The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 is a controversial United States federal law (Act of Congress) that reauthorized a number of federal programs aiming to improve the performance of U.S. primary and secondary schools by increasing the standards of accountability for states, school districts, and schools, as well as providing parents more flexibility in choosing which schools their children will attend. Additionally, it promoted an increased focus on reading.
NCLB is based on the belief that setting high expectations and establishing measurable goals can improve individual outcomes in education. The Act requires states to develop assessments in basic skills to be given to all students in certain grades, if those states are to receive federal funding for schools. NCLB does not assert a national achievement standard; standards are set by each individual state, in line with the principle of local control of schools.
The effectiveness and desirability of NCLB's measures are hotly debated.
the effectiveness can be in terms of measured results and in other ways like teaching methods. benefits include providing data which improves quality of instruction by requiring schools to implement "scientifically based research" practices in the classroom, parent involvement programmes, and professional development activities for those students that are not encouraged or expected to attend college. it has also narrowed class and racial gaps in school performance by creating common expectations for all. The Department of Education points to National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) results, released in July 2005, showing improved student achievement in reading and math.
However, this could mean that teachers would manipulate the results or records to make it seem like there was an improvment.The system of incentives and penalties sets up a strong motivation for schools, to manipulate test results. For example, schools have been shown to employ creative reclassification of drop-outs. Also, NCLB could reduce effective instruction and student learning because it may cause states to lower achievement goals and motivate teachers to "teach to the test."
I feel that this act is beneficial to a certain extent. It makes sures that students walk out of school, a better, and smarter person. However, this will only happen with the co-operation of teachers. Teachers should still teach the whole syllabus and not only a certain part that is coming our for the test. Also, this act does not develop individuality but conformity. Maybe, the government could adapt singapore's style of syllabus, like project work which spur students to have a mind of their own and not conform to the masses.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Is formal education overvalued?
“Formal,” implies structure, organization, or a systemized approach that drives towards established objectives, whereas “informal” would imply the exact opposite, where matters are left entirely perhaps to the course of nature or lasse faire.
‘Education” is a process whereby an individual from childhood to adulthood undergo a developmental process within his or her society or environment, acquire the necessary skills and knowledge that will transform him or her into positive contributors, both socially and economically in his sphere of influence and existence.
There is value in formal education as it provides foundational literacy and numeracy skills and knowledge that is critical for intellectual development. These are the tools or the keys needed to open up, access and unlock the vast and limitless world of knowledge.
Few would and should dispute this point.
The question is therefore at what point and in what form of manifestations, does formal education become overvalued? In general, it is said to overvalued if
there are excessive pressure on the young causing a negative impact cited in first article
and when there are insufficient avenues to cater to “late developers”. The creative, the artistic who may not have any academic inclinations, but excel in sports, music or art.
. Rote learning and pure memorization power does not work in the new economy and this must be recognised by the relevant authorities to prepare our students towards a more diversed economy in the future.
Singapore has since been trying to change in many instances for the better. The Ministry of Education has been constantly luring people to turn to teaching as a profession with attractive incentives. The purpose of this is to increase the number of teachers to cope with the ever increasing amount of students and also to increase the teacher-student ratio and increase the quality of the education provided for the younger generation. The Ministry has also been developing the current curriculum and modifying it to include more broad-based activities. The focus is no longer entirely on academic-based programs but on an all round development of the student. This is a step to prepare the students for the future where they have to handle interpersonal relations on a day by day basis. From this two points above, it can be easily seen that formal education has got the needed basis for intellectual development and whether this can be fully utilised would be dependent upon the student and the amount of self effort that the individuals put in.
Singapore is a good example of diversified learning. It has a variety of schools catering to the different needs of the students. There is the Singapore Sports School, Nayang Academy for the Fine Arts , ITE, Polytechnics which provides a very diverse options for those who have different needs.
A simple study would be all it takes to identify the sky rocketing pressure present among students as young as 7 or as old as 24 in our current curriculum. Facing such extensive and excessive pressure in their studies, it is no wonder that many would crack. This is when the race for the degree comes in. Most entry level jobs now requires at least a Bachelor's degree. A career in performing arts or sports is not likely to be feasible in a market as small as Singapore. Most of us would be hired employees and would require that basic degree and would have to study hard and withstand the pressure put upon the students. With such heavy pressure on such young shoulders, formal education is said to be overvalued as skills are often overlooked and replaced by that wanted degree which may not teach the relevant skills for the job.
“Formal,” implies structure, organization, or a systemized approach that drives towards established objectives, whereas “informal” would imply the exact opposite, where matters are left entirely perhaps to the course of nature or lasse faire.
‘Education” is a process whereby an individual from childhood to adulthood undergo a developmental process within his or her society or environment, acquire the necessary skills and knowledge that will transform him or her into positive contributors, both socially and economically in his sphere of influence and existence.
There is value in formal education as it provides foundational literacy and numeracy skills and knowledge that is critical for intellectual development. These are the tools or the keys needed to open up, access and unlock the vast and limitless world of knowledge.
Few would and should dispute this point.
The question is therefore at what point and in what form of manifestations, does formal education become overvalued? In general, it is said to overvalued if
there are excessive pressure on the young causing a negative impact cited in first article
and when there are insufficient avenues to cater to “late developers”. The creative, the artistic who may not have any academic inclinations, but excel in sports, music or art.
. Rote learning and pure memorization power does not work in the new economy and this must be recognised by the relevant authorities to prepare our students towards a more diversed economy in the future.
Singapore has since been trying to change in many instances for the better. The Ministry of Education has been constantly luring people to turn to teaching as a profession with attractive incentives. The purpose of this is to increase the number of teachers to cope with the ever increasing amount of students and also to increase the teacher-student ratio and increase the quality of the education provided for the younger generation. The Ministry has also been developing the current curriculum and modifying it to include more broad-based activities. The focus is no longer entirely on academic-based programs but on an all round development of the student. This is a step to prepare the students for the future where they have to handle interpersonal relations on a day by day basis. From this two points above, it can be easily seen that formal education has got the needed basis for intellectual development and whether this can be fully utilised would be dependent upon the student and the amount of self effort that the individuals put in.
Singapore is a good example of diversified learning. It has a variety of schools catering to the different needs of the students. There is the Singapore Sports School, Nayang Academy for the Fine Arts , ITE, Polytechnics which provides a very diverse options for those who have different needs.
A simple study would be all it takes to identify the sky rocketing pressure present among students as young as 7 or as old as 24 in our current curriculum. Facing such extensive and excessive pressure in their studies, it is no wonder that many would crack. This is when the race for the degree comes in. Most entry level jobs now requires at least a Bachelor's degree. A career in performing arts or sports is not likely to be feasible in a market as small as Singapore. Most of us would be hired employees and would require that basic degree and would have to study hard and withstand the pressure put upon the students. With such heavy pressure on such young shoulders, formal education is said to be overvalued as skills are often overlooked and replaced by that wanted degree which may not teach the relevant skills for the job.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)