Traditional or homeschool, the education system has always been a topic of debate for years.
Which works best? How can we improve our children's overall academic performance? What laws need to be passed to see these improvements?
These questions have long been thrown to debates and academic gurus yet despite the continuous effort to find that 'ideal' technique to have the best system, education always seem to have its own way of proving things wrong.
When President George W. Bush signed and passed the No Child Left Behind Act as law, progress in the American education system in junction with students performance is expected.
Yet even after a decade since the passing of this law, doubts on its effectiveness as means to forward American education remains in question. In fact if any, critics are more like convinced that the law has certainly failed.
Let's have an overview of this law and the possible implications it possibly has on alternative modes of education especially homeschooling.
What is the No Child Left Behind Law?
In 2001, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act was presented and gained enormous support, allowing it to become a law on January 8, 2002. It's a law that reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which is the leading government program that aids disadvantaged students.
What does it do and why was it created?
In an attempt to strengthen and improve students' individual academic performance, NCLB was promulgated. Under this law, changes in the educational strategies primarily implemented by teachers in public schools are forwarded. Moreover, new and predetermined standards in measuring a student's performance has also been enacted.
Specifically, the No Child Left Behind Law does the following:
- Requires all public schools to conduct annual, state-wide standardized test (reading and math tests) to all students
- Requires states to provide 'high quality' teachers for the students
- Encourages students to score higher in the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) than the last year's examiners. Otherwise, the law will require the school with poor results to take necessary steps to improve their performance.
Who can benefit from this law?
Students, teachers and school.
Primarily, the law is created to ensure that public school students pass and eventually surpass the standards set by the state as a qualifier for good academic performance. It is expected that by implementing the law, the overall achievement gap between students who belong to the minority and those who belong to the majority will decrease.
On the other hand, by setting the AYP, teachers will be able to enhance their flexibility in devising teaching strategies that will help them convey the lessons to their students.
The improved overall performance of both the students and teachers will then benefit the school in terms of high-scoring graduates, and consequently improve the institution's prestige. Schools on the other hand who might not have performed well in the past will be more encouraged to revise their own strategies to meet the standards.
How did it fail in fulfilling its core purpose?
While the end goal of the law is to improve the overall student performance of federal funded schools, the question of whether or not it did fulfill its purpose remains a hot topic for debate.
Still, with the enormous number of critics on this law's implementation, several things emerge as some kind of accepted reason why we can consider NCLB a failure.
Let's try to look at some of them:
- Since standard tests are primarily focused on reading and math tests, students and teachers are more obliged to pattern their lessons on these fields alone to ensure that they pass the AYP. Thus, creating a sort of limitation to lessons covered.
- Students are held by the same academic standard (as set by each state) without considering factors like socioeconomic status, levels of personal ability and mother language. (with the exemption of those who have physical or mental disabilities)
- Possible inconsistencies in assessing the proficiency of data nationwide because in the first place, each state sets their own standards. Different standards results to an inconsistent basis for nationwide assessment.
- Changes or improvement to overall class performance puts teachers to a difficult position of centralizing their teaching instruction according to what the state demands as reflected on the standard tests. Supplementary curriculum has the tendency to be set aside.
- In an article published at washingtonpost.com, NCLB is said to have failed to increase the average academic performance of students. Likewise, the achievement gap between the minority and majority students has not been narrowed significantly.
Why is Homeschooling becoming a viable option?
Source: www.dreambox.com
In line with the emerging issues bombarding the present educational system, the number of parents who choose to enroll their kids in homeschool has been significantly increasing.
But how is this related to the failure of the No Child Left Behind Law?
Because of the criticisms received by the law, which eventually planted the seed of doubt among parents as to the quality of public education, the choice to educate their children at home is seen to be a favorable choice.
Why?
Aside from the fact that lessons taught at home is more child-centered, it also allows the parents to personally guide and see the improvements made by their kids at a certain pace. Lessons can be readily modified and teaching instructions can vary depending on the child's learning speed and individual ability.
Parents will not worry about standards set by the state. Using their preferred module, children are allowed to explore a variety of fields and focus on their strengths at the same time.
Instead of worrying about making, or somehow forcing, their kids to pass the standards set by the state, homeschooling can offer a favorable advantage through its flexible and creative course requirements.
Generally, homeschooled kids still amount to only 4% of the entire school kids population, but its constant increase is starting to become a challenge not only to parents who want a better education for their children, but more importantly to our school's educational system.
Bottomline?
Traditional education and homeschooling both have their own pros and cons. But at the end of the day, the decision of which among the two works better lies on the parents and the students themselves.
What about you? Have you already come to a conclusion?
Is the No Child Left Behind Law really a failure, or is it only the start of a more efficient American education? And is homeschooling really a more viable option at present?
You decide.