For a brief time I was an early childhood education major before I decided this was not the field for me. My mother has a degree in this field and is a Head Start center supervisor/teacher. Education has always been a big issue in my family. When I look at the NCLB, I see that even though it is an attempt to clean up failing public schools, it is really just a bandaid soulution. I'll elaborate:
--I was actually in high school to take one of the assesment tests. Not only was the test a joke (pathetically easy), but it was passed out to me with a printed label on it. You know all of those optional quesitons at the beginning of an Iowa or similar test? Questions like what race you identify with, and so forth? Mine was already filled out. It listed me as a white, gifted student from a low-income family. This way, if I did well on the test, the school could claim that they were doing a good job of reaching out to "at-risk" students, and get credit they didn't necessarily deserve. If I did poorly on the test, the school could claim that they needed more money to "reach out to at-risk students". Either way, my test could be used by, say, people working up stats on students of different races, income levels, or "special needs" (aka "gifted" and "slow") students. These are all uses of my test results that I object to, and have a right to not be included in. And further more, I was one of only a small group to have my test profile filled out for me. Everyone else got to choose their own answers.
--Teachers are threatened with loss of their jobs if all the students can't pass these tests. As a result, panicked teachers have been adapting their curriculums to teach to the tests, or even worse, putting extreme pressure on students to pass. In rare cases, there have even been teachers who read test answers to students during the test! This is absurd--it teaches our children that all that matters is passing the test, not learning for its own sake.
--How exactly will taking away money from struggling schools and giving more money to schools that are doing well fix anything? I see this as a failed attempt to apply capitalist philosophy to a situation that frankly is not free-market. For example, many believe that our health system is great because if you don't like a doctor, you can leave that doctor, who will eventually loose business/money. People who live in the real world realize you can only pick docotors from a limited list anyhow (whatever your insurance allows) and all you know about these doctors is a name and an address. If you don't like the doctor from your area, you can drive an hour away or you can deal. Similarly, parents who cannot afford to send their children to a specially chosen private school have the public school in their area as their only recourse. If they don't like the school, they can uproot their lives and move--or they can deal. The school system is *not* free market, and pretending it is (NCLB or vouchers) will not solve the problem. Public schools need our support and involvement, especially on a local level, to improve. People need to look for solutions, not blame.
--The tests really *are* a joke, and not an accurate assesment of how a school is doing. For example, I did well on the test, and I was a "gifted" student. I did not necessarily do well on the test because my school did well by me. I did well on the test because I always do well on tests--my talents include strong language skills, and I never have anything to fear from a written test (bwa-haha!) But that's my own talent, bolstered by my reading addiction--something my school never did anything to foster.
--I don't believe in grades anyhow. In my ideal world, children would be constantly immersed in hands-on learning environments where instead of having factoids crammed down their throats and then vomiting them onto a page for points, they would learn through exploration and experimentation whenever possible. They'd then be assessed through oral exams, essays, and demonstration of skills/completion of projects. Anyone can BS their way through a multiple-guess test or yank words from a wordbank. We would still need some paper/pencil tests, but their nature would be changed and their number greatly reduced. Then it wouldn't matter what precentage points a child got after cramming facts into her head to be promptly forgotten. It would only matter what she actually learned and how well she could apply it.
Hope that helps clarify my position--thanks for your comment! I am not surprised to hear you call me a potential Libertarian, but I had a dear friend who was registered Libertarian, and our political opinions were not just night/day, they were from different planets! A "Goldwater" Republican? I know I've heard the term, but I can't recall its meaning. Refresh my memory? Thanks! --LL