|
Episode #1902
No Child Left Behind
Brown: Natalie Bullock Brown,
host
Lee: Howard Lee,
State Board of Education
Quarters: Renee Quarters, E.E. Smith High School
M: Unidentified male
F: Unidentified Female
Brown:
In
addition to meeting the ABC’s accountability measures
towards improving student achievement, North Carolina schools
are also beholden to President Bush’s federal No Child
Left Behind legislation. We’ll discuss how the two programs
work together and what they mean for parents, teachers and
students, tonight on Black Issues Forum.
Voiceover:
This program was made possible by contributions to UNC-TV
from viewers like you. Thank you.
[THEME
MUSIC]
Brown:
Good evening, I’m Natalie Bullock Brown and welcome
to Black Issues Forum. In 1995, the North Carolina
State Legislature created what has come to be known as the
ABC’s of public education, to help track and improve
student performance statewide. In 2002 the federal government
signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act, with its own
set of education reforms to improve student achievement and
narrow the academic achievement gap. Now how does the national
school accountability legislation impact and interact with
North Carolina’s ABC’s? Moreover, are these state
and federal stands helping those they intend to help, or hurting?
We have two guests tonight to talk with us about the issues.
But first, some background information on the No Child Left
Behind legislation by Producer Tim Crowley.
Crowley:
These seventh-graders at Sycamore Lane Middle School in
Laurinburg are working on their math problems. School is only
a few weeks old so the students have their minds on the books
and not on what happens at the end of the year. But school
administrators are looking ahead. Sycamore Lane and several
other schools in the Scotland County school district didn’t
meet their yearly progress goals last year. A second year
of missing the goal and the school and school district could
be placed on the needs improvement list under No Child Left
Behind, for schools with a high percentage of students getting
free lunch, called Title 1 Schools. This means parents could
choose to send their kids to another school.
F:
It could be very detrimental to public schools in general.
I’ve been—when you look at schools and you try
to judge them on some label that has been attached to them,
I think that’s a negative thing. But I have found the
community to be very understanding and I think they understand
that we’re not meeting full adequate yearly progress
but we’re making progress and that’s a good thing.
Crowley:
The hard luck fact for Scotland County schools is that
state scores show they missed their goals by a small margin,
and these are schools that perform well in the state’s
accountability system called the ABC’s. The school district
met more than 90% of its goals overall. Under No Child Left
Behind though, all goals must be met. The goals that Scotland
County missed were for exceptional children in reading and
math. School officials are trying to avoid placing blame.
F:
We the educators control the conditions that bring about
student learning, and so we would not blame a group of students
for not meeting a particular learning goal. We’re not
going to blame the educators either, we’re going to
blame the processes that we’re using and we’re
going to try to fix those processes so that we can bring every
student to a proficient level.
Crowley:
Other school systems face the same problem as Scotland
County. They’ve reached more than 90% of their goals
under No Child Left Behind. In a regular classroom, that equals
an A; under No Child Left Behind, it’s an F, and that
has state school officials concerned.
M:
The all-or-nothing nature of the federal accountability
model we think is problematic because the model doesn’t
distinguish between schools that miss their annual yearly
progress targets by a little, and schools that miss it by
a mile. So that you’ve got some schools that have missed
their performance growth targets by a fraction, and others
that have missed it woefully; but as far as the most severe
consequences are concerned, both are subject.
Crowley:
More than half of North Carolina’s public schools
are Title 1 schools and are eligible for the harshest sanctions.
After two years on the needs improvement list, parents can
move their children to a new school. After three years, the
school districts would have to pay for support services like
extra tutoring. With several more years on the list, the most
extreme penalty could be to reconstitute a school, meaning
a new principal and new faculty.
M:
This year, as you know, only a relative small number of
schools—I believe it was 37—are feeling the consequences
of the bill and having to offer students the right to transfer
to other schools and so on. That number in all probability
will increase fairly dramatically and it’s not going
to just increase in some of our poorest neighborhoods; it’s
likely to be in wealthy suburbs as well as inner city schools
or rural areas. And I think that’s when the pressure’s
really going to be felt at the building level and at the community
level.
Crowley:
Preliminary numbers released by the Department of Public
Instruction show 37 public schools had to offer school choice
at the start of this year, but school administrators expect
that number to be several hundred next year. They will try
to target resources to schools that need it the most.
M:
It’s big, it’s a daunting challenge, but it’s
the right challenge. This legislation forces the question
of closing gaps by race and poverty and disability and language
status. We ought to have been there already, but this legislation
will certainly force the issue over the course of the next
few years. We just want it to be legislation that works well
that has a useful and accurate accountability system as we
work to meet those very worthy goals.
Crowley:
School officials would like to see some type of progress
rewarded, much like North Carolina’s ABC’s system,
instead of the all-or-nothing mentality. That way schools
like Sycamore Lane won’t face the harshest sanctions
under No Child Left Behind for barely missing its target.
Brown:
And now let’s meet our guests. Former State Senator
Howard Lee, the newly elected chair of the State Board of
Education, and the first African-American chair I might add.
Also Renee Quarters, principal of Fayetteville’s E.E.
Smith High School and the 2003 North Carolina Principal of
the Year. Welcome the both of you.
[BOTH
SAY “THANK YOU”]
Brown:
Now let’s start off—I’m going to start
with you, Mr. Lee. I’m trying to understand the difference
with the state’s ABC’s accountability program
and the No Child Left Behind.
Lee:
Actually at the heart of the No Child Left Behind legislation,
much of what we have created in North Carolina as a part of
our ABC’s plan, North Carolina along with Texas were
the two states—was the first state to step up and have
a very strong accountability program—but emphasis on
holding both schools and school systems accountable for achieving
those levels. Under the North Carolina plan we put a great
deal of emphasis on growth. That is we expect schools to meet
a certain level of proficiency that is to ensure that a certain
number of their students will pass at a certain level, and
we measure that through various assessments and then we reward
the school for having made this progress. Under the No Child
Left Behind legislation, the measurement is focused more on
subgroups. And so each subgroup then has to reach a set level
of proficiency which changes over time, which means that by
2013 North Carolina may have a very high proficiency, but
the problem with this No Child Left Behind legislation is
that there is no wiggle room: you’re either perfect
or you fail. And I think that is going to be problematic long
term, and I am among those who believe that that can’t
continue because it sets up an almost failed process or process
for failure. So I’m hoping the Department of Education
and the Congress will relook at giving us some wiggle room
because if one subgroup on one test fails to meet proficiency
by one point, as the superintendent mentioned earlier, it
brings down the whole school and I think that has some long-term
serious consequences which I’m sure we’ll talk
about as we continue this conversation.
Brown:
Yes. Well, Ms. Quarters, since you’ve experienced
I’m sure, this lack of wiggle room as a principal, how
do you deal with that?
Quarters:
Well first of all, one of the things we might want to point
out is another difference and I think a key difference between
the ABC’s model and the No Child Left Behind legislation
is that with the ABC’s model in North Carolina we take
a look at all schools. With the No Child Left Behind legislation
we’re only talking about those schools that are subject
to federal sanctions or federal accolades if you will, because
of monies that they received as a result of being Title 1
schools. So because I’m principal of a high school then,
our high school is not subject to sanctions or accolades because
we don’t receive those Title 1 funds. So with the ABC’s
model, the focus then is to make sure that every individual,
every student under that roof experiences a year’s worth
of growth each year, and that’s what we focus on. And
gratefully enough, and I have to be quite honest with you,
I feel quite fortunate because with the high school situation
we don’t have to take a look at nearly as much as those
elementary and middle schools do that receive Title 1 funding,
but that no wiggle room that we talked about earlier. And
so I don’t feel that pressure of the NCLB legislation
that I might feel otherwise.
Brown:
Well let me get back to you Mr. Lee, and talk about how for
the schools that are under No Child Left Behind, how is it
supposed to help students? I understand the lack of wiggle
room and the problems that that presents, but what’s
behind, what’s at the heart of the legislation that’s
intended to help?
Lee:
Well, first of all it’s awfully difficult to be
opposed to the concept in No Child Left Behind because all
of us have been committed to working, to helping every child
improve. And while we don’t highlight the child per
se under the North Carolina ABC plan, the goal is to ensure
that students perform at a level of proficiency, and the schools
are rewarded for that. So obviously there’s a built-in
incentive for the leaders of the school and the teachers to
work hard to get all students up. At the same time, it does
allow parents to have some more focused interests or information
about what their student is doing in comparison to other subgroups
within that school.
Brown:
And let me just cut in—is that useful information?
Lee:
It is useful information because I think it allows parents
then to recognize and it allows educators to recognize that
we may be missing the target in terms of some cultural factors
or some other factors that are not involved here, and it allows
the parent to have a greater incentive to be involved in the
educational life of that student. The third way it helps is
that certain schools do qualify for additional federal funds;
i.e., we have applied for and received a grant on Reading
First and helping students develop their reading skills. That
might be money that would be available to help hire tutors
and give support in other ways. So there are some strong benefits
to having the No Child Left Behind legislation, but North
Carolina was already way down the road in having achieved
many of these goals under the ABC’s plan. And I want
it understood very clearly that the ABC’s accountability
plan is what’s driving the train in North Carolina,
and No Child Left Behind is an add-on that certainly gives
us a little boost forward.
Brown:
Let me just ask one more clarifying question in terms of No
Child Left Behind: how much is the state accountable to No
Child Left Behind in light of what you’re saying about
the state is being—its main focus is on the ABC’s?
Lee:
The state is very accountable for No Child Left Behind
because if we fail to achieve the goals that are set out in
that legislation, we have to account to the federal government,
and of course when we receive money that is determined by
how we are performing. Now, what the State Board has done
is to integrate No Child Left Behind as a part of the ABC’s
plan, and so the two are working in tandem. Now there’s
been some question raised as to whether or not we should use
No Child Left Behind as a basis for determining the rewards
that are given to schools that meet and exceed proficiency.
And I think that is a point that needs to be talked about,
because it would require legislative change if indeed we were
to go down that road.
Brown:
Thank you. Ms. Quarters, talk about how ABC’s has
helped students, teachers, parents, to come together to increase
student performance?
Quarters:
Well I don’t think there’s any question but it’s
all but forced school people to work in cooperation with parents
for the betterment of students to ensure that they do experience
that year’s worth of growth. One of the things that
I think I would like to add about the ABC’s model and
an improvement I might add that we made recently in North
Carolina to our own model is heretofore if a school had an
80%+ proficiency rate, then that school was automatically
termed a school of distinction, whether or not the students
in that school—and we’re talking about subgroups—whether
or not all those students were able to move the mark. But
now with the changes it means that if you’ve not experienced
and met expectations and experienced that growth, that school,
80%+ or not, can no longer be termed a school of distinction.
So I agree wholeheartedly with Chairman Lee, I think that
what we’re doing in North Carolina in terms of our focus
on growth and in terms of our focus on achievement, is light
years ahead of what we’re being asked to do with the
No Child Left Behind Legislation, we’re at the forefront.
Brown:
Well let me ask you this really: is it fair to expect
the sort of growth in achievement and performance of all the
schools across the state, or do we have some work—and
for all subgroups—or do we have some work to do?
Lee:
We have a great challenge. I’ve been moving around
the state in recent weeks talking to people about where we
are, celebrating what we have achieved, but also challenging
folk to recognize we’re not there yet—and I use
this little adage about a child in the back seat on a long
trip continuing to ask, “Are we there yet?” Well
no, we’re not there yet. But let me tell you, we have
made tremendous strides forward. No Child Left Behind certainly
has helped us be more motivated, as Ms. Quarters has said,
to focus on subgroups and on students, and the results of
our early work focusing on closing the achievement gap is
reflective of that. When you look now, even under No Child
Left Behind, at the performance of subgroups, especially a
black student, you are seeing a sharp upward turn of those
students. And other subgroups are kind of flat. And so eventually
those two lines will meet, but that’s because of the
early work, it’s because of the early childhood More
At Four programs, the Smart Start programs; it’s because
of the hard work in those earlier grades and the fact that
we were working hard to bring students and schools to proficiency.
No question in my mind that what has happened up to this point
will certainly be a benefit as we try to implement No Child
Left Behind, and I think we should embrace it, and the State
Board has done that.
Brown:
So it is fair to expect that all of the children throughout
the state can reach these levels of increased performance
and improvement?
Lee:
It’s certainly fair to expect that we need to keep
the pressure on to keep people moving in that direction. My
concern is that the perfection that No Child Left Behind demands
of us is not realistic and so we can’t get caught up
believing that we should rest on our laurels and accept this;
we shouldn’t. We need to have some realism built into
this whole legislation as it’s implemented. So there
are those of us who are working with the Department of Education,
who will continue to work with the administration and Congress
to get them to understand that we’re not shirking from
our responsibilities. We accept the challenge to make every
child proficient, but don’t put an imposition on us
that simply creates an opportunity for failure at every turn—the
harder you work, the more you fail. That just can’t
be. And so I’m hoping we can get some reality brought
in from that perspective.
Brown:
Well Ms. Quarters, tell me what teachers are saying. I know
that high schools are not under this No Child Left Behind,
but I know that under the ABC’s there are concerns about
the amount of testing that kids have to go through. I’ve
heard teachers talk about that. Tell me what they’re
saying.
Quarters:
I think that we’re all at a point now where we know
that because we are school people and because we are service
people and deliver that service to boys and girls of North
Carolina, that we have an obligation to be held accountable
for what it is that we do. So we know that testing is with
us and it certainly needs to be with us. And there is some
outcry among some of our various groups that perhaps we’re
testing a bit too much. But we know that it’s necessary,
and we need the report card just as the students need the
report card. In terms of No Child Left Behind, I think that
the major concern among teachers has been just as Chairman
Lee said earlier, the fact that there isn’t any wiggling
room if you will, and the fact that if there’s one subgroup
in your particular school that happened not to make it, then
when the box scores come out of the newspaper what lay people
see is, did not make adequate yearly progress. And teachers
of course take opposition to that, and as hard as they work
you certainly can understand why.
Brown:
Sure. When students don’t improve as expected, I
think most parents would tend to hold the system accountable,
teachers might go to the system—there might be a little
bit of finger pointing. Who should parents, teachers, schools,
look to when children are not meeting these benchmarks?
Quarters:
Well I’d like to think that parents have a level
of involvement and that school people are pulling on parents
so that their level of the involvement will be such that we’re
working together all the time, continuously for the benefit
of that student, toward that student’s achievement,
so that we’ll get rid of the finger pointing, so that
we’ll know if Johnny didn’t manage to make that
growth this year, then together we know what we need to put
in place to ensure that he does perhaps the next year. We
know that all children can learn in North Carolina, but we
understand the reality, as Chairman Lee said, that they learn
at different paces, they learn in different ways, and the
research bears that out. And so I think that we understand
all of that.
Brown:
Mr. Lee, how does No Child Left Behind empower parents,
if at all, to be more involved and help to give them more
choices in terms of how their kids are educated?
Lee:
Well, I think that first of all, No Child Left Behind
will give the parent the ability to assess the subgroup in
which his or her child may be a part of, and how that subgroup
is performing. And then allow them to have a conference with
the principal, the teacher, or the most appropriate person
about their specific child. The concern I have is that it
gives parents false negatives. If the one subgroup does not
make it and the school is charged with not having met AYP—
Brown:
What’s AYP?
Lee:
Average Yearly Progress. You do fall into these things
very quickly. And then the parent will make a decision, for
example, to transfer a student. And that school may not at
all be a school that’s not performing where it should
be. It could be a great school. So I think that what we have
to say to parents is that you’re empowered by coming
into a school and getting more information, digging in to
make absolutely sure that you’re not just reacting to
a symbol but you’re not taking your child out of an
environment that is very good that child, but you reacted
to what came out in the box scores in the newspaper.
Brown:
Well, tell me, where can parents go when they—to
look at not only how No Child Left Behind legislation has
impacted their particular school, but also how the ABC’s
report card has, and I’ll go to you Ms. Quarters.
Quarters:
And you’re asking where they can come to find out
how their child is impacted by it?
Brown:
Yes.
Quarters:
Well, all the answers lie at the school. All the answers
lie with that child’s teacher. And so that’s where
we hope the communication will start. And as much as possible
we encourage parents to be in that school all the time and
as much as they possibly can, as much as their free time will
allow, and school people are open with parents, because we
understand that we’re all in it together.
Brown:
Well, once the ABC’s report card comes out, and
I figured there’s a similar report card that comes out
with No Child Left Behind, where do parents go to view these
and see the numbers, basically?
Lee:
There’s several place they can go. First of all,
there is the State Board of Education web site, which carries
practically all of this information about every school, every
score, every test, and all the things that are broken down.
The second is the local school board web site. Practically
all of our local school boards now have a web site, and they
post these scores for the web site. The third is to actually
go, as Ms. Quarters said, to the child’s school. That
information specific—school specific and student specific—is
available to the parents at the school. The problem we’re
having is that many parents don’t follow through and
go to the school to check on that child, and only react when
there is a problem or when they get shaken up by some bad
information that comes out on the school. What I’m doing
as chairman of the State Board as I move around the state,
is encouraging parents to stay continuously involved in the
educational life of their student, connect to the school,
connect to the principal, connect to the teacher, and know
what’s happening at every step of the way so that when
we do have these outcomes, they have more information than
just a box score that says this school did meet average yearly
progress.
Brown:
Right. And Ms. Quarters, any additional advice to parents,
how to get involved and stay involved and make sure that they’re
impacting their child’s improvement?
Quarters:
I just encourage them strongly to be there as much as
possible, so that when those box scores do come out, we’re
not talking about finger pointing, but rather you feel a part
of the box scores, and I think that’s where we need
to all be at this point.
Brown:
Well I need to go on, and I thank you very much for your
sharing of your expertise and your wisdom on this topic. And
if you’d like to learn more about tonight’s topic,
or about the work of our two guests, please visit the Black
Issues Forum web site at www.unctv.org/bif. We would also
like to hear your feedback and suggestions, so send us an
email, or you can call the BIF line at 919-549-7167. Be sure
to join Black Issues Forum each Friday night at 9:30.
I’m Natalie Bullock Brown reminding you to be encouraged
no matter what. Good night.
[THEME
MUSIC]
Voiceover:
This program was made possible by contributions to UNC-TV
from viewers like you. Thank you.
|
