The Commission on NCLB Needs Your Input!

The Commission on NCLB is about to close its work. You can give them your comments – anything you think they need to know – at their website: http://www.aspeninstitute.org/site/c.huLWJeMRKpH/b.938015/k.40DA/Commission_on_No_Child_Left_Behind.htm

Just click the Comment Box and tell them what you think. I chose to comment on the insane "highly qualified teacher" standards. (In case you might find it helpful, I’ve copied my comments below.) If you know several people who want to comment, don’t use the same language – the commission staff will just write off all comments that are virtually the same. Instead, tell one story about one school, how NCLB affects it, and what needs to change.

---------------------------------

My organization evaluates all of the 250+ alternative education programs in Oklahoma. These are not the punitive, dreary programs or "sweathog" classes that many people associate with alternative education. They are research-based programs that have a 15-year history of effectiveness.

We evaluate each program annually and we know which ones are effective. We know which ones are not yet as effective, and we close programs that are ineffective. As a group, these programs keep kids in school, reduce absences and suspensions, and increase grades and standardized test scores.

Here is the problem: Because of the US DOE interpretation of "highly qualified" teachers, many of these programs may close. Oklahoma is a rural state, and these programs are taught by one teacher who manages the learning of approximately 10-15 students per day. Because the US DOE cannot find its way to accepting highly EFFECTIVE teachers as "highly qualified," these one-teacher programs may have to close. Our teachers, even our most effective ones, lack the paperwork to be classified as "highly qualified."

After evaluating these programs since 1994, I can tell you that this is criminal. We have spent a long time figuring out what we should do to engage at-risk youth in rural areas. Now we are asked to abandon effective programs because they do not fit the cookie cutter, standardized approach that best suits a federal bureaucracy.

These programs and teachers are (and should be) held accountable for student learning. But I can tell you that, as long as we focus on sameness and standardization, we will lose many at-risk youth.

Please give states the flexibility to retain programs with demonstrated effectiveness. If you would like additional information, feel free to contact me. You may view annual evaluation reports for the state as a whole on our website: www.otac.info.

Thank you for your time, and thank you for reviewing NCLB.