Is 'No Child Left Behind' to Blame for Poor Science Test Scores?

[Sandy Eggo]

U.S. students don't know much about science, according to the latest results from a national test released today. And one leading science educator says that a big reason for their poor performance is a 2002 federal law that has pushed the subject out of classrooms by emphasizing reading and mathematics.

"For 9 years, elementary school principals have been telling teachers not to teach science because it's not part of No Child Left Behind," says Francis Eberle, executive director of the National Science Teachers Association in Arlington, Virginia, referring to the 2002 law that requires annual testing of those students in grades three through eight toward a 2014 goal of national competence in those areas. "Now those students are in high school, and we've seeing the consequences of that policy."

Eberle is speaking about scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which measures student achievement in reading, math, and science at the fourth, eighth, and 12th grades. The 2009 assessment, which focused on science, found that 40% of high school seniors perform below the basic level in science and only 1% at the advanced level. Younger students did marginally better, with 29% of fourth-graders and 38% of eighth-graders falling below basic and 1% and 2% at the advanced level, respectively. Among the biggest states, Massachusetts ranks highest and California lowest in grades four and eight, although students from New Hampshire, Montana, and North Dakota scored the best and those from Mississippi scored the worst. (Scores for 12th-graders are available only nationally.)

The Obama Administration is no fan of No Child Left Behind, which is seen as putting too much emphasis on annual test scores. Department of Education officials now refer to the law by its generic name, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and Education Secretary Arnie Duncan hopes that the next version, now pending before Congress, will offer school districts a variety of incentives for having students demonstrate significant year-to-year progress.

Test officials, which call NAEP "the nation's report card," say the content has changed so much that the results can't be compared with previous assessments in 1996, 2000, and 2005. The new test better reflects the subjects that students learn at those grades, they note, as well as placing more emphasis on whether students can apply textbook knowledge to real-life situations rather than simply recall scientific terms and facts.

Science educators see the changes in the test itself as a big improvement. "It's the best test we've ever had," says Alan Friedman, former director of the New York Hall of Science and a member of the test's oversight body, the National Assessment Governing Board.

Even so, Eberle and others regard the overall findings as very discouraging. "I don't see anything to celebrate here," he says. "Despite all the emphasis on improving educational achievement, there's been a 30% decrease in the amount of science taught at the elementary level, and opportunities for professional development have been reduced. It's not that teachers aren't trying. But there are fewer resources available to them."

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/01/is-no-child-left-behind-to-blame.html?ref=hp

Any guesses why science wasn't prioritized?

[kimmi]

Yes!

[The Troll]

  Now the question is what do we do about it?  These kid are already ruined in science, they have missed their most informitive years.

  I know myself have been ruined by experiments in eduction.  My first grade, the powers that be decided that phonics did not need to be taught.  Sight reading would be enough.  Well, I am a spelling cripple, I can't hardly sound out a word to spell it let alone find it in the dictionary.  On the other hand my wife had phonics and can spell anything.

[Anne]

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/01/is-no-child-left-behind-to-blame.html?ref=hp

Any guesses why science wasn't prioritized?

I'll ask, why?

[Palehorse]

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/01/is-no-child-left-behind-to-blame.html?ref=hp

Any guesses why science wasn't prioritized?

Religion 

[followsthewolf]

I tend to agree, PH.

[Sandy Eggo]

Considering whose brain-child NCLB was, I also agree

[Sandy Eggo]

I know the current administration has a lot on it's plate, however based on last night's SOTU speech, I'm hoping there will be something created to replace/fix NCLB.

[Palehorse]

I know the current administration has a lot on it's plate, however based on last night's SOTU speech, I'm hoping there will be something created to replace/fix NCLB.

There is and I forget what he called it, but he specifically stated it was to replace NCLB and correct the problems with it. . .He mentioned it specifically about mid-way through his speech last night.

[Sandy Eggo]

There is and I forget what he called it, but he specifically stated it was to replace NCLB and correct the problems with it. . .He mentioned it specifically about mid-way through his speech last night.

Unfortunately I fell asleep. It wasn't him, I was tired lol

[Palehorse]

. . .Maintaining our leadership in research and technology is crucial to America's success. But if we want to win the future — if we want innovation to produce jobs in America and not overseas — then we also have to win the race to educate our kids.

Think about it. Over the next 10 years, nearly half of all new jobs will require education that goes beyond a high school education. And yet, as many as a quarter of our students aren't even finishing high school. The quality of our math and science education lags behind many other nations. America has fallen to ninth in the proportion of young people with a college degree. And so the question is whether all of us — as citizens, and as parents — are willing to do what's necessary to give every child a chance to succeed.

That responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but in our homes and communities. It's family that first instills the love of learning in a child. Only parents can make sure the TV is turned off and homework gets done. We need to teach our kids that it's not just the winner of the Super Bowl who deserves to be celebrated, but the winner of the science fair. (Applause.) We need to teach them that success is not a function of fame or PR, but of hard work and discipline.

Our schools share this responsibility. When a child walks into a classroom, it should be a place of high expectations and high performance. But too many schools don't meet this test. That's why instead of just pouring money into a system that's not working, we launched a competition called Race to the Top. To all 50 states, we said, "If you show us the most innovative plans to improve teacher quality and student achievement, we'll show you the money."

Race to the Top is the most meaningful reform of our public schools in a generation. For less than 1 percent of what we spend on education each year, it has led over 40 states to raise their standards for teaching and learning. And these standards were developed, by the way, not by Washington, but by Republican and Democratic governors throughout the country. And Race to the Top should be the approach we follow this year as we replace No Child Left Behind with a law that's more flexible and focused on what's best for our kids. (Applause.)

You see, we know what's possible from our children when reform isn't just a top-down mandate, but the work of local teachers and principals, school boards and communities. Take a school like Bruce Randolph in Denver. Three years ago, it was rated one of the worst schools in Colorado — located on turf between two rival gangs. But last May, 97 percent of the seniors received their diploma. Most will be the first in their families to go to college. And after the first year of the school's transformation, the principal who made it possible wiped away tears when a student said, "Thank you, Ms. Waters, for showing that we are smart and we can make it." (Applause.) That's what good schools can do, and we want good schools all across the country.

Let's also remember that after parents, the biggest impact on a child's success comes from the man or woman at the front of the classroom. In South Korea, teachers are known as "nation builders." Here in America, it's time we treated the people who educate our children with the same level of respect. (Applause.) We want to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones. (Applause.) And over the next 10 years, with so many baby boomers retiring from our classrooms, we want to prepare 100,000 new teachers in the fields of science and technology and engineering and math. (Applause.)

In fact, to every young person listening tonight who's contemplating their career choice: If you want to make a difference in the life of our nation; if you want to make a difference in the life of a child — become a teacher. Your country needs you. (Applause.)

Of course, the education race doesn't end with a high school diploma. To compete, higher education must be within the reach of every American. (Applause.) That's why we've ended the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that went to banks, and used the savings to make college affordable for millions of students. (Applause.) And this year, I ask Congress to go further, and make permanent our tuition tax credit — worth $10,000 for four years of college. It's the right thing to do. (Applause.). . .


http://www.npr.org/2011/01/26/133224933/transcript-obamas-state-of-union-address

[kimmi]

I'll ask, why?

Most NCLB state assessments focused heavily on reading and math.  You spend the majority of your time prepping, teaching, reviewing, etc.. in those subjects!

[kimmi]

National standards have been needed for years.  Each state makes up their curriculum and then the federal government test all states using one test.  It has never made sense.  States (including mine) who have received the Race to the Top grants had to apply and basically convince the feds that they would  be working hard to change their current curriculums to match up with the national curriculum.

I will tell you what I got out of his speech.  If and when I go back for my masters degree, I will be looking for a school who offers a STEM degree - science, technology, engineering, and math.  I was looking tonight, but I'm not finding any that my undergrad supports.  I'm sure that will change quickly. 

I teach science 3 days a week for 50 minutes, 5 weeks of the 9 in each quarter.  It is not enough time, but I am mandated by my school board to have 2 1/2 hours of language arts instruction, 1 1/3 hours of math instruction, 30 minutes of physical education, and a 30 minute lunch each day.  There isn't a whole lot of time left in the day for much else.