no child left behind in puerto rico: how does the no child leftbehind act affect teachers’...

8/11/2019 No Child Left Behind in Puerto Rico: How Does the No Child LeftBehind Act Affect Teachers Attitudes Toward Stud

1/21

No Child Left Behind in Puerto Rico: How Does the No Child LeftBehind Act Affect Teachers Attitudes Toward Students from Low-

ncome Communities

Emely E. Medina-RodrguezDe!artment of Social Science

"ni#ersit$ of Puerto Rico%&a$a'(e) Cam!us

Leonard RamirezLatin American Recruitment and *ducational Ser#ices

"ni#ersit$ of llinois at Chica'o

1


2/21

Abstract: The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was created in 2001 to close the achievement

gap between middle class hite st!dents and low"income minorit# st!dents in the $%&% NCLB is

also mandated in '!erto ico and affects '!erto ican ed!cational instit!tions% Altho!gh this law

has been st!died in the $%& its impact on territories distant from the mainland is less !nderstood%

Little is *nown for e+ample abo!t how NCLB affects '!erto ican teachers, attit!des

especiall# those wor*ing with st!dents from low"income comm!nities% -!alitative research

methods were chosen to enco!rage teachers from an intermediate school in .a#ag/e '!erto

ico to e+press their perspectives from their own point of view regarding the NCLB Law and

related themes% The school serves st!dents from five s!rro!nding p!blic ho!sing pro ects and

ninet#"two percent of the st!dent bod# came from ho!seholds with an income below the povert#

level% &tatistics from '!erto ico,s epartment of 3d!cation also showed that this school had not

met NCLB,s Ade4!ate 5earl# 'rogress re4!irement for the past five #ears% A snowball sample

identified seven teacher and staff members, participants and the# were interviewed !sing an

instr!ment containing 26 open"ended 4!estions%

Teachers emphasi ed the impact of the environmental and socio"c!lt!ral bac*gro!nds of

st!dents from this low"income comm!nit# on their lac* of s!ccess on standardi ed tests and on

their academic life% Teachers e+pect st!dents to possess attit!des that reflect their lac* of interest

toward the ed!cational process% The# ass!me the children lac* critical e+periences and c!lt!ral

capital and that this lac* leads them to become disinterested in their own schooling% The data

s!ggest NCLB aggravates teachers, low e+pectations of local comm!nit# st!dents% To f!ll#

!nderstand the implications of the implementation of NCLB in '!erto ico we sho!ld consider

the vario!s factors that ma# affect the relationship between teachers and st!dents% e m!st also

2


3/21

e+amine options that reinforce the strengths of teachers and st!dents ta*ing into acco!nt the

special needs of st!dents and the challenges that confront teachers%

1 Introduction.!ch has been written abo!t the No Child Left Behind Act in the $nited &tates b!t less

is *nown abo!t the impact of this law in $%&% territories% '!erto ico is a $nited &tates territor#

and therefore $%&% federal laws m!st be followed as the# are in an# state of the !nion% Altho!gh

'!erto ico has no representation leveling Congress according to the 2002 $%&% Cens!s 776

809 '!erto ican st!dents in the island are covered b# the NCLB act% '!erto ico has been

!nder $%&% power since 18:8 and has !ndo!btedl# had a great c!lt!ral infl!ence from the $nited

&tates; B!t this does not necessaril# mean '!erto ican st!dents on the island have the same

needs as American st!dents or even as '!erto ican st!dents living in the $nited &tates% There

are


4/21

have to !se standardi ed tests states to demonstrate st!dents, proficienc# in core s!b ects each

#ear% hen a school does not show A5' conse4!ences are grad!all# applied beginning b#

labeling the school as >in need of improvement? the first #ear and c!lminating with the

replacement of school staff and the restr!ct!ring of the school personnel in the fifth #ear

(&chmidt 2007)%

The NCLB act has been highl# critici ed in the $nited &tates for failing to accomplish its

ob ectives and especiall# for not closing the achievement gap it was created to close% The

standardi ed tests !sed to implement it have also been critici ed for being biased and for

ass!ming that getting good scores on the test will close ed!cational and economic gaps% The law

has also been acc!sed of narrowing the c!rric!l!m and den#ing st!dents a holistic school

e+perience% The literat!re identifies additional problemsD it does not differentiate between

comm!nities or social gro!ps it treats st!dents from m!ltiple bac*gro!nds and m!ltiple needs as

if the# were all the same and it affects predominantl# minorit# st!dents from poor !rban areas%

'!blic polic# decisions stemming from the NCLB law have also been critici ed arg!ing

that the law is !sed to advance private economic and political agendas and that it is being !sed to

avoid policies that directl# deal with these comm!nities, iss!es s!ch as !nemplo#ment or

!nderemplo#ment% &cholars arg!e this law enco!rages the disconnection between st!dents and

teachers% &ome agree that the c!rric!l!m has been replaced with practice for standardi ed test%

The literat!re s!ggests that it is necessar# that teachers get involved in polic#"ma*ing decisions

beca!se it is them who m!st implement these decisions%

This research tries to !nderstand how NCLB shapes teachers, attit!des toward their

st!dents from low"income comm!nities in '!erto ico% @t also e+plores low e+pectations and

4


5/21

their impact on the st!dent"teacher relationship as the# are e+pressed and described b# the

teachers% .oreover this wor* see*s to !nderstand from the teacher,s point of view how NCLB

re4!irements and low teacher e+pectations impact st!dent interest in and commitment to the

school%

2 Methodology

&even interviews with teachers wor*ing in a middle school near the $niversit# of '!erto

ico at .a#ag!e were anal# ed% The school was chosen based on its location and on the '!erto

ican epartment of 3d!cation statistics; The .arina % Eernande &chool is located near to and

serves st!dents from five p!blic ho!sing pro ects and ninet#"two percent of its st!dent bod#

come from ho!seholds with income levels below the povert# line% This school was labeled to be

>in need of improvement? for the past five #ears% &t!dents, age at the school range from eleven

to fifteen #ears with the e+ception of those enrolled in the special ed!cation program% &pecial

ed!cation st!dents constit!te half of the st!dent enrollment at .arina % Eernande &chool and

range from eleven to twent#"one #ears old% .ost of these special ed!cation st!dents are not

assigned to a partic!lar grade b!t rather to a >wor*shop?%

Two mathematics teachers one &panish teacher one social st!dies teacher two

co!nselors and the school principal were interviewed% Three of the instr!ctors that were

interviewed teach special ed!cation st!dents and three teach st!dents from seventh to ninth

grade% Teachers were recr!ited !sing a snowball or chain method recr!iting process beginning

with the school principal% Fpen"ended interviews were cond!cted in an attempt to capt!re

teachers, views abo!t the No Child Left Behind act% Teachers were as*ed twent#"si+ 4!estions

5


6/21

abo!t NCLB and st!dentsG college aspirations% @nterviews were appro+imatel# one ho!r in

length and were cond!cted between the months of Eebr!ar# and April of 200:%

The interviews were coded !sing the open coding method described b# &tra!ss H Corbin

(1::8)% Nine ma or codes were derived from the data and anal# ed witho!t a preconceived

theor#% Two main 4!estions were !sed as general g!ideD Iow does the No Child Left Behind act

affect the teaching practices in a low"income schoolJ and Iow does the No Child Left Behind

act affect teachers, attit!des toward st!dents from low"income comm!nitiesJ The anal# ed data

allowed a better !nderstanding of the impact of NCLB on teacher attit!des%

3 Literature

NCLB affects disadvantage students

&chmidt (2008) see*s to demonstrate that NCLB schools with large amo!nts of

disadvantaged st!dents are more v!lnerable to NCLB sanctions% Ie foc!ses on two factors to

base his arg!ment proficienc# gains and separation of s!bgro!ps scores% The proficienc# gains

model re4!ires all schools to reach a single proficienc# level in order to close the achievement

gap% Iowever for disadvantaged st!dents this re4!irement is a challenge beca!se the ne+t #ear

the criteria scores will get higher even if the school did not previo!sl# meet the threshold the

previo!s #ear% This p!ts disadvantaged st!dents in the position of having to reach higher

proficienc# levels in a shorter amo!nt of time in order to avoid NCLB sanctions and the

withholding of federal f!nds (&chmidt 2008%) Eor &chmidt this model !nfairl# affects schools

with m!ltiple s!bgro!ps which he describes as incl!ding low"income st!dents gro!ps with

learning disabilities or those with limited 3nglish proficienc#%

6


7/21

To ma*e s!re s!bgro!ps are reaching the progress needed to attain statewide

re4!irements schools separate s!bgro!p scores from the collective school"wide scores% The

a!thor claims this model !nfairl# impacts schools with certain gro!ps of st!dents s!ch as those

with m!ltiple needs% This provision identifies partic!lar samples of st!dents failing the test to

sanction the entire school ma*ing it more diffic!lt for schools with higher n!mbers of

disadvantaged children to reach statewide proficienc# levels% This ma*es those schools more

v!lnerable to federal sanctions than those schools with a homogeneo!s pop!lation%

Low Expectations:

einer (2006) reviews deficit theories and presents recommendations on how to

challenge deficit thin*ing% Ie describes the school c!lt!re as fostering deficit thin*ing% Ie

e+plains how the ed!cational s#stem str!ct!res and s!stains deficit thin*ing b# ass!ming

misbehavior or poor achievement are iss!es st!dents inherited from their families and that need

to be fi+ed% @ndivid!al behavior and character are in need of reform in order to solve p!blic

iss!es% This same approach can be seen in school practices and ass!mptions% einer states this

deficit thin*ing often hides st!dents and teachers abilities which is especiall# powerf!l beca!se

is a practice that people tend to overloo* or ta*e"for"granted%

eficit thin*ing in the ed!cational s#stem >ma*es teachers a mere referral agent and

locates responsibilit# for st!dent achievement be#ond a teacher,s reach? ( einer 2006)% Ie adds

that ed!cators are also victims of deficit thin*ing especiall# when parents and legislators insist

that teacher deficits are the sole reason for st!dents, poor achievement% einer e+plains that

these ass!mptions school practices and traditions obsc!re both teachers, and st!dents, strengths%

7


8/21

E!rthermore he s!ggests that teachers ma# become disco!raged when the# face the fact that the#

cannot change these practices on their own% 3ven so he recommends teachers e+amine these

deficit arg!ments criticall# and develop strategies that foc!s on st!dents, strengths% Ie also

proposes that p!blic ed!cation sho!ld change its face b# ma*ing it important for teachers to

challenge those deficit ass!mptions%

Standardized testing: the misuse of data

&tandardi ed testing is the method that NCLB !ses to meas!re academic achievement in

ever# state and for children from all *inds of socio"c!lt!ral and economic bac*gro!nd% ivera

(2007) arg!es that data coming from standardi ed tests has been mis!sed to prove that the polic#

wor*s for all *inds of st!dents% &he claims the mis!se of data ma*es this test to be tempered b#

ideological beliefs s!ch as claims of tests been scientificall# based% .oreover believing

scientificall# based means above social c!lt!ral and economical factors% ivera anal# ed

disco!rses abo!t test scores statistics to reveal these ideologies come from ver# specific

historical and social conte+ts especiall# from disco!rses claiming that intelligence can be

meas!re empiricall#%

ivera e+amines disco!rses that s!pport the emphasis on testing and acco!ntabilit# for

e+ample those that claim teachers have alwa#s !sed e+ams to meas!re st!dent achievement or to

identif# children with disabilities or those who emphasi e the voice of the ta+pa#ers who

4!estion the performance of schools% E!rthermore she challenges the notion that strong

acco!ntabilit# based on testing is the *e# for a rigoro!s and challenging c!rric!l!m% ivera

arg!es that the t#pe of disco!rse that emphasi es testing and acco!ntabilit# is also !sed to !stif#

8


9/21

p!nishment for !nderperforming schools pa#ing no attention to social or economic

bac*gro!nds stigmati ing children and labeling schools as failing witho!t considering the

factors that ma*e the st!dents perform poorl# on the tests% According to ivera data

interpretations >in some cases ma# not reveal the realit# of those who are often affected b# it?

she e+plains that the mis!se of data disco!nts disadvantage gro!ps in the name of scientific

testing and prod!ces detrimental conse4!ences s!ch as marginali ing st!dents or p!nishing them

for !nderachieving%

Teachers invo!vement:

The necessit# of teacher involvement is st!dents, c!lt!re life problems and comm!nit#

is disc!ssed b# e#nolds 2007 especiall# after the implementation of the NCLB% &he critici es

that NCLB standardi ed test re4!irements ma*es the c!rric!l!ms disengage with st!dents, dail#

realities% e#nolds arg!es teachers, lac* the freedom to determine what teachings are more

consistent with their st!dents, needs% 'artic!larl# when the c!rric!la e+cl!de important topics in

the classrooms classrooms where social forces alread# deters the practice of critical thin*ing%

Therefore the a!thor s!ggests that st!dents ma# e+perience alienation from the school

environment beca!se their lives are not part of the c!rric!l!m%

Iowever she gives e+amples of scholars whose pro ects help teachers to e+amine their

teaching methods to incl!de alternatives to meet the personal and ed!cational needs of st!dents%

&he also cond!cted s!rve#s to teachers who had created lessons to help st!dents deal with their

problems% Erom the res!lts e#nolds concl!ded that >social development m!st precede

children,s consideration of the social force that affects their lives%? Additionall# she e+plains

9


10/21

these lessons were designed to help children control their emotions managing anger and solving

social problems%

Einall# she s!ggests teaches to promote respect in their classrooms and show concern for

st!dents% .oreover she recommends teachers to ac4!ire c!es to remind st!dents the lessons

ta!ght when conflicts arise% The a!thor attrib!tes the lac* of teacher engagement with st!dents,

social needs in part to NCLB test re4!irement% &he arg!es that >creating a c!rric!l!m of basics

s*ills that can be meas!re b# standardi ed tests is !st another wa# of ignoring st!dents, real

needs%? e#nolds s!ggests that even with NCLB p!nitive policies teacher sho!ld g!ide st!dents

in their personal development%

NCLB cannot c!ose the achievement gap

An#on (2007) e+plores the government,s rhetoric abo!t NCLB f!nctioning as a ob

polic#% &he tries to demonstrate how the economic realit# of disadvantage gro!ps shortens the

power of ed!cation to lead people o!t of povert#% The a!thor arg!es that NCLB is !se as an anti"

povert# meas!re ass!ming that having a higher ed!cational level will lead low"income

individ!als o!t of povert#% 3ven so An#on claims that >for ed!cation to lead to better obs there

has to be obs available%? Therefore she e+plains that the $& ob mar*et is limited and is

prod!cing primaril# povert# wage obs and onl# a few highl# paid ones% $& economic realities

ma*e having a college degree not a g!arant# of having a highl# paid ob% An#on advice that

those promise of a good ob and better pa# impl# b# NCLB are false beca!se for minorit#

st!dent and low"income individ!als academic achievement is no g!arantee of economic s!ccess%

10


11/21

Eor An#on the government wants to ma*e seen as if NCLB has the power to close an

achievement gap that was created b# other factors that a better ed!cation cannot fi+%

4 Results

After cond!cting the interviews and ta*ing field notes nine ma or codes were selected

beca!se of their relationship to each other and to the literat!re% The first was related to the

teachers, comments that e+pressed their low e+pectations of st!dents, academic achievement% @n

one ma or code named deficit two s!b topics were identified first the lac* of parental

involvement in their children,s academic life and second the st!dents, lac* of academic and

e+trac!rric!lar e+periences which are ass!med to contrib!te to b!ilding c!lt!ral capital%

@n the interviews teachers e+pressed low e+pectations for their st!dents, behavior in the

classroom attit!de toward learning and academic progress% The# tho!ght their st!dents,

academic performance in class and on standardi ed tests e+emplified an !ncaring attit!de toward

school% Teachers e+pected st!dents not to follow the cond!ct code in classrooms and be

irresponsible in their dail# schoolwor*% The# ass!med that the# wo!ld not be prepared to disc!ss

homewor*% As one of the teachers e+plainedD

>@ as* them for information then @ wait for the children to bring me the

information the ne+t da# so @ can contin!e the class b!t no onl# two or three brought

the assignment% B!t see this is the wa# the# do it% The# go to the librar# and print it

directl# Kfrom the internet b!t @ as* them if the# *now something of what is there and

one even told me that the librar# printers ran o!t of in* and that is wh# she did not

brought it?

11


12/21

Teachers did not e+pect st!dents to wor* at 100M intellect!al capacit# since the# see

them as disinterested in school% According to teachers !ncaring st!dents can be identified b#

their negative attit!de toward schoolwor* and b# their academic achievement which incl!des

low grades and low scores on standardi ed test%

Teachers asserted that st!dents lac* c!lt!ral and ed!cational e+periences o!tside their

comm!nit#% The# see this as a detriment to c!ltivating st!dent interest in the ed!cational process%

Fne teacher commented that >latel# man# st!dents come Kto school with specific learning

disabilities and it is possibl# beca!se the# lac* previo!s ed!cational e+periences or ma#be

beca!se the# are c!lt!rall# disadvantaged%? The# attrib!te this lac* of e+periences to their socio"

economic stat!s b!t with the caveat that the socio"economic part is onl# an obstacle b!t not the

reason for academic fail!re% 3ven so teachers feel that their st!dents are !nable to achieve

!pward social mobilit# beca!se the# have been acc!lt!rated to the comm!nit# living standards

which the# describe as welfare dependant and !nacc!stomed to a!togestion%

egarding parental involvement teachers do not e+pect parents to provide

comprehensive c!lt!ral e+periences for their children as do more economicall# privileged

ho!seholds% As a teacher e+plains >The# Kst!dents are not e+posed to man# e+periences as

when #o! parents have mone# and e+pose their children to broader e+periences% Then when the

teacher disc!sses certain topics st!dents *now beca!se the# have traveled or been e+posed to

c!lt!ral events% The# are aware of certain topics so that when the teacher disc!sses them the#

alread# *now%? Teachers claimed that most of the parents of their st!dents do not provide an

e+ample of !pward social mobilit# or academic s!ccess to their children b!t rather an e+ample

12


13/21

of social stagnation and resignation with their life st#le% Teachers all!de to the parents, low

ed!cational levels and governmental financial assistance as an e+ample of this social stagnation%

Teachers believe that famil# s!pport and ed!cational val!es are an important part of

st!dent,s academic s!ccess% Therefore if the parents do not get involved in their child,s

academic life the st!dent will not obtain the academic progress teachers, believe is necessar# to

achieve s!ccess% Teachers emphasi ed that st!dents lac* the parental stim!l!s to inspire socio"

economic progress% The# feel that the comm!nit# and the parents of their st!dents fail to provide

social academic and c!lt!ral e+periences that enco!rage st!dents to aspire to higher academic

goals%

Teachers attrib!te the lac* of e+periences to the st!dent,s environment% Living in a p!blic

ho!sing pro ect affects st!dents, self"esteem% Teachers perceive that their st!dents have a self"

image of a poor person witho!t opport!nities to s!cceed% As this teacher comments >loo* it is

li*e a c#cle the# Kst!dents don,t have an# other wa# the# don,t have the opport!nities to

e+pand their hori on% The# can,t see o!tside from where the# live and @ thin* that has an

infl!ence on them and the school%? Teachers feel the comm!nit# does not s!ppl# st!dents with

broad c!lt!ral e+periences and opport!nities for !pward mobilit#% Children will not be able to

imitate or aspire to be s!ccessf!l professionals since the# are not e+posed to s!ccessf!l

professionals in their comm!nit#% Teachers s!ggest that the st!dents feel safe within their

comm!nit# environment and are satisfied to onl# f!lfill their comm!nit# e+pectations%

E!rthermore the# maintain that their school is not capable of offering socio"c!lt!ral e+periences

to their st!dents beca!se the school is part of p!blic ho!sing and is part of the comm!nit#%

13


14/21

Teachers feel st!dents cannot identif# with the school c!rric!l!m beca!se their comm!nit# has

not offered them the c!lt!ral e+pos!re necessar# for the st!dent to be interested in learning%

Einall# teachers believe the school fails the NCLB standardi ed test beca!se of the lac*

of importance that st!dent give schooling% The# stated that man# of their st!dents are not

committed to their academic progress; therefore the# feel test scores will not affect them in an#

wa#% According to one teacher >most of them Kst!dents sta# in the basic part not beca!se the#

can,t progress and it is not beca!se the# don,t *now b!t beca!se the# don,t care% The# don,t see

the "val!e of the test% The# thin* nothing is going to happen to them beca!se the# are not being

graded and beca!se the# will not get an#thing from them Ktests %? 3ven so teachers see s!ccess

on the test as a meas!rement of the commitment of st!dents to their ed!cation%

5 nalysis

ata shows teachers have low e+pectations of their st!dents specificall# for two ma or

reasonsD (1) beca!se st!dents come from a low"income marginali ed comm!nit# and (2) beca!se

half of the school,s enrollment participates in the special ed!cation program% .an# st!dents have

learning disabilities% These factors contrib!te to teachers thin*ing that their st!dents have deficits

that will not allow them to achieve academic s!ccess% The first deficienc# is the lac* of parental

involvement in their children,s academic life which for the teachers means that the st!dent will

be lac*ing famil# s!pport to aspire to be more academicall# s!ccessf!l% 3ven more parents do

not provide socio"c!lt!ral e+periences that motivate st!dents to aspire to a profession that can be

reached academicall# for e+ample seeing one of their parents achieve social mobilit# thro!gh a

ob that re4!ires a degree%

14


15/21

Another deficit the st!dents have is the lac* of the social and c!lt!ral e+periences o!tside

of their school and comm!nit#% The# lac* c!lt!ral e+periences s!ch as fieldtrips to m!se!ms

landmar*s and !niversities which e+pose st!dents to iss!es and ideas that stim!late the

development of academic interests and professional career paths% The# also lac* social

e+periences s!ch as camps or hobb# gro!ps which e+pose st!dent to people from m!ltiple

bac*gro!nds with ideas different from their own% Einall# teachers interviewed tho!ght that the

most severe deficit the# confronted was the limited academic capacit# of their special ed!cation

st!dents to s!cceed academicall#% Ialf of the st!dents bod# are special ed!cation st!dents with

learning disabilities that rang from the mild to the severe% These did not allow teachers to

demand better academic competence from their st!dents% Eor teachers these factors affect the

interest that st!dents have toward academic life and therefore their academic s!ccess%

&ince NCLB was implemented teachers redefined their idea of academic s!ccess which

has been foc!sed on standardi ed test scores% &t!dents who do not meet this re4!irement are not

considered s!ccessf!l% To achieve the ade4!ate scores NCLB re4!ires teachers redesign their

teaching methods toward a c!rric!l!m that can assist st!dents to achieve the re4!ired test scores%

This means that the c!rric!l!m is narrowed which ma# contrib!te to st!dents becoming even

more disinterested in their ed!cation% The st!dents do not identif# with the c!rric!l!m as it

becomes monotono!s and lin*s st!dent needs to tests scores% The combination of these two

factorsD (1) the deficits identified b# teachers and (2) a narrowed c!rric!l!m which is !naware of

the st!dents, needs ma# ca!se st!dents to disengage with their own ed!cation% &t!dents do not

give importance to standardi ed tests that might increase their s!ccess as defined b# teachers nor

15


16/21

do the# obtain the scores needed to f!lfill NCLB re4!irements% This in t!rn ca!ses an increase in

teachers, low e+pectations of their st!dents%

Aggravating these attit!des is the fact that teachers will not integrate into the process the

ac4!isition of comprehensive holistic learning which ta*es into consideration st!dents

comprehensive needs% Teacher attit!des ma# lead st!dents to believe that the# do not care abo!t

their well"being% Therefore this co!ld increase the disengagement of st!dents with their

ed!cation even more and ma# e+acerbate behaviors that teachers identif# as !ncaring% alen !ela

(1:::) s!ggests that a complete appreciation of the material ph#sical ps#chological and

spirit!al need of st!dents sho!ld g!ide teachers in the ed!cational process% To obtain this *ind of

ed!cation einer (2006) recommends teachers to criticall# e+amine deficit e+planations abo!t

their st!dents and search for strategies that foc!s on their strengths%

@n the '!erto ican conte+t the sit!ation is aggravated since '!erto icans do not have a

sa# in the ed!cational policies implemented in the island beca!se of their political stat!s vis"O"vis

the $nited &tates% .oreover this law shapes '!erto ico,s own ed!cational laws as for e+ample

the most recent epartment of 3d!cation circ!lar letter which ta*es the res!lts of standardi ed

test to reform '!erto ico,s school c!lt!re even tho!gh the law do not ta*e into acco!nt the

academic and social needs in school li*e this one% Eor e+ample the letter !rges principals to stop

fieldtrips that are not related to academic achievement even tho!gh teacher !rge for more

st!dent e+pos!re o!tside the school and their comm!nities%

Ereire (1:70) e+plains that >.an# political and ed!cational plans have failed beca!se

their a!thors designed them according to their own personal views of realit# never ones ta*ing

16


17/21

into acco!nt (e+cept as mere ob ects of their actions the men"in"a"sit!ation to whom their

program was ostensibl# directed%? The agenc# of the teacher in ma*ing decisions for the welfare

of st!dents each da# is red!ced b# this law which does not ta*e into acco!nt the realities of

'!erto ico,s low"income comm!nities% NCLB does the opposite of what democratic societ# is

loo*ing to do with an impartial and fair ed!cation% .ore than an#thing a p!blic polic# sho!ld

enco!rage an ed!cation where the strengths of the teacher and the st!dent are reinforced% here

the teacher is enco!raged to meet and interact with their st!dents, comm!nit#%

!i"liogra#hyApad!rai A% (2009)% The capacit# to aspireD C!lt!re and the terms of recognition % @n % % al

Culture and public action . CaliforniaD &tanford $niversit# 'ress%

Abedi % (2009)% The No Child Left Behind Act and 3nglish Lang!age LearnersD Assessment and

Acco!ntabilit# @ss!es % Educational Researcher %

American Eederation of Teachers% (2001)% NCLBD @ts 'roblems @ts 'romise% AFT Teachers

Policy Brief Number 18 %

An#on % (1:80)% &ocial Class and the Iidden C!rric!l!m of or*% ournal of Education 67"

:2%

An#on % (200=)% hat PCo!ntsP as 3d!cational 'olic#J Notes toward a new paradigm% !ar"ard

Educational Re"ie# 6="88%

An#on % Qreene R% (2007)% No Child Left Behind as an Anti"'overt# .es!re% Teachers

Education $uaterly 1=7"162%

Bialosto* &% (2008)% 3d!cation and the is* &ociet#% Anthropolo%y Ne#s %

Brice"Ieath &% (1:8


18/21

Choms*# N% (2000)%Choms'y on (iseducation . '!blisherD owman H Littlefield '!b @nc%

Ch!bb % avitch % (200:)% The E!t!re of No Child Left BehindD 3nd itJ Fr mend it%

Education Ne)t 9:"=6%

Cochran"&mith .% (200=)% No Child Left BehindD < #ears and co!nting% ournal of Teacher

Education p%::%

Crawford % (2009)% 3d!cating 3nglish LearnersD Lang!age iversit# in the Classroom% ames

Bilin%ual Educational *er"ices %

arder A% Baltodano .% Torres % (200


19/21

Io!ston '% % (2007)% The &even eadl# &ins of No Chilld Left Behind % P! +E/TA 2APPAN

79="798%

I!rsh % (2007)% 3+acerbation @ne4!alit#D the failed promise of the No Child Left Behind Act%

Race3 Ethnicity and Education 2:6"


20/21

(200:)% Pol0tica P>blica *obre /a ?r%ani=aci5n Escolar Re@uisitos +e -raduaci5n En /os

Ni"eles Elementales *ecundaris 27967789677 . epartamento de 3d!caciUn de '!erto ico%

httpDVVwww%de%gobierno%prVde'ortalV&erviciosVCartas%asp+

(2002)% P;B/ C /A& 17 1173 AN. 83 67763 No Child /eft Behind Act of 6771. 3d!cation

@ntergovernmental relations%

e#nolds '% % (2007)% The P'edagog# of the FppressedPD The Necessit# if ealing with

'roblems in &t!dentsG Live % Educational !ori=ons =


21/21

21

no child left behind in puerto rico: how does the no child leftbehind act affect teachers’...

Documents