Ranking as one of the most frequent educational news items in the public press, on the Web, and in professional journals (see sidebar), the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLBA) has truly captured national conversation. But one thing is missing from all this talk, and that is any mention of just what it is we're at risk of leaving our children behind. NCLBA, which was signed into law in January 2002 (PL107-110), presumably is a comprehensive effort to improve education for all children in the US by providing them successful schools with qualified teachers in every classroom and fair assessments of learning. Few of us would seriously argue against these goals. Some, however, have questioned the implications of NCLBA (e.g., Lewis, 2002; Linn, Baker, & Betebenner, 2002). In fact, the title itself, "No Child Left Behind," suggests that a strong political agenda accompanies its stated goals. Connotations of "Left Behind" What images come to your mind when you hear the phrase, "left behind"? A skittish racehorse caught in the starting gate? An out-ofbreath traveler narrowly missing a bus or train? A family continuing a road trip only remember they left their youngest child at the rest stop? Now extend these images to the context of education. Does learning have a definitive "starting gate" and "finish line"? Is learning a race? Do some children miss the learning train because they arrived at the station too late or because they're standing on the wrong platform? In many ways, the NCLBA requirements fit these images. The states' adequate yearly progress (AYP) targets may indeed constitute finish lines for learners. Children who learn differently or uniquelyand which of them don't?-may be too late for the learning train, particularly when qualified teachers need only to pass tests of content and not pedagogic knowledge and practice; indeed, under NCLBA, developmental learning becomes an oxymoron. And what about the artistically gifted children who learn best in ways not legitimized by NCLBA's limited definition of scientific research NCLBA? Aren't they waiting on the wrong platform? Add to these images the "one size fits all" perspective of "Reading First," which aligns instruction, materials, and teacher preparation with that narrowly defined scientific research, and the increased testing and accountability requirements across the 50 states. It becomes easier to see why some of my Texas colleagues paraphrase the law as "no child left standing." Under NCLBA, learning is reduced to content that is transmitted and then tested. Period. Independent, engaged, life-long learners are not part of the image. Neither are the truly qualified teachers. Think of those you've known. You would likely describe them as people who nurture independent learning, who share learners' interests, and who are learners themselves. They do not talk of children as being "left behind," except perhaps through a national curriculum and legislated policies that disrespect the interest, control, and power of the learner in the learning process. New Science, New Talk Maybe it's the scientific research base as defined by the NCLBA that needs to be left behind. It is, after all, rooted in 17th Century Newtonian concepts of the universe. New seiences, such as quantum physics, self-organizing systems, and chaos theory, are more useful in understanding the complex systems of the 21st century (Wheatley, 1999). …

No Child Left Behind What

One-to-one laptops in a public secondary school: Students' usage and the impact on achievement

Elementary Teachers' Use of Technology for Teaching and Parent Communication in Low Socio-Economic Classrooms: a Case Study

.......................................................................................................................................... ii Dedication ...................................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................................

/pdf/eighth-grade-students-without-home-internet-a-case-study-of-1prfiht0y3.pdf

Stacey J Flinner

Papers

Eighth-Grade Students Without Home Internet: A Case Study of a One-to-One Laptop Program at a Title 1 School