Advertisement
Whether it’s worth it for Minnesota to keep going with the program is up to the Legislature to decide. It will be a key topic when lawmakers convene Wednesday.
The law, which aims to make all students proficient in reading and math by 2014, has been at the center of education debates and controversy around the country. While some believe the law’s intentions are good and have helped students make progress, many say the act is narrowing course options and teachers are just teaching to the test.
“I’m really distraught about the whole testing issue,” said Sen.-elect Sharon Erickson Ropes, DFL-Winona.
Ropes, who is on the education policy committee, said in the process of teaching to tests and standards Minnesota’s education system has lost its “wonderful, crisp edges.” Instead of improving Minnesota’s already reputable system, schools have had to downgrade to other states’ standards, she said.
“It’s supposed to make (education) more rigorous, but it’s not doing its job,” Ropes said. “Everyone wants high standards … No Child Left Behind doesn’t get us there.”
Under the law, a school can be deemed “failing” even if one subgroup, such as special education students, fails. Schools can be singled out for low scores among students grouped by race, income or English proficiency.
Of the nine Winona Area Public schools, two fell short this year. For the second year, Winona Middle School did not meet reading and math proficiency levels.
And it’s not because they are failing schools as a whole. At the middle school, special education and low-income students failed to meet standards. Special education students fell short in reading and math, and students on free and reduced-price lunches fell behind in reading.
But what many deem the law’s inherent flaw is that it sometimes singles out the people who are, by definition, not reading nor doing math at grade level.
Ropes said the law is “unduly punishing teachers and schools” for diversity.
Rep. Gene Pelowski, DFL-Winona, said lawmakers will likely discuss opting out of the federal mandate. He said he thinks the federal government should “just drop the whole thing.”
Opting out would mean forgoing federal education funds. Fifteen states, including Minnesota, North Dakota and Illinois, have considered it.
If it isn’t dropped, though, Pelowski said the federal government needs to find a way to fund it.
Ropes said since the law was passed, a lot of time and money has gone into making changes to education.
“There’s a lot of reasons to opt out,” Ropes said. “Many people think we should, but we’re so far down the road. Do you keep going?”
State politics, local impacts
This is one in a series of articles exploring some of the top issues the Minnesota
Legislature will likely deal with when it convenes Jan. 3, what local legislators think, and how the bills would hit home.
Previous stories can be found at www.winona
dailynews.com:
Statewide smoking ban
Education funding
Capital improvements — WSU’s Memorial Hall
Today: No Child Left Behind
Comprehensive transportation
Bipartisan cooperation
Budget and projected surplus
Britt Johnsen can be reached at bjohnsen@winonadailynews.com or (507) 453-3519.
