McDonnell, Lorraine M. (2005). No Child Left Behind and the Federal Role in Education: Evolution or Revolution?

This article examines the interrelationships of various educational agencies at the federal, state and local levels. It identifies the intended roles of these organizations and recognizes their purpose and limitations from a historical perspective. There are comparisons made between both the Title1 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) mandates. It also helps in understanding the political agenda of NCLB. After having read other documents such as, "No Child Left Behind" in Urban Education: Solving a Crisis or Creating One and “Cooking the Books” by S. Macrine, this article offered a perspective that broadened my understanding of the issues confronting these policies

As we well know there are major issues concerning the policies of NCLB. However it is our responsibility as educators to research information that supports our concerns. One issue that continuously comes to the forefront of these policies is accountability and the imperatives associated with it.

Have these educational policies shifted their intended focus to other areas or are they just subtle transformations? One could argue that nothing has significantly changed since the 1960’s. However it appears that during each change government administration has created a need to approach dilemmas in new ways.

The ideology that justified public education was beginning to shift its focus in the 1980’s. This article explains that it went from remedying the effects of past injustices to promoting broad-based access to tools necessary for economic self-sufficiency. During the 1990’s the educational reform issues moved toward core instruction. Over time research evidence suggested that standardized tests were one of the most powerful tools that politicians had at their disposal.

According to this article there has been more of an evolution than a revolution with educational policies and that there has not been in radical changes made in either of the aforementioned mandates.

Perspective on Article: Test scores plummet as state raises standards

I recently posted a blog about a state wide plan that would increase the number of credits that high school students will need to graduate. Now here is an article on how changes to New Jersey elementary and middle school proficiency test have caused scores to drop tremendously. This has affected both urban and suburban schools in the state of New Jersey.

Since the revision every school in Newark is seeing double digit drops in the percentage of 5^th and 6^th graders passing the language arts section. In Paterson, NJ passing rates dropped 50 to 60%. In the Chatams where nearly all students generally passed, currently have rates of 80% passing and special education down 50%.

More students throughout the state of New Jersey are not considered proficient, as a result of the states revisions. Consider this; in sum cases the bar was set so low that a student only needed to get 33% of the questions correct to be deemed proficient.

It appears from the data provided that most of these students were not sufficiently prepared for any type of testing whether it was rigorous or not. Certainly setting the bar low is not the answer and I think it only compounds the problem. If a student is conditioned for a test that only requires him/her to get 1/3^rd of the questions correct, then some if not most will prepare to accomplish this only and more time will be spent on leisure activities such as playing games, surfing the internet, and listening to their ipods.

In my opinion something is terribly wrong and a fix is needed. The revision needs to be revisited because the rate of non-proficiency can conceivably increase. Mistakes are made and it is my hope that this issue will be resolved.

I think there has been to much focus on teaching to the test. Students need to be motivated and pedagogical methods that focus on understanding, which brings meaning to the subject content matter need to be implemented.

Opinion: Article “State Plan to revamp high school curricula met with tough questions

Today I happened upon an article concerning the New Jersey Public Schools. There was a two hour meeting to unveil a plan that would change the current requirements for graduation. The Corzine administration has embraced a plan endorsed by thirty three states to raise the standards in mathematics, science and proficiency testing. This will effect the current minimum graduation requirements which will increase by 10 credits. It will also require students to take on-line courses for classes in foreign languages and economics.

The plan is still on table for discussion and according to state administrators it could take a full year before it is implemented. However, there is fervent objection by many educators and others whom are opposed to further testing and mandates limiting options.


Some believe that this is just window dressing for a college preparatory curriculum. It appears that they want more options for students who do not plan to attend college upon graduation. Maybe the revisions will take this into consideration.

A few recent high school graduates whom are attending Cumberland College were in attendance for this two hour meeting. All of them said that they found themselves in remedial classes for subjects in which they thought they had learned. One student from Elmer who took a math test stated that she didn’t have sufficient knowledge to take it.

This is one example of many issues that is affecting graduates state wide. While I do agree that there should be more options, it is unexceptable to compromise a students education.


In my view, while the plan may not offer enough options, it does address some serious academic issues that warrant action. I think it is impossible to introduce a plan that would be amiable to all.
It is my hope that the glitches will be worked out in this plan so that graduates attending college will not have to take remedial courses.

My Perspective: Here’s a Plan for Saving Urban Kids

A few weeks ago as I was searching for some urban topics of interest, I stumbled across an interesting article about a plan to save urban kids. The article is on a blog written by a principal from Ohio, Jawanza Kunjufu. He makes a good case about various strategies that could be beneficial to children and their futures. However, there is no mention of key players that form a sense of agency to buttress his suggestions. While the parents, educators and administrators understand the significance of agency in fostering quality education, he excludes it.

It could very well be that, Jawanza Kunjufu, excluded the sense of agency because it has not produced any tangible results from his perspective. I’m of course only making an assumption because there is nothing to support this premise. I have never read anything pertaining to education that he has written. Therefore I have no prior knowledge of his past ideologies but he does state in the theme of the article, “Here’s one plan for saving urban kids”, qualifying it with “one” may be the basis for non-exclusion.

With that said I think some of, Jawanza Kunjufu, list of suggestions are palatable and should be entertained in an effort to prepare children for bright and productive futures. Let’s face it, without any direction, children become educated by the media and they envision themselves in unrealistic future occupations such as, sport stars, musicians, and comedians.

I would like to analyze a few of, Jawanza Kunjufu, suggestions because I think they are worthy of mention and critique. I will list them in the order written in his blog, which are 3, 4, 6, and 10. They are the following:

3) Institute Looping

He favors looping which is keeping the same teacher with the same group of students. The teacher has the student from freshman to senior year.

He believes the student will form relationship with the teacher making the school seem or appear smaller.

4) Raise Expectations

Kunjufu says research has shown teachers lower expectations for
poor children, boys, minority children and kids who are unkempt.

He says schools must enforce high expectations for kids without
exception. If you expect kids to perform poorly, they will. If you
expect them to excel, they will too.

6) Reading must be treated as the most important subject

Whether you look at kids in special education or prison, you will
find a large percentage with major reading problems, he said.

In the majority of black schools, Kunjufu said too often the reading
materials are not targeted to the kids’ interests. He urges teachers
to consider the reading materials that they have and ask if they
would interest their students, especially black boys.

10) Teach kids capitalism

Urban kids tend to focus on unrealistic career paths, such as
playing pro basketball or becoming a famous rapper. Schools
should teach them tools for more realistic careers where they can
gain similar fortunes.

Schools, he said, should be teaching kids about the stock market,
entrepreneurship and real estate. These careers can gain similar fortunes.

He suggested making a senior project in which three student-
designed business plans would get $50,000 in seed money to
start the businesses. That sort of realistic incentive would
motivate kids to learn financial skills.

From my perspective these are valid proposals that should be evaluated from a pros and cons viewpoint. For instance, institute looping; may be good for students to develop bonds with the teachers over an extended period. The student will probably be less apprehensive about inquiry. At the same time the student is not being exposed to a dynamic environment, and therefore may develop a complex toward change. Nothing is as static as it was years ago and things change within our intellectual environment very rapidly. This may have some validity but there has to be some balancing so that the student learns to adapt to change.

Now let’s look at number 4, raise expectations, I think that this proposal is valid. Expectations should be the same for all children. They intuitively understand how they are being viewed. You should not vary intellectual material according to race, gender or ethnicity. Standardization for all is a must for equal education.

The next is number 6, reading must be treated as the most important subject. I concur with Kunjufu on this proposal. Literacy is the most important aspect of learning. If you cannot read then your level of understanding is diminished significantly. All content areas require a certain level of understanding for success. Students must read material of their interest to foster literacy. Reading, facilitates writing and language. Educators cannot over emphasize the importance of reading.

The last which is number 10, teach kids capitalism. It is important that students understand this because as he mentions, they can have unrealistic career expectations. Statistically the numbers are not in favor of most students becoming professional athletes. Educating students so that they are aware of real professional opportunities would clearly be to their advantage.

While I can appreciate some of Kunjufu s’ perspective it is not without flaws. Not once did he mention anything about parents, community, or extended family. It would be hard to foster this type of mindset without their involvement, from my perspective. Again maybe he intended to include them but assumed it was a given. He does make some good suggestions whether they are practical or not.

Kunjufu speaks of gender specific classes and that boys should start their education later than girls. He is contradictory because he states that everyone should have the same educational opportunity.

In a broad sense it is helpful to view the perspectives of educators on a national level. It can help shape and broaden your knowledge about the evolution of urban education.

Unequal Childhoods

There are some serious socio-economic issues that impact urban communities across the state of New Jersey. The real cost of living in New Jersey is the central issue for many families throughout the state but most importantly the urban centers. There are an astonishing number of families that meet the self-sufficiency standard whom are barely making ends meet. On the other hand there are families who are below or above the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), and many that are borderline-income is slightly above. Four out of the six families from unequal childhoods would have a tough time trying to maintain a lifestyle in New Jersey. This information is relevant to the urban educator because it will help with understanding the socio-economic dynamics of the community.

There are three families in Unequal Childhoods that would have a tough go at sustaining there families in Essex County, New Jersey. Take for instance the Taylor family, a single parent with an annual income of $20,000. According to the “Real Cost of Living In New Jersey” (NJRCL) they need an annual income of $39,000 just to be considered self-sufficient. There is a big disparity between the two, a $19,000 difference. To make things worst they can’t get any federal assistance. Keep in mind the FPL for a family of three was approximately $17,600.

Now let’s look at the two remaining less fortunate families the Brindles and the McAllisters, both receive public assistance. Neither of these families including the Taylor’s have any education beyond high school. According to “Not Enough To Live On”, households with in adequate income, 22% have less than a high school degree and only 36% have a high school degree. According to these reports there are families living in New Jersey that fit the aforementioned profile.

As for the Tallingers , the Williams, and the Marshalls they could live in New Jersey with there socio-economic position. There is only one family that lives in an urban area out of the three, the McAllisters and they have income which is double the self sufficiency standard for New Jersey with an annual income of $100,000.

This information will be useful for the urban educator because if gives him or her a point of reference. Being cognizant of the socio-economic issues within the community where you will be teaching can be a tremendous asset.

Unfortunately there are many problems associated with families who are socio-economically deprived. As an educator in an urban center, it is likely that I will be confronted with the 22% of families with inadequate incomes that only possibly have a high school diploma.

A concerned educator would want to have information that will help him or her develop the disposition needed to confront various issues. For instance, a student who you feel is genuinely interested in their academics becomes disinterested, maybe there are some mitigating factors which need to be implemented. It may require a call to the students home, to speak with the parents to get a gauge about their concerns. Whatever the issue may be having some knowledge about the community can help to resolve various problems.

In reality being an informed educator within the community will serve to help everyone involved, better understand each another. You can’t use the same approach for everyone in the community, especially in an urban city. It is so diverse that various approaches have to be adapted, to have an ameliorative effect.

My concern is for the student’s education and how I can motivate them to strive for excellence. To have an understanding that they can succeed regardless of the obstacles that may confront them. That hard work, persistence, faith and perseverance can supersede any of the negative in which they have no control.