No Child Left behind Act - Case Study Example

Review of Program Activity & Proposal for Change Part A: Review and Evaluation In my tenth grade, our English teacher engaged us in‘Prevention against Drug Use Program’ during our free time. The teacher was committed to teach the students on the negative effects of using drugs since it was rampant in the school, especially the students who were aged between 15 and 18. The habit of drug use was not exclusive to boys, as many may think; rather the girls were affected as much as the boys were (Adriana, 2011). Given that youths, like us then, spend most of their time in the school environment, it is appropriate for school provide the students with knowledge that will help in the prevention and reduction in drug use among the schooling youths (NCPC, 2009). Immediately after our normal classes, we would assemble, after which our teacher took us through a learning process about drugs that lasted for an hour. Each student was empowered after the program. Through the program, the students’ knowledge on drugs was enhanced. The program boosted the students’ comprehension that drug use is detrimental both in the short-term and in the long-term, when the behavior turns into addiction. As a result, drug demand in the school environment reduced, the supply of the drugs was reduced, and the social consequences impacted by drugs were mitigated in the end. For instance, negative associations with peers, drug-related crimes, dropping out of school, wild sexual behaviors, violence among students and teen pregnancies were reduced, thanks to this program (UNDOC and GYN, 2010). Indeed, every institution ought to have such program as part of their pedagogy. Currently, the program is only delivered through face-to-face approach of learning. The teacher meets with the students, who assemble in a designated classroom immediately after normal classes, and gives presentations on drug use using projectors and blackboards (Hyuman Intafesu Shinpojumu et al., 2009). Students are expected to keep quiet during the presentation and raise their hands in case they have a question on the presentation being made. The students are left to discuss among themselves when need arises so that they can internalize the values being taught by the teacher (Lemov, 2010). This has been helpful for many students. With face-to-face approach, students stand to gain quite a great deal. These students’ time management skills are still developing and despite having knowledge on the use of computers, they may not be having access to the internet. Additionally, not all parents can afford to purchase computers and mobile phones for these youthful students, and in most cases, these facilities are shared among the family members (Glazer, 2012). Given that, face-to-face approach used in this program emerges as the most practical way of teaching the students. The approach provides more information to students through body language and gestures. The students are able to give their personal experiences pertaining to drug use in this approach, a source of additional information. Besides, face-to-face approach helps the teacher and student personify the learning by giving feedbacks promptly (Kilary, 2010). The needs of these young minds are fulfilled effectively through this approach. Even so, there is room for improvement. The teachers should make it a requirement for each student to have a laptop or tablet. The school should also provide free internet for the students. This will positively affect the learning since the students will be able learn with increased information sharing and at any location of their convenience (Gillespie, 2014). The integration of online learning into the program is worthwhile. Part B: Proposal for Change Integration of an online component to the program will serve as a solution to the factors that hinder school-based programs, which are concerned with prevention of drug use, from achieving their objective. As Provini (2014) reports, many of these programs are not grounded in science, something that leads to their failure to achieve their aims. He adds that, despite the No Child Left Behind Act requiring all the schools with federal funding to employ programs that are based on evidence, only a few of them comply with the law. Additionally, Provini asserts that the programs involve one-time events that only explicate the dangers of drug use through presentations, a leading factor in spurring curiosity of experimentation with drugs among the students. In addition, Provini affirms that the mere liking of such face-to-face presentations by the students does not translate to a change in the student’s behavior. Online components can solve these adversities of face-to-face approach. Firstly, an online component allows students to learn at their own convenient time. The student does not have to assemble after normal classes to learn. Teaching students on the dangers of taking drugs alone does not bar the student from engaging in drug abuse (Provini, 2014). It is suggested that the student ought to engage in things like sports and other useful roles in the community so that the students mind is busy with no time left for thinking about engaging in risky behavior (Hanson, Venturelli and Fleckenstein, 2014). Online components of learning enable the students learn at their leisure time, instead of sacrificing their playing time for programs. In addition, online components of learning will reduce the costs of inviting guest-speakers and other trainers, who are high-priced. The face-to-face approach should be used occasionally since the online supplements it rather than substitution. Secondly, online components will aid in providing the student with a caring adult to serve as a positive role model. In this context, role models can be teachers and other adults who are often busy with their day-to-day activities. This means that they will not have sufficient time to spare for the students, in their role model function. Through the integration of an online component into the learning, the role models can connect with the students often through social media, among other forums, and provide the students with the emotional support that they desperately require abstaining from drug abuse behaviors (Provini, 2014). Additionally, students are able to express their feelings and ask personal questions when they are not in direct contact with the role model (Donohew, Sypher and Bukoski, 2012). This will help approach the problem in a more detailed manner as opposed to the face-to-face approach that generalizes the issue. Lastly, through the online component, the students can exchange oodles of information with the instructors and other recovering addicts. In the online forum, students can derive inspirational personal stories of recovering drug addicts and can share such information among themselves through forums like social media (Freeman, 2013). In the face-to-face approach, recovering addicts are invited occasionally, but in the online approach, the personal stories of addicts are easily available and can be shared. Additionally, the online component can help the students understand that despite the fact that some peers in their school are abusing drugs, not everybody in the world is doing that (Provini, 2014). In effect, the students are able make salient decisions on drug abuse and not because of peer pressure. Adding an online component undeniably helps overcome many challenges of the teaching and learning. References Adriana, R. (2011, November). School Context Description. [Web log Comment]. Retrieved from http://teachingcanbebetter.blogspot.com/2010/11/context Donohew, L. Sypher, H.E & Bukoski, W. J (2012). Persuasive Communication and Drug Abuse Prevention. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers. Freeman, E. M. (2013). Substance abuse intervention, prevention, rehabilitation, and systems change strategies: Helping individuals, families, and groups to empower themselves. New York: Columbia University Press. Glazer, F. S. (2012). Blended learning: Across the disciplines, across the academy. Sterling, Va: Stylus. Gillespie, H. (2014). Unlocking Learning and Teaching with ICT: Identifying and Overcoming Barriers. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Hanson, G., Venturelli, P. J., & Fleckenstein, A. E. (2014). Drugs and society. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Hyūman Intafēsu Shinpojūmu, Smith, M. J., Salvendy, G., & International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. (2009). Human interface and the management of information: Symposium on Human Interface 2009, held as part of HCI International 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, July 19-24, 2009 ; proceedings. Berlin: Springer. Kiraly, D. (2010, December). Is e-Learning Inferior to Face-to-Face Instruction? (E-Learning Series). TechChange. Retrieved from http://techchange.org/2010/12/06/is-e-learning-inferior-to-face-to-face-instruction/ Lemov, D. (2010). Teach like a champion: 49 techniques that put students on the path to college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. National Crime Prevention Centre (NCPC). (2009). School-based Drug Abuse Prevention: Promising and Successful programs (DHHS Publication No. PS4-73/2009E). Ottawa, Ontario Canada: Canada Government printing Office. Provini, C. (2014, August 23). Your Drug Prevention Program Probably Isnt Working. Educational World. Retrieved from http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/school_climate/drug_prevention_program_isnt_working.shtml United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), & Global Youth Network (GYN). (2010). Schools: School-based education for drug abuse prevention. New York: United Nations. Read More