For a multitude of years educational reform has been a large focus of much debate. Many believe that it is time for a change in the school system because if there is not one, then it will corrupt today’s youth and leave this nation in the wrong hands. At the heart of controversy is the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and its effects on the school system. Many have come to the conclusion that No Child Left Behind needs to be eliminated, but some disagree on whether or not the NCLB’s implication of standardized testing is an accurate form of interpreting a student's learning. Many people believe that the No Child Left Behind act is damaging to the school systems. Authors like Diane Ravitch believe that it caused the “destruction of public
…show more content…
When the teachers are drilling their students it’s hard for a student to stay creative and openminded, therefore crippling their education, which is a means to why Ravitch strongly believes that the NCLB is damaging to public education. Bronwyn T. Williams stresses that “The NCLB focuses on broad comparisons of students, with little regard to their differences”. Williams fears that the reason for education is becoming standardized assessments and ranking rather than learning (152). Instead of preparing students for real world experiences, students are being taught to write essays on topics that have no real meaning behind them at all. They are preparing the students for a test, not life. John Taylor Gatto in “Against Schools”, further explains schools as “virtual factories of childishness”. He believes that schools should help students “take an education and not merely receive a schooling”, which is not happening with …show more content…
In the Age of Educational Romanticism, Charles Murray talks a lot about the NAEP. Murray believes that “scores on tests of reading and math track with intellectual ability, no matter what” (36). He sees no fault in the way that standardized testing assesses students. People like Ravitch also agree with the idea of standardized testings assessing students. She explains that “standardized testing can provide useful information about how students are doing” (Ravitch), she just does not agree with how they affect the students and teachers. She sees the tests as detrimental to the teachers in that it causes them a large amount of stress and strips away all uniqueness from the students in which it is testing. On that note, some people like Susan Headdens see drilling students to the demands of a tests as harmful to their education (2). She believes this “degrades the fundamentals of teaching and learning” (Headdens). These standardized tests only test the “basic skills” of the students. Instead of standardized tests, Headdens believes that states should mold exams so that they measure and advance higher order skills for all students, such as the Advanced Placement Exams do. The Advanced Placement tests encourage students to “analyze and interpret texts, construct logical explanations,
When the teachers are drilling their students it’s hard for a student to stay creative and openminded, therefore crippling their education, which is a means to why Ravitch strongly believes that the NCLB is damaging to public education. Bronwyn T. Williams stresses that “The NCLB focuses on broad comparisons of students, with little regard to their differences”. Williams fears that the reason for education is becoming standardized assessments and ranking rather than learning (152). Instead of preparing students for real world experiences, students are being taught to write essays on topics that have no real meaning behind them at all. They are preparing the students for a test, not life. John Taylor Gatto in “Against Schools”, further explains schools as “virtual factories of childishness”. He believes that schools should help students “take an education and not merely receive a schooling”, which is not happening with …show more content…
In the Age of Educational Romanticism, Charles Murray talks a lot about the NAEP. Murray believes that “scores on tests of reading and math track with intellectual ability, no matter what” (36). He sees no fault in the way that standardized testing assesses students. People like Ravitch also agree with the idea of standardized testings assessing students. She explains that “standardized testing can provide useful information about how students are doing” (Ravitch), she just does not agree with how they affect the students and teachers. She sees the tests as detrimental to the teachers in that it causes them a large amount of stress and strips away all uniqueness from the students in which it is testing. On that note, some people like Susan Headdens see drilling students to the demands of a tests as harmful to their education (2). She believes this “degrades the fundamentals of teaching and learning” (Headdens). These standardized tests only test the “basic skills” of the students. Instead of standardized tests, Headdens believes that states should mold exams so that they measure and advance higher order skills for all students, such as the Advanced Placement Exams do. The Advanced Placement tests encourage students to “analyze and interpret texts, construct logical explanations,