The 2002 No Child Left Behind Act focused the country’s attention on
school reform as never before, but the law is far from perfect. The
Obama administration is wise to address its flaws, since Congress is
four years overdue in updating the law.
The Department of Education’s plan gives states that agree to several
reforms — including stringent teacher evaluation systems and new
programs for overhauling the worst schools — an exemption from many of
the law’s requirements. It would permit the states to change the way
they evaluate most schools for the purpose of compliance, allowing
indicators other than just reading and math scores to be considered. And
it would lift the law’s provision that all students be proficient in
math and reading by 2014, which was never going to happen anyway because
there were so many loopholes.
The administration, however, must not allow the new waiver system to
become a way for states to elude the purpose of the act, which is to
raise student achievement across the board.
The waiver plan will cure several obvious shortcomings of the original
law. It would allow schools to be rated partly on achievement-growth
measures — how much students improve on reading and math — instead of
just on the percentage of students who reach “proficiency” on those
tests. The current approach has led many schools to ignore both
high-achieving and low-achieving children to focus on pushing up
students who fall just short of the proficiency mark.
It would also put an end to the much despised pass-fail system under
which otherwise high-performing schools are rated as “needing
improvement” if one racial or economic subgroup falls short of yearly
achievement targets. And it would allow districts more flexibility in
the use of federal dollars.
To qualify for waivers, states will have to install new tests — and
teacher evaluation systems that take those test results into account —
by the 2014-15 school year. The 12 states that received federal grants
in the Race to the Top program last year have a head start. They agreed
to put in data-driven teacher evaluation systems as part of that
competition. But even reform-minded states like Delaware, which was one
of the first to win a grant, have been unable to get their systems up
and running and have asked the government for more time.
Part of the problem is that in most states, yearly math and reading
tests are given only in grades three through eight and once in high
school and cover less than half of the teachers. This means that the
system must devise other rigorous rating measures for the remaining
staff. Another is that the systems must be designed not just to show how
much children have improved, but also to provide guidance so that
ineffective teachers get better.
It seems imprudent to rush the states into bringing these complex new
evaluations systems and high-quality tests on line by 2014, given that
they will also be expected to adopt new core curriculums.
The Obama administration must insist that states getting waivers
demonstrate that they are making substantial progress, but it should
allow flexibility on the timing. Having states rush to adopt inadequate
evaluation systems would discredit the school reform movement.