I'm worried about what No Child Left Behind is doing to students. This week I had to go over test scores for my second grade students. I had to separate them into categories - african american, latino, asian, white, English Language Learner, IEP, and students with free and reduced lunch. This is so I can concentrate on "bubble" students. The ones who are almost making Adequate Yearly Progress. This is so my school can meet it's goal for safe harbor. By the way, the asian student in my classroom doesn't satisfy the category of having enough students in my school to be "counted" in the numbers.

How would a student or a parent feel about not being counted? How do students and parents feel about teachers and schools taking "extra" time to teach and reteach to only students in the middle who will make a difference in a score?

I know how I feel. I want to get back to my real career - caring about each and every student in my classroom and teaching authentic information applicable for life rather then teaching to the test.

Teacher Sullivan
Las Vegas, Nevada

I urge you to add your name as a cosponsor of the Improving Student Testing Act of 2007 (S. 2053), sponsored by Senators Feingold and Leahy, and the No Child Left Behind Reform Act (S. 1194), sponsored by Senators Dodd and Salazar.

I support the No Child Left Behind goals of improving student learning and closing achievement and skills gaps among different groups of students. However, the law's reliance on standardized testing as the sole measure of school and student performance represents a one-size-fits-all approach that does not provide an accurate measure of achievement and dilutes the targeting of resources and assistance to schools truly in need.

S. 2053 and S. 1194 would both allow states to use growth models and multiple measures to assess student learning and school success, rather than simply looking at their performance on a standardized test one day of the year.

S. 2053 would also place greater emphasis on assessments that measure the kinds of advanced skills--higher-order thinking, analytical, and problem solving--students need for the 21st century and would offer states the option to go back to the pre-NCLB testing schedule for statewide tests (at least once in elementary school, once in middle school, and once in high school).

S. 1194 would also target school choice and supplemental educational services to students in specific subgroups that fall short of Adequate Yearly Progress targets, making sure that resources are targeted to the students who need them the most.

S. 2053 and S. 1194 represent a critically important step toward curbing the epidemics of "teaching to the test" and narrowing of the curriculum, both of which have been negative, unintended by-products of NCLB's accountability requirements.

I urge you to cosponsor these important bills.

As Congress considers reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act, I would like to share with you my views as an educator impacted by the law.

The goals of the law -- to raise student achievement, close achievement gaps, and ensure that every child is taught by a highly qualified, caring teacher - are important and commendable.

I hope Congress will slow down and take the time necessary to craft a bill that truly helps us reach these goals.

I urge you to revisit the law's one-size-fits-all approach and focus on testing as the sole measurement of student and school success.

An accountability system should include multiple measures of student learning and school effectiveness instead of the current one-day snapshot based solely on standardized tests; should reward progress over time to improve student achievement at all levels, and should recognize individual needs of students such as students with disabilities and English Language Learners.


The bill must also help reduce class sizes and modernize school facilities to ensure every student a safe, modern and effective learning environment.

The ESEA reauthorization should also reject any proposals to link teacher pay to student test scores. Just as a standardized test is not an accurate reflection of what a student knows, it is not an accurate reflection of what a teacher has taught.

I thank you for your consideration of my views, and those of my fellow educators, as you move forward on this important reauthorization.

September 23, 2007

As an educator, I am deeply concerned about the current House discussion draft for reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act/No Child Left Behind. Unless the draft is improved substantially, I urge you to reject it.

Educators support accountability and assessment, but this law's over
reliance on flawed standardized tests is hurting our students, educators,
and public schools.

Unfortunately the current proposal continues to grade students and schools based overwhelmingly on statewide standardized test scores. These low quality tests measure a student's memorization skills, rather than the ability to think critically and demonstrate 21st century skills. The draft even proposes to tie teacher pay and evaluation to these
standardized test scores. This is the wrong approach.

The bill also ignores the critical issues of class size reduction, access
to quality early childhood education, and adequate resources for school
facilities and materials.

This proposal as it is currently written will make it harder to attract
and retain the quality teachers and education support professionals we
need in our classrooms.

Educators want to work with lawmakers to create a federal law that once again helps schools and improves student learning. Educating children takes more than testing them. It requires a rich, high-quality
curriculum, qualified and caring educators, and schools built for the 21st
century.

Instead of rushing to pass legislation that will offer more bureaucracy,
more mandates, and less help for students and educators, Congress should take the time to craft a bill that will truly help ensure great public
schools for every child.

Please do what's right for our public schools and the students they serve.

Angie Sullivan
2nd Grade Teacher
Hickey Elementary
Las Vegas, Nevada

The staff at my school worked hard this entire last year to meet the expectations of AYP - ESEA/No Child Left Behind. We targeted instruction, taught summer school, re-arranged the schedule to teach a longer instructional day, and basically worked hard to teach to the test.

Our school made AYP for the 2006-2007 school year.

I just had a discussion with my principal. He said that because the expectations are so high next year, there is no possible way we can make AYP in 2007-2008. For some reason, we have to make impossible improvements because Nevada decided to raise the bar this year. The school district as a whole has failed AYP every year since the expectations were implemented. Almost every school in Clark County Nevada can expect to be printed in the paper next year as failures.

So the year hasn't started but the goal is already impossible. The good news is teachers can go back to teaching authentic instruction because teaching to the test will not even help us this year. We can give in to failure, do the best job we know how, and take the punishment. We can look forward to teachers being replaced and staff moved when we haven't made the goal. WHY? Does this legislation make sense to anyone?

100% of students passing a standardized test is impossible and eventually EVERY school in America will fail. Not everyone who goes to public schools will pass a standardized test. Public schools teach all students whether they can pass a certain type of test or not.

It's so discouraging to work so hard but never be able to reach the goal. We were set up to fail the minute this legislation passed.

Angie Sullivan
2nd Grade Teacher
Hickey Elementary
Clark County School District

ESEA/No Child Left Behind directs that instruction be very focused. The goal is to pass the annual standardized tests. In Nevada the results are calculated using a complex rubric. If a school fails in any of the areas, then the school is determined to have not met AYP - Adequate Yearly Progress.

While the intent of ESEA/No Child Left Behind was to hold students, teachers, and adminstrators accountable - it has encouraged the exact opposite. Schools now determine which students are the targeted populations that will be published in the upcoming reports.

Every year the staff looks at the rubric. Every year the students are labeled by ethnicity, free- or reduced- lunch status, attendance, first language status, IEP/504/Speech/GATE eligibility, etc.

A school determines which students to target for remediation. NOT EVERY STUDENT COUNTS. In Nevada, if a school does not have a certain percentage of any particular group or label, then those students will not count in the final rubric. Each school has a different population and will determine which groups it needs to focus on to remediate or ensure they pass.

While ESEA/No Child Left Behind intends to force schools to be accountable for everyone, education is very difficult to measure fairly.

Whatever tool is applied to measure adequate yearly progress will be examined by the people who will be judged. Students, teachers and administrators will meet the goals set by the tool and focus mostly on students gathered in the data - those who count.

ESEA/No Child Left Behind has drastically changed education. Teachers do not have to teach for the future, they do have to teach to the test. AND they will teach the students who count first and foremost. Some students will be focused on by educators to improve the scores, meanwhile others will sit to the side.

The discrimination and labeling this legislation has forced on education is discouraging- just because the title sounds great doesn't mean this legislation was ever a good idea.

Angie Sullivan
2nd Grade Teacher
Hickey Elementary
Las Vegas, Nevada

Nevada is sadly last in education in so many areas. We are 50th in the nation in per pupil spending. We are at the bottom in salaries/beneftis for teachers when compared to other states.

What little resources we had to educate members of the Nevada community in our public schools, are now being diverted to meet the requirements of ESEA/No Child Left Behind.

Our greatest resource - our public school teachers, do not plan to stay in Nevada and become invested in our community. In a recent survey done by the CCEA, Clark County Education Association, 45% of teachers currently employed in the state of the Nevada do not plan to be teaching here in the next 5 years. Most of our current teachers have less than 5 years of experience. AND all of our teachers make less than teachers with comparable experience and education in other places. When asked why they want to leave - at the top of the list was salary and benefits. Leaving teachers also are discouraged by working conditions, which are most probably brought on by increasing yearly requirements without additional compensation.

The cry from the public was to require more accountability from teachers and the legislators applied ESEA/No Child Left Behind. Teachers have labored under this unfunded mandate which has basically turned authentic instruction into a thing of the past and watered down the real curriculum to be focused on passing annual tests.

We teach to your mandated tests in Nevada, we are more accountable than ever in Nevada, we are paid less in Nevada than other teachers in other states, we have less money to spend per pupil than almost every other state. . .

How much more can the teachers in Nevada take? While I love my job and realize there are many intangible rewards, why am I required so often to work for free? I have skills and education and experience - no one asked me what I thought of ESEA/No Child Left Behind.

You raised the requirements and continue to do so at an almost impossible rate, now you need to show teachers and schools the money.

Angie Sullivan
2nd Grade Teacher
Hickey Elementary
Clark County School District
Las Vegas, Nevada

It is approaching the end of the year for many teachers who teach in nine-month schools. We will say good-bye to students we have seen daily. Some students have spent more time with their teachers than they have with their families. Committed teachers will remember these students for years to come. I will pass them on to their teachers next year.

The other thing I pass on is their scores.

First thing next year, when I should be preparing for my new students and my curriculum, I will begin reviewing scores. Scores are the priority according to ESEA - No Child Left Behind legislation. These scores came from last year. I will have no idea what was taught and by whom. In reality, the scores will mean little if anything to me after I meet the student and the parents and begin instruction. While they are interesting, they are ONLY a measurement of how well the student did on a particular academic question, at a specific time, on a specific day - nothing more.

The scores will tell me nothing about the home environment. The scores will tell me nothing about the culture the student lives in. The scores don't tell me how many languages the student has learned. The scores don't tell me how hard-working the student is. The scores don't tell me how the student behaves. The scores don't tell me if the student has enough to eat, sleeps at night, or watches TV all day long. The scores don't tell me how often the student attends school. The scores won't tell me if a student has a lot of common sense. The scores won't tell me how social a student is or how many friends they can make.

20 years from now, I can guarantee that no one will remember the scores or even care.

The types of lessons that make a real difference to humans are hard to measure with a score. Valuable life lessons are replaced by lessons to teach students how to better take a particular type of test. Test taking skills are great for taking tests - but what is their real application to everyday life or the work place? Thousands of people who aren't great test-takers are valuable members of our society. It is very difficult to measure success with a number system.

I can tell you that No Child Left Behind has limited my ability to provide authentic life-changing instruction. Scores have begun to drive and influence instruction. The unfunded ESEA- No Child Left Behind mandate has redirected all resources, time, and curriculum to a very direct and focused instructional day based on teaching to a test given once a year. Instead of science experiments, we read text. Instead of social studies, we practice filling in the bubbles. Instead of PE, we read more books. Instead of art, we look in encyclopedias. The balanced instruction is lost in an effort to manipulate test scores and therefore show adequate yearly improvement.

I will begin my school year by looking at and analyzing last year's scores. I will submit my required paperwork labeling my students as a success or failure based on this limited information. THEN I will close my door and meet my real students. I will get to know their strengths and weaknesses. I will love them all as I have done for years. I won't worry so much about the scores because I will get to know the people I will spend most of my time with over the next year. I have to do what the legislation and my school district mandates and then I will do my best to squeeze in actual instruction around the sides.

When my students will take the high stakes test, I will never know their scores. The scores will be passed on to the next year's teacher. Standardized tests are sent off to a fancy place with a lot of money to be corrected. Mostly, they won't be ready for review until next year. The first time I have a hint at how my school did - I will read about it in the newspaper.

Next year, I will receive someone else's students and their scores.

I will pray for the day when the numbers stop meaning more than actual people. I'm not understanding how this legislation, with such an important name - No Child Left Behind, can keep labeling people based on scores, using up all our resources to teach to tests, and limit real life learning.

Real people will always be more than a score.

I urge you to oppose the proposal by the Aspen Institute's No Child Left Behind Commission to create a "highly qualified effective teacher" requirement on top of requirements already contained in NCLB.

This ill-conceived mandate would simply set teachers up for failure.

Many veteran teachers have already met the requirements set by ESEA - NCLB to prove they are highly qualified. The Aspen Commission would now add yet another hoop to jump through.

The proposal would measure teacher performance mainly through the use of standardized test scores, based on one of three ESEA - NCLB mandated tests in reading, math, and science.

It is unfair to be evaluated at your place of work and measured by scores that most likely are out of your control. I always work with students who are considered by some to be less than perfect. They may be poor. They may be disabled in some way. They may not come from homes with family who is literate. They most likely don't speak English at home. The students are perfect to me -- their scores may stink.

To me this Aspen study basically suggests that I move to another school with students more likely to pass the test so that I can be labeled Highly Qualified and Highly Effective. Who will be left to teach students who might have less than perfect scores? I want to teach them. Does that mean I'm not qualified and effective because I don't meet the impossible standard? Does that mean I'm not qualified and effective because my students may not meet the impossible standard?

The people who did this study did not teach at-risk students. The people who did this study do not believe that great public schools are for EVERY student in America. I still believe that democracy only runs if the educated public makes educated decisions.

Who will be left at my school if you listen to these suggestions?

We can no longer afford to turn our back on public schools at a time when they are struggling with growing enrollments, more and more students with special needs, aging and outdated facilities, and the growing costs of complying with No Child Left Behind.

The legislature decided it was time to expect more from teachers, students, and schools without paying the price. ESEA - No Child Left Behind is diverting every resource the district, school, and classroom has to meet AYP. You wanted us to test - tests cost. You wanted us to remediate - remediation costs. You wanted us to meet a standard - materials and instruction costs. You wanted us to do more with less and less - we did.

Meanwhile, more and more students are being left behind and the very intention of ESEA - No Child Left Behind is lost in the pile of numbers. I'm playing your unwise and unfair game. . . SHOW ME THE MONEY.

If the legislature can't pay the price, then maybe everyone will realize how unfair it is to ask me to pay as I'm doing each and every day. I don't ask you to work for free and force a law on you to make you do so.

Start funding the unfunded mandate - or stop mandating.

ESEA - No Child Left Behind Legislation

If I were a businessman this legislation would mean . . .
 I would have no choice over which products to buy at wholesale prices
 I would have to receive broken, disadvantaged, less than perfect products each and everyday and still figure out a way to make a profit
 I would have to measure and re-measure my products to see if anything has changed
 I would have to read my measurements in the newspaper which will compared my products to the entire nation
 I would be in competition with other businessman who have zero problem products
 I would be in competition with other businessman who regularly receive more money from their communities to be able to improve their products and sale their products
 I would have to repair my own products even if they get re-broken each night
 I would be REQUIRED to sale each and every product or I would not be considered successful
 I would have to pay to take tests and go to college for a long time to be able to sale my products
 I would have to be highly qualified even though it's unclear exactly how I am supposed to do this
 I would be expected to work and work and work for less money than other people with my same level of skill and school degree

If I were a teacher this legislation would mean . . .
 I would have no choice over which students enter my room
 I would have to receive broken, disadvantaged, less than perfect students each and everyday and still figure out a way to make them learn
 I would have to measure and re-measure my students to see if anything has changed
 I would have to read my measurements in the newspaper which will compared my students, broken or not, to the entire nation
 I would be in competition with other teachers who have zero problem students
 I would be in competition with other teachers who regularly receive more money from their communities to be able to improve their schools and student achievement
 I would have to repair my students even if they get re-broken each night
 I would be REQUIRED to improve each and every student to grade level or I would not be considered successful
 I would have to pay to take tests and go to college for a long time to be able to teach my students
 I would have to be highly qualified even though it's unclear exactly how I am supposed to do this
 I would be expected to work and work and work for less money than other people with my same level of skill and school degree

Teachers should not be measured or made accountable to a business model legislation. In fact this legislation and it's business model measurements, do not even make sense when applied to business. Education is a basic human right and all students in our country deserve a free and quality public education. To continue to measure and publish inaccurate measurements, improves nothing. A businessman would never allow the government to dictate their business practices, why would a teacher?

ESEA - No Child Left Behind Legislation has left almost everyone behind. What is the purpose? Please support efforts to drastically change this legislation, adequately fund this legislation, and start making a real difference to every child, teacher, and family in this nation.

No Child Left Behind legislation costs millions of dollars to implement, regulate, and document. Since it is based on increasing standardized tests scores, we will always be behind and no one will get ahead. Standardized tests scores are based on a national curve. If everyone in the nation increases test taking skills - the curve will move and everyone who was behind will still be behind - even if the scores improve. Everyone knows the goal is impossible but we continue to run on the hamster wheel.

Let's put our money into authentic instruction and real life educational skills. Let's look at each student individually and help them progress from place to place. Let's get real and not base individual worth on a bubble test we give once or twice a year.