The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act has been mired in controversy ever since it was introduced by president Bush five years ago. Its proponents insist the bill is the only solution to improve the education system in the country. Opponents argue that it’s a one size fits all option that attempts to micromanage schools with out taking into consideration other factors that are a measure of a school’s success.

California school districts have been vociferous in their opposition to NCLB, and now teachers in the state’s schools are demanding that the state’s politicians do their bit to help block NCLB. Authorities in California schools have appealed to Congress to block the reauthorization plans for NCLB that have been brought forward by two of the state’s most prominent politicians -Democratic senator George Miller of Solano, Chairman of the House Labor Relations and Education Committee, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat from San Francisco. California schools say Miller and Pelosi’s proposed reauthorization continues to focus on school scores on standardized tests as a measure of the school’s ranking and does not take into consideration other factors like attendance rates in California schools and the difficulty of the curriculum. They also propose that NCLB should take into consideration the numbers of students graduating from California schools, and the numbers of students taking part in honors or advanced placement courses in deciding school rankings.

How NCLB Negatively Impacts California Schools

This year NCLB labeled one in every four California schools as “failing.” Among the California schools labeled with this dreaded tag was a distinguished school that had managed to successfully clear 45 out of the 46 components in NCLB. The reason it was labeled “failing”? Ten students did not score high enough on one English language test. It is situations like these that are getting people in the California schools up in arms about a law they feel punishes low performing schools and teachers to the extent that they fall further down the rankings. It also pulls down high performing schools because of low test scores in one isolated subject.

Experts at California schools insist the NCLB has a blinkered approach, and their fears have been compounded by the Miller Pelosi reauthorization proposal which they say will continue to punish teachers in California schools. The state estimates that it will need at least 100,000 teachers in the next 10 years and fears the continuation of NCLB will discourage new recruits. The Miller-Pelosi proposal erodes local control while giving Washington the power to micromanage its schools. California schools are equipped to handle their own affairs and decide what works best for their students, and should be allowed to do so.

Patricia Hawke is a staff writer for Schools K-12, providing free, in-depth reports on all U.S. public and private K-12 schools. For more information please visit California School Districts

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Patricia_Hawke

California School Districts have a racially and ethnically diverse population; more so than in any other state and the numbers of immigrants keeps growing. This diversity is reflected in California schools. Many of the California schools have large student populations that originate from linguistic minorities, or from families that are still in the process of learning English. This fact has led to California schools being high on the national list of schools with limited fluency in the English language. Add cultural and social differences to the linguistic problem, and it isn’t surprising to find that California schools are beginning to slide down the scale.

School Rankings and California Schools

The entire premise of the No Child Left Behind program aims to allow each child the chance at a high quality education. This is admirable, but it doesn’t take into account the fact that not all the children in the country are the same. This is especially true in California schools with their huge ethnic and linguistic minority students. Expecting children of varied cultures, and across all linguistic divides, to perform equally well on a standardized test can be a futile exercise. A standardized test doesn’t take into account the vast differences in cultures, family backgrounds, abilities and experiences of children in the California Schools. That’s why it’s doomed to fail as a measure of a student’s or child’s standing in the educational system.

Promoting California Schools: Walk the Walk

When it comes to the state of California schools, politicians are more than eager to mouth platitudes that sound great on paper but fizzle when it comes to putting them to action. One particular requirement of No Child Left Behind is mandatory testing of at least 95 per cent of students in a school. This requirement means little in California schools, where parents have the right to refuse to allow their children to be tested. What this trickles down to, in effect, is that even good quality schools might not find the required number of students to test, which means a black mark and a possible slide down the public school rankings for a perfectly good institution. Another provision of the program allows students to leave schools that fail any one the program’s requirements. This sounds great in theory until you realize that it is the California school district that has to foot the bill to transfer these students to other schools, adding to the congestion problem in already overcrowded schools. When it comes to implementing the No Child Left Behind program, California schools are finding more stumbling blocks than in other states.

Patricia Hawke is a staff writer for Schools K-12, providing free, in-depth reports on all U.S. public and private K-12 schools. For more information please visit California School Districts

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Patricia_Hawke

To be considered for the award, California schools must meet a variety of eligibility requirements. These include designated federal and state accountability measures that are based upon the No Child Left Behind, Adequate Yearly Progress, and Academic Performance Index measurement programs. Approximately, five percent of California schools are selected each year for the award, with no fewer than 40 counties typically being represented.

The program alternates awards yearly between the elementary and secondary California schools. Year 2006 honors elementary schools.

California schools that meet the requirements complete an application and submit it to a team of local educators from across the state, which evaluate and score the merits of each school application. Schools with the highest scoring applications are selected as statewide nominees for the award. Nominated California schools then receive an onsite visit by a team of county school superintendents and members of the California Department of Education, who validate the accuracy of the application data.

Those California schools selected for the Distinguished School Award are honored at a statewide ceremony, where the state school superintendent awards a plaque and flag to each school. The program and annual ceremonies are funded through the generosity of prominent California corporations and statewide education organizations that believe educational excellence should be rewarded and encouraged publicly.

In 2006, a record 377 public elementary schools were honored with the California Distinguished School Award, surpassing the 302 elementary schools honored in 2004 — the last elementary school award cycle. They represent the largest number of elementary school awardees in the 21-year history of the program.

The 2006 California schools awardees were chosen from 190 school districts in 40 counties. They were selected from the largest number of eligible elementary schools to date, setting another record for the program. Of the more than 5,000 elementary schools in California, 2,043 were eligible to apply for the 2006 award. California schools are proving that student scholastic excellence can be nurtured and consistently improved.

Patricia Hawke is a staff writer for Schools K-12 , providing free, in-depth reports on all U.S. public and private K-12 schools. Stacy has a nose for research and writes stimulating news and views on school issues. For more on California schools visit California Schools

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Patricia_Hawke

The examination concerns specific restructuring methods used by California Schools and their success. According to CEP founder and president Jack Jennings, “While it is still too early to tell whether restructuring is working, it is clear from the experience of California and Michigan, the two states we have studied in-depth, that simply requiring schools to replace staff does not guarantee increased student achievement. Rather, success is linked to implementing multiple improvement strategies.”

This is of critical concern to California Schools for a couple of reasons. California Schools have more schools facing restructuring than most other states for several reasons. School restructuring is mandated by the NCLB act for any schools unable to meet its Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) markers for five or more consecutive years. One reason that California Schools saw the number of its schools facing this mandate double to 8% in the last year is because of its massive size. Also, California Schools implemented AYP markers a year before it was federally mandated. Of the California Schools facing restructuring, over 60% are in urban areas.

The numbers don’t look good. 207 of the California Schools in the implementation phase of restructuring failed to meet AYP standards for seven consecutive years. That’s why the CEP study has such import. The study concluded that the California Schools that were most successful in raising student achievement were those that analyzed school data and implemented initiatives designed to meet those specific needs. This is important because the US Department of Education previously recommended replacing staff rather than other forms of restructuring.

Other reform methods in California Schools include instituting English Language Learner programs, direct coaching for teachers and principals, changes in scheduling and the hiring of a district-level coordinator. The California Schools that used the above methods, without replacing staff or changing to a charter system, were generally more successful than the other schools studied. What will this mean for the future of California Schools?

It’s likely that funds for teacher planning time, instructional coaches and special instruction for at-risk students will appear on coming legislation. As noted by Jennings, the California Schools still have a long road ahead before the success of many programs can be fully evaluated. That’s why California Schools need the quantifiable results of a study like this one.

Patricia Hawke is a staff writer for Schools K-12, providing free, in-depth reports on all U.S. public and private K-12 schools. For more information please visit California Public Schools

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Patricia_Hawke