NCLB

One of the topics of conversation that has really interested me amongst our class has been about No Child Left Behind. I have always believed I was fairly familiar with the law and understood it's ramifications not only on education as a whole in the country, but on me specifically in the classroom. NCLB is really an intriguing study. It is one of those rare issues that, to me it seems, the more I know about it, the less I like it.

And here is another example... http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2008/04/04012008.html

This article demonstrates to me that, once again, supporters of the Law are looking externally for ways to enforce and improve it, rather than internally. One of the major arguments against NCLB, in the past, have been that part of the criteria for judging a school having met AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) and therefore not being considered a "school in need of improvement" has been graduation rates. This has been further complicated by the fact that not all states (not even all districts in the SAME state) calculate graduation rates the same way. It's a bit complicated, but let me give you a couple of "for instances"...

If a student transfers into your school with 2 months left in his/her senior year and graduates, that student is counted as a "graduate" from your school in some districts. In others, it would not. Similarly, in some districts, if a student transfers out of your school 2 weeks into their freshman year, but drop out as a junior at another school, the student would count AGAINST your graduation rate.

So NCLB is pushing for uniform graduation rates... Is that the answer, or should the criteria for AYP not include stringent graduation rate policies? Or, should NCLB be looking more closely at ways they can ENCOURAGE students to stay in school, rather than just at how they will judge schools if a student doesn't stay?