Demographic Data and Immigrant Student Achievement - Research Proposal Example

Minority Failure Under the NCLB Act Introduction Education is the single most important factor that separates people by status, income, and social class. Academic credentials add to our social and cultural assets, increase our income, and make new opportunities for advancement possible. Indeed, the US has valued a free and public education for all its citizens as an expression of the belief that all men are created equal. Landmark decisions such as Brown v. Board of Education further confirmed that education was a right of all people without regards to race, ethnicity, or gender. More recently, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 dictated a new national curricula and set standards of performance for school districts, schools, teachers, and students. It was advocated as a way to insure that students were receiving the education they were entitled to, and not just pushing them through the motion of graduation. However, critics have contended that it is ineffectual, punitive, inflexible, and hurts minority students the most, the very one's the Act was purported to help. An evaluation of the important markers of achievement scores, drop out rate, and performance gap will show that the NCLB has left minority students farther behind, and in fact is fundamentally discriminatory in its implementation. Relevance The NCLB was enacted with good intentions and targeted the legitimate educational problems in the public school system, but the unintended consequences have prohibited the ACT from realizing its goals. The Act was passed with bipartisan support amid much fanfare with then President Bush stating, "These reforms express my deep belief in our public schools and their mission to build the mind and character of every child, from every background, in every part of America" (cited in US Department of Education, 2002, p.9). The fundamental principles of the NCLB came after decades of debate and stress that "schools and districts work best when they have greater control and flexibility, when scientifically proven teaching methods are employed, and when schools are held accountable for results" (US Department of Education, 2002, p.9). However, after 6 years of data it appears that schools and teachers have lost their autonomy and the results are being masked and hidden through unethical accounting practices. Issues such as bilingual education are being used as a political hot button, with little regard for the students that the policies impact. Data is falsified, drop out rates soar, and the real problems go unnoticed in an air of false confidence. The situation has degenerated to the point that some states have considered abandoning the NCLB and forfeiting federal funding for education. It is of extreme importance to look at the latest data available and make an evaluation as to the future of the NCLB. It is the obligation of the citizens and legislature to assure we have an Act that works as designed and fulfills the lofty, and worthwhile, goals set by the NCLB. Literature Review One of the most focused upon characteristics of student data is what is called the 'Achievement Gap'. It is the performance gap that exists between the white students and the minority students. Traditionally, since the 1960s white students have outscored minorities at almost every level and subject due to socio-cultural and economic reasons, and the NCLB has a goal of closing this gap (Smith, 2005, p.513). However, this aspect of the NCLB is almost immeasurable. For the recent 4-year period beginning in 2004, the data required to evaluate the achievement gap only exists for 10 of the 50 states (Anderson, Medrich, & Fowler, 2007, p.549). To be measured as a minority sub-group, such as Hispanic, the school needs a minimum number of the minority students to be required to include them in the data. If the number of minority students is small, such as in a rural school, they are not required to disaggregate them in the data. Schools and districts can set this number arbitrarily and may be using it to hide minority results. According to Olson and Jacobson (2006), "schools aren't being held accountable for the subgroup performance of some 1.9 million students who fall into various racial or ethnic categories in calculations of AYP".1 Because funding and sanctions ride on the results of the AYP, it is sometimes in the interest of the school to mask or hide the results through creative counting practices. Reporting them with a large number of majority students can dilute the effect of the significant gap in performance, and still claim they are counted (Clarkson, 2008, p.20). Counting every student's progress is, and should remain a goal of the NCLB Act. Another problem with tracking AYP is the NCLB's rigid and strict guidelines that conflict with the reality of America's demographics. Great disparities exist in the racial and ethnic makeup of the school systems as well as the economic foundation of the school districts. There is an uneven distribution of minorities in the schools, and they are mostly concentrated in inner city areas. Kane and Staiger (2003) stated that, "the difference in failure rates between states is likely to be the racial composition of their schools" (cited in Smith, 2005, p.513). In 2004, it was reported that 57 percent of the Ohio schools had failed the critical AYP goal, due largely to the lack of progress among students with Special Educational Needs (SEN) (Smith, 2005, p.513). The impact on minority students is twofold. First, from a very early age tracking places low performing students on an almost inescapable academic path that leads to a "watered down curriculum that emphasizes memorization" (Futrell & Gomez, 2008, p.75). Students such as minorities, ethnic students, and immigrants will often find themselves locked on this academic track. Additional language, social, cultural, and economic pressures (often misdiagnosed as mental or behavioral disorders) will inevitably place many of these students in special education programs. According to De Valenzuela, Copeland, Qi, and Park (2006), "African American, Hispanic, Native American, and ELL students had a greater chance of placement in more segregated educational settings than did their peers" (p.437). They may be locked here for their entire academic career as counselors and teachers discourage advancement out of these tracked classes in the fear that they will bring down the average of the majority class (Futrell & Gomez, 2008, p.76). Secondly, the pressures on the teachers, schools, and districts to accomplish the guidelines of the NCLB will lead to a demoralized staff that is willing to cut ethical corners to keep the school from being punished by federal sanctions, or even closed. Adhering to the NCLB has taken priority over the solid education, complete with critical thinking and analytical skills, of many minority youth. These short cuts and questionable accounting methods further put the minority population at risk under the NCLB. The results of the discriminatory policies of the NCLB become even more evident when the impact of high stakes testing and the dropout rate are analyzed. High stakes testing is the undue importance that is placed on an individual test that is required for adherence to the NCLB Act or graduation. Because testing for the NCLB is done in the 10th grade, students are routinely held back in 9th grade so their low performance does not impact the NCLB results, and the curricula is then driven by the test (McNeil, Coppola, Radigan, & Heilig, 2008, p.12; Smyth, 2008, p.134). Smyth (2008) reports the impact that this has on inner city and poverty areas when she states, "when test stakes rise, people seek help from professional resources. Naturally, affluent families, schools, and districts can afford these tutorials. Lower-performing schools typically cannot afford to offer high-priced materials for these high-stakes tests" (p.135). In addition, as students are retained in grades to remove them from the NCLB results, they are often unable to resocialize with a new set of peers, and have developed a pattern of failure. Without intervention, these students will eventually become a casualty of the drop out rate. One of the primary goals of public education is to graduate students. The NCLB Act requires states to report their graduation rate, but numbers are grossly exaggerated and in most cases highly unreliable. While states such as North Carolina boast a Latino graduation rate of 94 percent, research by the Urban Institute places the number at 58 percent (Adam, 2006, p.19). The discrepancies come from the method used to measure the drop out rate. If a state uses the percentage of 12th graders that complete the year, the number will be significantly higher than the percentage of 21-year-old Latinos that have graduated. States fail to count students who may drop out in 9th or 10th grade, prior to high stakes testing. The most affected are minority students who have dropout rates as high as 60 percent is some areas, and "our most vulnerable youth, the poor, the English language learners, and African American and Latino children, [are] at risk of being pushed out of their schools so the school ratings can show 'measurable improvement'" (McNeil et al., 2008, p.1-2). Minority students that begin their education with socio-cultural disadvantages will find themselves tracked into lower level classes and be unable to avert the pressures to eventually drop out of school. Findings This research has noted some significant deficiencies in the implementation of the NCLB in America's public school system. In addition, those most affected are minorities, English language learners, and students with special needs. A review of the relevant literature has found that data regarding students is highly unreliable. The data is often skewed to benefit the school system at the expense of minority students. This results in large numbers of minority students being tracked into lower academic levels, removed from accountability, and encouraged to drop out rather than have a negative effect on the NCLB goals and requirements. High stakes testing further reduces the minority student's chance for success. The classroom instruction is geared to the test, and those that have a potential to fail are held back, rather than being tested. The culmination of these problems results in the excessive dropout rates of minority students, and especially African-Americans and Latinos. There is a clear indication that these problems begin in the early grades, while the school system exacerbates, or ignores, the problems in an effort to protect the self-survival of the school and to escape federal sanctions. Discussion The problems that are inherent in the NCLB Act are at best unethical and at the worst racist. De facto discrimination results from policies that unintentionally segregate the population, even though the policy may appear to be fair and equal. According to the Supreme Court, this practice is illegal in the workplace, and this should also apply to education. Discriminatory practices that begin with tracking have been dealt with successfully in the public school system in Maryland. They offer an expanded all-day kindergarten program and have free pre-kindergarten programs for 3 and 4 year olds with economic needs (Futrell & Gomez, 2008, p.77). This is followed by an increased focus on the curricula, intense monitoring, and a reduced class size that has resulted in a substantial increase in the number of poor and minority students that achieve academic success, including advanced placement programs (Futrell & Gomez, 2008, p.77). The key to their success has been to reach these children at an early age and encourage their success, rather than anticipating their failure. Getting students off to a successful start can make other adjustments possible and further increase the minority students' chance of success. High stakes testing needs to be re-evaluated using the current and reliable data. Schools and teachers should not be held hostage to the results of a single test. This system almost assures that the classroom instruction will be based on the test, and short cuts will be taken. According to McNeil et al. (2008), "the higher the stakes and the longer such a system governs our schools, the more school personnel may come to view students not as children to educate but as potential liabilities" (p.37). This system needs to be more flexible and give teachers and districts more autonomy over the curricula and teaching methods. The public school system needs to focus on education and not the abstract concept of passing a particular test. Conclusion and Summary In conclusion, the NCLB Act has been called racist and there have been calls for its elimination due to its discriminatory characteristics. However, scrapping the Act may leave the system in total disarray. The Act needs to be re-evaluated and keep what works, and eliminate what is failing. There is widespread agreement that schools need standards, testing, and measurable results. However, education needs to keep its focus on education without the constant fear of losing federal funding or being stigmatized as a failed school. Funding across school districts needs to become more uniform to assure that the concentrated pockets of minority students have the resources necessary to give them an opportunity for academic success. Getting our 3 and 4-year-old children off to an early academic head start can help reduce the social, economic, and cultural disadvantages that many minority students have. There also needs to be an attitudinal change in the public school system that begins to view students as assets as opposed to liabilities. The NCLB Act was an effort that carried many unintended consequences with it. The Congress should recognize its shortcomings and rewrite the law to give minority students a better chance of success, remove the incentives for encouraging minority dropouts, and begin to promote the education of the child, rather than anticipating their ultimate failure as students. References Adam, M. (2006). States are faking minority progress for NCLB. Educational Digest, 71(5), 18-23. This article discusses the myriad ways that schools use to calculate the dropout rate and why the rates are unreliable. It is a useful article to confirm the discrepancies exist and find out the motivation that schools have for hiding the true figures. The true figures cited by Adam are verified in other literature, and show the extent of the schools disregard for minority students' education. Anderson, S., Medrich, E., & Fowler, D. (2007). Which achievement gap Phi Delta Kappan, 88(7), 547-550. This article highlights the difficulty in getting student data on performance that is useful as disaggregated subgroup performance standards. The article is useful in that it explains the AYP and gives the reasons that schools are incapable of currently providing AYP data. Clarkson, L. M. (2008). Demographic data and immigrant student achievement. Theory Into Practice, 47(1), 20-26. This article contends that immigrant students face special challenges in meeting the subgroup standards for NCLB, and as such the schools and districts are finding innovative methods of keeping them out of the disaggregated subgroup totals. De Valenzuela, J. S., Copeland, S. R., Qi, C. H., & Park, M. (2006). Examining educational equity: Revisiting the disproportionate representation of minority students in special education. Exceptional Children, 72(4), 425-441. This article confirms the widely held belief that minority students are over represented in special needs classrooms. It further examines the reasons for their greater numbers, such as social and cultural factors that contribute to behavior or attitude problems. Futrell, M. H., & Gomez, J. (2008). How tracking creates a poverty of learning. Educational Leadership, 65(8), 74-79. This article tackles the ongoing problem of tracking that is used in most public schools to segregate students by ability. It is useful to understand that once a child is tracked as a slow or special needs learner, it is difficult if not impossible to escape that label. In addition, the article offers several alternatives that schools are successfully using to move away from tracking. McNeil, L. M., Coppola, E., Radigan, J., & Heilig, J. V. (2008). Avoidable losses: High-stakes accountability and the dropout crisis. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 16(3), 1-48. This article details the high dropout rate among minorities and its close association with high stakes testing. It is based on a long-term study of specific schools in Texas, which have problems similar to other systems around the country. It is useful in its correlation of poverty and drop out rate and the linkage between them. Olson, L., & Jacobson, L. (2006). Analysis finds minority NCLB scores widely excluded [Electronic version]. Education Week, 25(33). from Academic Search Premier. This article reports the magnitude of the problem of unreported students. The article sites statistics both nationally, and from California. It can be used to state the severity of the problem and that it is not just anecdotal. Smith, E. (2005). Raising standards in American schools: the case of No Child Left Behind. Journal of Education Policy, 20(4), 507-524. The purpose of this article is to explain why a law that seems to be fair and equitable can result in significant discrimination. It is useful in that it has statistics that report state failures, their reasons, and the views of educators as to why it happens. Smyth, T. S. (2008). Who is no child left behind leaving behind The Clearing House, 81(3), 133-137. Smyth details the implications of high stakes testing and its effect on the teachers, curricula, and the student. Smyth contends that more affluent students and schools can afford better preparation for the test. In addition, Smyth highlights the poor educational value of teaching the test, and not educating. US Department of Education. (2002). No Child Left Behind: A desktop reference. Washington, DC: Author This is an abridged version of the NCLB legislation. It includes the rationale behind the law and the goals of the supporters. It also explains the methods that the legislation would use to reach the goals of the NCLB Act. Read More