is that without the waiver any school that is underperforming will have to set money aside for private tutoring, the school also runs the risk of being labeled as "failing." Washington lost the waiver due to pressure from the teachers union argument over whether standardized testing scores should be used to evaluate a teacher's performance in teaching. This can be a social problem if all states decided not to abide by the conditions of the No Child Left Behind act. Education is important and teachers should be doing what they can to provide their students with the proper education. Its important because students are supposed to learn basic English, math, and science through their elementary and high school years. That is what's going to prepare them for their career choices in college. If the proper education isn't offered students will not be successful in life and society will be the ones affected by it. From a functionalist perspective, education is important because it teaches generations of kids the proper training and skills necessary to use in jobs that our society needs. It education fails it becomes a dysfunction. People will be barely surviving in minimum wage jobs and struggling to get by. I think that standardized tests are important because it gives teachers that incentive to actually teach and make sure that their students are learning. I have known people that have felt discouraged in school because teachers wouldn't teach at all, that made them not want to keep going to school. As a solution I think we should keep the testing requirements for evaluating teachers. By doing so, we will know if students are getting the proper education they need in order to be successful and if teachers are actually doing their jobs.
Jennifer M.
Washington has now lost waivers to the No child left behind act. What does this mean? When this laws come out basically the school and the government make a contract with each state and if schools do not meet the standards of the contract then they get money taken away. Why do you say this is a problem, well that is the money that the school uses to provide the students with the material they need like transportation and tutoring. Now these schools in Washington are going to have to find other ways to come up with money for these essentials. Why did they lose their funding you ask well its because they did not hold there part on evaluating the teachers based upon the standardized testing. To be honest I don’t think that teachers should be feeling evaluated on standardized testing because it can lead to the dishonesty of teachers who can alter the testing so that they don’t get into trouble. Also a test should not be the only thing used to evaluate a student because teachers have no control over what happens in the test. For example, I remember while I was taking standardized tests sometimes I would get so bored because they were dumb and stupid to me that I would just bubble in the answer. So does that mean that a teacher should be hold accountable for my testing when I was just being lazy.
A functionalist would say that this is how the system works. The government sends out what they expect out of the schools within that year and if schools do not meet those expectations then they get punished. By them setting out the rules they are supposedly seeing if the schools are teaching the students what they need to know. They test out if the teachers are doing their jobs by looking at the standardized testing scores of the students. If the students performed at a proficient and advanced levels then the schools get rewarded. Those schools are labeled as good schools versus the schools that underperform are labeled failing schools.
To be honest, I think there should be other ways to punish Washington because it is not the student’s fault that the ones in charge of the school district did not want to evaluate the teachers by using standardized testing. The students should not lose just because someone made a mistake. Standardized testing should be one of the factors to see how the school is performing but it shouldn’t be the main one. To be honest, I don’t even think they should give the school funding based on how well they perform on the standardized testing because then it is just making the teachers teaching kids how to memorize and they aren’t teaching them how to think abstract so then in the long run it is hurting the students. Teachers should be able to concentrate on the important subjects like history and art not just math and English because that’s what is going to be on the standardized testing. Why is it that sometimes the private schools perform better overall, it is because they do not concentrate on teaching for the test instead they do more hands on things and they teach them how to be abstract thinkers.
Daniel J
This entire thing is completely childish. Washington had standards to go by. It was very clear that if they wish to keep receiving money from the federal government they need to ensure that it goes to good teachers. Apparently the teachers union decided they did not wish to be evaluated this way. Maybe using standardized tests isn’t the most efficient way of evaluating teachers, but that is how it works for now. From an interactionist point of view, the union seems to be accountable. They complain its not fair to judge us this way and thus put pressure on the standardized tests. So they essentially bit the hand that feeds them and now the victims will be children in Washington. They need better communication between the two. I don’t know if that’s also a problem on the governments behalf but that is a different issue. If they disagree with how they are to be evaluated they should instead propose other solutions which would replace the guidelines for the no child left behind act. It’s a shame for the people involved and the children, but in the end the government drew a line in the sand and they crossed it. We need a better solution for evaluating teachers and they need better communication with the government. If we do that all the students will receive a better education and the future for Washington will be better off.
Kristina S.
Education has been a controversial issue for a long time. Because overall education was declining, the government has been focusing on a solution such as the No Child Behind Act. In this article, Washington waiver for the act was revoked due to pressure from the teacher unions. Therefore, their school funding will be affected. Although the act promoted participation from teachers to give their best efforts to increase proficiency in basic skills for students, schools have to face some harsh outcomes. For example, these standardized tests force to label many good schools as failing. Also. it causes lack of critical thinking, and it may drive states to lower their standards in order to meet higher scores since states can make their own tests. This act makes room for "behind the scene" unfair actions such as principals providing inaccurate test results in order to save face. In addition, when these standards are not met, funding is taken away which affects students and their quality of learning. Punishing schools for not meeting certain criteria only adds to the problem. Clearly, solving the education crisis is not an easy task, but it essential and completely necessary to call for a reform.
From a functionalist point of view, the act serves as a function by enabling pressure on teachers to provide more attention to students and their basic skills in order to succeed on these tests which in turn will increase the quality of education. Moreover, this act calls for improvement and supports core academic subjects that are needed for college and future job positions.
I chose this article because I strongly believe that the quality of education is crucial for the youth and up coming new generation. In order to improve the system, it is mandatory to take action on reforming the educational plans to shape the future of our children. I believe the best solution would be to raise the taxes, and provide more funding for schools to offer materials, well thought out academic plans, tutoring services, and more qualified teachers. Education as well as health care should be top priorities in a country in my opinion. Therefore, it is worth every penny because it is an investment for the quality of life and overall well being of the country. Standardized tests should be done, but not be taken so seriously in the sense that the rights to funding will be taken away or to label schools as failing or passing. Teacher assessments should be taken, and the qualifications for teachers should be more strict. Finally, salaries for teachers should be higher in order to guarantee more qualified teachers.
Kimberly G.
In general, this article depicts the consequences the State of Washington is going through. The No Child Left Behind Act in the state of Washington has lost their waivers. With this being said, school districts get orders they have to meet in order for them to receive waivers. However, Washington became the first state to not meet the requirement that was vital to the Osama administration. Therefore, their waivers have been revoked. The Obama’s administration goal is to evaluate teachers by having students take a standardized test, which will portray how well teachers are at educating. This is a great idea according to Randy Dorn, the Washington Superintendent of Public Instruction. On the other hand, the state legislature does not like the idea. Consequently, Washington school districts are now at a disadvantage because it is the year that no student should be left behind, which means some children attending K-12th grade will loose some school benefits. For instance, they will loose school transportation, free tutoring services, and better school meals. Randy Dorn also depicts that if state legislature is against using standardized testing to evaluate teachers, schools will now demand skilled students only. All this is a social problem to our Country because I believe that teachers should be evaluated on how well they teach by any method that will help students have teachers that will make them succeed in their education. Unfortunately, there are teachers that may be dishonest and change their students test scores so the school and their ability of educating do not appear negative.
Fallowing this further, a functionalist theorist would say that the institution of education contains two functions. The manifest function is simply to educate individuals so they can contribute to the society. Without having educated human beings, our society becomes abnormal. The latent functions focuses on how society controls the labor force of young individuals. Moreover, the social problem described in the article, is that a functionalist would illustrate that school districts receive orders from the state government and if they do not meet those requirements they are punished. They are in danger of loosing school funding and awards. The United States education institution is evaluated by given tests to the students in order to evaluate how well teachers are instructing. This basically defines the better schools from the worse schools. For example, schools located in better areas are often rewarded with things than those schools situated in deprived neighborhoods. Schools in better neighborhoods have more education opportunities, and are known as the Blue Ribbon Schools.
I believe sate legislature, should focus on evaluating teachers with the with standardized test scores. They have become vital to our country for the past years for a reason. Teachers focus on educating subjects such as, math, history, science, and English at the beginning of the school. This method is very helpful to see how well students learn from their teachers. Some solutions may be providing extra private tutoring for schools in disadvantage neighborhoods, so they can have the chance to succeed academically as well. Also, getting students parents involved in their education by volunteering in school activities, such as science fairs or book fairs. I think the standardized testing evaluation demonstrates how the education institution has achieved many goals. It also helps society see what school districts are doing their jobs properly in order to gain successful students for our future.
Desiree A.
This article discusses the No Child Left Behind Legislation. In order for a state to receive federal money for education the state must uphold certain standards and expectations. The state legislators must approve of the terms of the Federal Government is suggesting, if not the waiver is revoked. If the waiver is revoked then schools must put money aside for private tutoring and may also be labeled as failing. This article specifically discusses the state of Washington. In this situation the federal government is assessing teachers based on standardized testing. The teachers union in Washington did not approve of this method of evaluation. This issue is a social problem because thousands of students will be affected due to the loss funding from the federal government. On the other hand, the argument of teacher evaluation based solely on student performance can be considered unjust because of all the circumstances and obstacles they face (class size, curriculum, and not having enough materials for the class). Although the act can motivate teachers to increase their students proficiency levels, it can also hinder education as a whole because teachers will be preoccupied with "teaching for the test".
From a functionalist perspective, this legislation would be considered necessary in order for the educational institution to run properly. In order for schools to receive funding from the federal government they must uphold their end of the contract which states that teacher evaluation is based upon the students success rate. The consequences of not abiding by federal government standards negatively affects students who are struggling in school.
I chose this topic because my mother is a teacher in LAUSD and experiences many of the political injustices surrounding education. Personally I believe that students should be allowed to think critically and not be forced to take standardized test to prove intelligence. Many students learn in different ways and educators should be allowed to expand their teaching abilities based on the demographic of students they have in their class. Teacher evaluations should not be based on standardized testing but based on how they interact and get students to engage in the material they are presenting.
Davy P.
The state of Washington was punished by revoking the waiver for No Child Left Behind Act, because the schools didn't do good on the standardized tests. With that being said, the schools can’t support the students anymore by providing them materials, giving them transportation to school and they might be labeled as a “failing school.” The teachers were not evaluated, they didn't know how much the students are learning and how much they know, so when the standardized tests came, they didn't score enough to pass the tests. I believe that education is an important institution in the society because it reflects their performance in their future roles. If the teachers are not being evaluated and students are not educated properly, then this will become a social problem.
A functionalist would say that it is essential to punish the state for not following the Obama administration. The teachers are pressured to make sure their students are prepared to do the standardized test. If the students are not prepared, then they are considered behind, which can affect their roles in the society in the future.
I think that teachers should be evaluated, knowing how much the students learn can help the school know what they need to fix. Living in poverty and knowing that your school can’t support you because they are not funded can affect my education. I remember I had this teacher who tutored me after school, unpaid, just so I can score better in the standardized tests. If every teachers are like this, not pressured and connected with the students, then I think students will perform better in the standardized tests. In other hand, teachers should be evaluated, feeling comfortable and connected with their students.
Anahid M. in response to Desiree
I chose to discuss Desiree's comment further since she gave a very good summary of the overall issue concerning the No Child Left Behind legislation and Washington's refusal to comply with the given terms. I strongly agree with Desiree's argument that students should be taught to think critically instead of studying for the test. While students end up being prepared for the specific test, they do not learn to think further and their knowledge cannot benefit them in other subjects, in their later educational career or outside of the classroom. A teacher who might have greater focus on critical thinking skills rather than studying for the test, might encounter difficulties since students are not used to a teaching model like this and thus many might fail the standardized test. The federal government automatically considers the teacher as unqualified, even though the quality of his or her education exceeds those of other teachers who simply make students memorize. This is a social problem on many levels including a child's education and a state's economy. A state such as Washington, that does not comply with the terms, looses funding leaving schools struggling and unable to provide quality education due to the lack of resources. This forces teachers to agree with teacher evaluations based on standardized tests, forcing them to study for the test instead of teaching critical thinking skills. This leaves students ill prepared for their future careers. There might be higher school dropout rates and a higher rate of unskilled workers, which then brings down the state's economy and the US economy as a whole.
While Desiree discussed the Functionalist perspective, I want to focus on Conflict theory and the power struggle between the federal government and teachers. The federal government and the Department of Education enforce standards and punishes states for not complying with their terms, which ensures the federal government always remains in power. Meanwhile teacher's seem to have little choice and freedom and must follow the federal government's instructions. Cutting the money supply is a very effective way to keep the population in check. No money means no resources, which in turn means less opportunities for teacher's to change things within their state. The Department of Education remains in power and has control over all important decisions.
I agree with Desiree that standardized tests should not be the base to evaluate teacher's performance since there are many different factors contributing to a student's performance on a test, which the teacher does not have influence over such as troubles at home, lack of focus or not having studied. While test scores should be considered in the evaluation, they should not be the main factor in determining the quality of education. While I agree with Desiree's statement, she did not offer a comprehensive solution to the issue of teacher evaluation and alternative models. I believe there should be a stronger emphasize on regular classroom observations by fellow teachers and outside entities and the student's opinion should be considered as well by filling out teacher evaluation forms. A combination of teacher observations, evaluations and test scores gives a well rounded image of the quality of teaching.
Patricia S.
I agree with Jennifer M's comment because not all students want to equally participate in standardize testing. All students learn differently and the tests students are imposed to are not culturally sensitive. It is hard for a test to be generally equal to all because many factors such as SES, race, ethnicity even gender are not taken into account. Tests are mostly composed of Math and English segments which correlates to a person's cultural capital not all individuals are exposed to the same kinds of learning and socialization to generalize test questions. Jennifer's comment about how students are punished on basis of their poor achievement stood out to me the most because if the government is seeking for improvement it is ironic that they are removing aid from them instead of backing them up. Schools who are in the verge of failure need greater resources if what is given to them now isn't supporting their students education. I chose this topic because minority children who tend to occupy poor achieving schools are placed in a cycle of poverty because of the poor education delivered to them.Minority parents are less educated and with less resources to provide their children with greater access to tutors or other extra curriculum activities already restraining them and the school districts and government creates an even greater education gap. This is a great social issue because people with less education tend to have greater health issues such as mental disorders, addictions,and stressful poverty lifestyles. Generations are not finding an end to their suffering Low SES lives, limiting their political power and poor access to general factors such as a good education. The government is just using standardized testing as an excuse to further the minorities progress and placing them in unskilled jobs.
In the conflict perspective, they would view how children of higher SES are given more advantages than the Lower SES population. Students are placed in schools based on their area of living and depending on the taxes reported by the surrounding the schools are funded. Higher SES students are given the advantage of more funding and being able to achieve greater educational goals. Unlike,lower SES students have to conform to poor schools budgets that sometimes don't meet their needs restraining them from a prosperous education. Therefore, when standardize tests are delivered not all the populations are not given the same access and opportunity in order for the results to reflect accurate data. With a restrained education lower SES are further behind even more because the government decreases their funding based on a biased test. Higher SES students are given greater advantages preparing them for college to become professionals. The U.S is a credential society and unskilled workers are seen as less valuable in society diminishing their importance and granting professionals more importance throughout their lifetime.
Patricia S. continuation
I believe that Jennifer's solution is feasible if the educational system can provide some fair standards and allow teachers to teach it can improve the quality of education. The rates of money the U.S spends on education is already too high and the educational system is poor the problem is the regulation of the system and the stems(teachers,parents community,etc). A student should learn how to critically think aside from standards imposed by the government because children are not learning on the basis of this tactic. A solution I would encourage would be from a macro perspective that the government should remove standardize testing and remove the factor of children having to attend home schools and instead give them the opportunity to attend the one of their choice that can meet their needs and goals in life. Students can learn goals from the beginning of their education that can later reflect in the job market with greater professionals who are productive improving our educational system and our job market. Students are strained in limited opportunities not given the opportunity to learn based on their needs. Teachers should be encouraged to increase their competence and attend workshops in the summer and winter or whenever students are in vacations for a certain amount of time to receive more adequate training, new skills and improve their teaching for each unique individual. This can greatly create motivation between the society as a whole because it implements unity. The managing of money should not be taken into account primary but instead the essence of learning for all equally. Teachers should be evaluated by officials checking on them by surprise and allowing students and parents to give their positive notes and concerns. Teachers not motivated should be removed from premises until they demonstrate the capacity of their teaching and the workshops should help aid those who are "burned-out", as well as provide them with segue professions that can create greater motivation within them and improve the labor force.
Post a Comment