The one about Will Lynch and the No Child Left Behind Act

Somewhere, not so far away, there is a Utopian society. All children in this society are proficient in every subject in school. Every school teacher has a broad knowledge of their subject, which compliments their bachelor’s degree. All parents are well informed in terms of his or her child’s school, and all schools are fully accredited by the state.

Where is the amazing society you ask? The United States, of course, in the year 2014. Well this would be true according to the No Child Left Behind Act.

All of the above provisions are detailed in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. A government funded program to ensure the education for all children in the United States and the equality of education for at risk students, minorities, and special education students.
I approached my research of the No Child Left Behind Act with a fair base of knowledge on the subject. I knew that it was a government program. I knew that most of my high school teachers didn’t like it. I knew that from what my personal experience it wouldn’t work.

After a great deal of research on news sites, public forums and on-line encyclopedias I learned much more. A majority of Americans held the same belief that the No Child Left Behind Act didn’t work, but was a good idea. The main problem, I learned, was the funding. The No Child Left Behind requires somewhere around 27 million dollars in appropriations, President Bush, however, allocated only 13.3 million dollars into the program this last year.

I also learned a lot about corruption. The reasoning behind the great bill was set on the belief that it had worked in Texas during President Bush’s tenure as Governor. However, in that system that worked so well in Texas, there were many fraudulent activities. The incentives to “cheat” the system were high; after two years of not reaching goals and being labeled “at risk”, schools stopped receiving government funding. These schools had to cheat in order to survive as schools. The punishment for the schools is high, aside from losing funding, the label also means that parents can have their children go elsewhere, which would also decrease the amount of appropriations they would receive from the government.

The main problem I’ve heard from teachers, before my research, was the fact that many teachers feel pressured by their school districts to “teach to the test,” meaning that the subject matter is drastically changed in order to ensure that students earn “proficient” test scores and the school receives the money needed to continue running. Surprisingly, this was only brought up once as a refutation of the system in my research. Neither the faculty nor the staff at Girard’s high school or middle school touched on the subject. Their views were mostly that the program was “good in theory” but needed far more funding.

However, I learned a lot about why the program isn’t horrible and, in some cases, has worked. More progress was made by nine-year-olds in reading in the last five years than in the previous 28 years combined. America's nine-year-olds posted the best scores in reading (since 1971) and math (since 1973) in the history of the report. America's 13-year-olds earned the highest math scores the test ever recorded. Reading and math scores for African American and Hispanic nine-year-olds reached an all-time high. Math scores for African American and Hispanic 13-year-olds reached an all-time high. Achievement gaps in reading and math between white and African American nine-year-olds and between white and Hispanic nine-year-olds are at an all-time low. Forty-three states and the District of Columbia either improved academically or held steady in all categories (fourth- and eighth-grade reading and fourth- and eighth-grade math).
All in all, the program is good, but does need a lot of reformation.

I learned a lot about it, and plan to use the topic as my senior thesis far down the road.