ASCD Page 1 of 6 November 2006 Volume 64 Number 3 NCLB Taking Stock Looking Forward Pages 64 68 The Side Effects of NCLB Gordon Cawelti If we focus only on math and literacy what happens to the rest of the curriculum Curriculum leaders have long contended that what schools teach must reflect the needs of society the needs of the learner and November 2006 the recommendations of scholars in various academic fields Accordingly schools teach about environmental problems require courses on the importance of good nutrition and exercise select history units that focus on noteworthy topics and so on However as knowledge continues to grow schools face a shortage of instructional time as they seek to accommodate these three components within a balanced curriculum that prepares students for the future Today federal legislation has complicated this broader view of knowledge No Child Left Behind NCLB focuses heavily on using reading and mathematics test scores to determine whether schools are making progress in reducing achievement gaps among various subgroups of students This narrow focus has resulted in a serious imbalance that denies many students access to the high quality curriculums that students in more affluent schools enjoy NCLB is now the prescribed treatment for the achievement gaps in U S schools but it has some serious side effects Side Effect 1 A Skewed Curriculum Marshall S Smith one of the architects of standards based reform recently commented on the effect of standards based education on the curriculum This is a narrowing the curriculum problem If we focus only on math and language literacy what happens to the rest of the curriculum In California we have lost a very high percentage of our arts music physical education and other teachers and rarely have K 8 foreign languages My sense is that it is time to begin to redress this imbalance Chat Wrap Up 2006 p 35 Schools end up narrowing the curriculum because they are under considerable pressure to show adequate yearly progress in reading and math For example one large urban U S high school in which I worked had subgroup pass rates in the range of 15 30 percent a long way from the 100 percent pass rate that schools are supposed to achieve by 2014 Cawelti Protheroe 2001 No wonder teachers were under pressure to focus on raising scores Elementary schools are also feeling the crunch despite state and district guidelines that supposedly require time allocations in a variety of subjects A study that predates NCLB legislation Hargrove et al 2000 offered this conclusion about the effect of high stakes testing on the curriculum Of greatest concern is the enormous amount of time that is being spent on reading http www ascd org portal site ascd template MAXIMIZE menuitem 459dee008f99653f 11 27 2006 ASCD Page 2 of 6 writing and mathematics at the cost of instruction in science social studies physical education and the arts The elementary teachers studied typically spent 75 percent of their time teaching reading and math leaving inadequate instructional time for other subjects The public seems to be aware of the legislation s effect on the public school curriculum A recent Phi Delta Kappa Gallup poll asked a random sample of respondents How much if at all are you concerned that relying on English and math only to judge a school s performance will mean less emphasis on art music history and other subjects Seventy eight percent of respondents indicated that they were concerned either a great deal or a fair amount Rose Gallup 2006 Moreover in its 2006 study about the effect of NCLB on school districts the Center on Education Policy noted evidence of a narrowing curriculum According to the study 71 percent of school districts reported that they have reduced instructional time in at least one other subject to make more time for reading and mathematics In some districts struggling students receive double periods of reading or math or both sometimes missing certain subjects altogether p vii Many school leaders are well aware of the curriculum imbalance resulting from NCLB s testfocused approach However they are understandably fearful not only of seeing their schools labeled as failing but also of jeopardizing funding and public support Side Effect 2 Discouraged Teachers Teachers are becoming increasingly concerned about the effect of high stakes testing on their teaching In a study of 376 elementary and secondary teachers in New Jersey teachers indicated that they tended to teach to the test often neglected individual students needs because of the stringent focus on high stakes testing had little time to teach creatively and bored themselves and their students with practice problems as they prepared for standardized testing Centolanza 2004 Moreover the focus on high stakes testing is negatively affecting teacher morale Assessment results often discourage teachers who have worked hard to close achievement gaps with their students For example if teachers have the goal of helping students in special education attain scores in the proficient range on state tests and their students never come close this repeated failure demoralizes teachers Side Effect 3 The Funny Numbers Game W Edwards Deming a major force behind the quality movement in the United States repeatedly warned that a heavy reliance on single goals or other narrowly defined evidence of success tends to encourage people to tweak the system rather than make the fundamental changes needed in schools and classrooms to ensure student mastery of standards Making the right numbers appear becomes more important than improving the system Thus we see negotiations between state education agencies and Washington bureaucrats on the need to exempt English language learners or students in special education programs as well as maneuvering by some states to lower their cutoff scores to show higher numbers of proficient students In addition each U S state defines proficiency somewhat differently and these definitions rarely line up with how proficiency is determined at the national level For example Texas reported that 83 percent of its 4th graders met the state proficiency standard in reading whereas the most recent round of testing by the National Assessment of Educational Progress NAEP showed that only 23 percent of those 4th graders met the proficiency level as defined by NAEP This variation adds further confusion to the issue of curriculum imbalance because it s part of an accountability system that