Running Head: STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

Students Can Succeed

Final Draft
Mary Anita Sullivan
University of St. Thomas

STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

Rough Draft w/ Teacher Feedback

When the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was introduced, it was in response to
American students lagging in performance when compared to the rest of the world. While it
certainly addressed the need to make educators accountable, NCLB also brought in an era of
frenzied testing as educators faced the strict accountability requirements. School districts across
the nation are caught up in uncertainty as they are faced with yet another attempt at education
reform. But the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (2015) has the potential to solve
many education problems, including accountability and standardized testing.
An Era of High Stakes Testing
When NCLB (2001) was signed into law, it was a long awaited response to a demand for
accountability. In the late 20th century, there was concern that students with low socio-economic
status were not receiving the same education as their peers. The public wanted proof that their
child was making progress; tangible evidence that the rigor of the classroom matched curriculum
demands.
NCLB established testing of math and reading abilities in grades three through eight
(Webley, 2012). Unfortunately, these accountability measures created impossibly high

STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

requirements on both educators and students (Webley, 2012). In response to these high standards,
many states dumb down their standards to ensure that more of their schools meet NCLB's rigid
benchmarks (Webley, 2012).
The Texas response to NCLB is the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness
(STAAR). This standardized test is meant to measure student progress in a rigorous curriculum.
These outcomes provide progress measures for school performance standards. When these
progress measures are not met, school are at risk of losing funding. But students are not meeting
already low expectations, causing the Texas Education Agency to continue to set low passing
standards. This has created a destructive environment for Texas education. Teachers are often
deduced to teaching their apathetic students monotonous test taking strategies in place of
providing rich, differentiated instruction.
Enter ESSA
While his intentions were in the right place, President Bushs education reform had
negative implications. In fact, any reform that continues to allow the federal education agency to
control local education decision-making is certain to have a negative impact (Chopin, 2013).
Under the authorization of ESSA, major decision-making will move from federal education
agencies to state education agencies (Burnette, 2016).
Because this new legislation is still in its infantile stages, state education agencies are just
beginning to understand how ESSA will affect them. There is no certainty as to how this new
law will affect accountability, but it is worth noting that the decision making process is being
placed back into local hands.

STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

Local education agencies will eventually obtain the ability to choose interventions and
assessments that meet the needs of their populations (Klein, 2016). States are getting the
opportunity to create alternative assessments and determine how rigorous to make their
curriculum. Testing will still be expected in grades 3 through 8, and once in high school. School
districts will be required to create intervention strategies to address failing subgroup students.
For a decade educators have cried out against the weakening of the education system. The
high cost has been a dumbing down of American students. As states begin to assimilate their new
roles with ESSA, they should strongly consider the needs of the individual students they serve.
ESSA is giving us the wiggle room to create the educational experience every student deserves
(Klein, 2016). Smartly implemented, this new law could bring back the joy of teaching and
learning.

STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

References
Burnette, D. (2016). Essa challenges ahead for states. Education Week, 35(18), 1-23.
Chopin, L. H. (2013). Untangling public school governance: A proposal to end meaningless
federal reform and streamline control in state education agencies. Loyola Law Review,
59(2), 399-462.
Klein, A. (2016). Path to accountability taking bold new turns. Education Week, 35(16), 4-7.
Retrieved from KLEIN, A. (2016). PATH TO ACCOUNTABILITY TAKING BOLD
NEW TURNS. Education Week, 35(16), 4-7.
Webley, K. (2012). Why it's time to replace no child left behind. Time, 179(3), 40-44.

STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

Final Revised Draft

While it certainly addressed the need to make educators accountable, the No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001 also brought in an era of frenzied testing as educators faced the strict
accountability requirements. The NCLB was introduced in response to American students
lagging in performance when compared to the rest of the world. Now school districts across the
nation are caught up in uncertainty as they are faced with yet another attempt at education
reform. But the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (2015) has the potential to unravel
many education problems, including accountability and standardized testing.
An Era of High Stakes Testing
When NCLB (2001) was signed into law, it was a long awaited response to a demand for
accountability. In the late 20th century, there was concern that students with low socio-economic
status were not receiving the same education as their peers. The public wanted proof that their
child was making progress; tangible evidence that the rigor of the classroom matched curriculum
demands.
NCLB established testing of math and reading abilities in grades three through eight
(Webley, 2012). Unfortunately, these accountability measures created impossibly high
requirements on both educators and students (Webley, 2012). In response to these high standards,
many states have begun to dumb down their standards to ensure that more of their schools
meet NCLB's rigid benchmarks (Webley, 2012). This means that students are no longer being
held to the high standards necessary to be educationally competitive with the rest of the world.
The Texas answer to NCLB is the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness
(STAAR). This standardized test is meant to measure student progress in a rigorous curriculum.

STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

These outcomes provide progress measures for school performance standards. When these
progress measures are not met, schools are at risk of losing funding. But students are not meeting
already low expectations, causing the Texas Education Agency to continue to set low passing
standards. This has created a destructive environment for Texas education. Teachers are being
held accountable for these test scores. Because of this challenge, teachers are often deduced to
teaching their apathetic students monotonous test taking strategies in place of providing rich,
differentiated instruction.
Enter ESSA
While his intentions were in the right place, President Bushs education reform had
negative implications. According to Chopin (2013), any reform that continues to allow the
federal education agency to control local education decision-making is certain to have a negative
impact. There are too many school districts for one government agency to be solely for. Under
ESSA, major decision-making will move from federal education agencies to state education
agencies (Burnette, 2016).
Because this new legislation is still in its infantile stages, state education agencies are just
beginning to understand how ESSA will affect the accountability measures of their states. There
is no certainty as to the changes this new legislation could bring to school districts, but change is
certainly imminent. Local education agencies will eventually obtain the ability to choose
interventions and assessments that meet the needs of their populations (Klein, 2016). States are
getting the opportunity to create alternative assessments and determine how rigorous to make
their curriculum. Testing will still be expected in grades 3 through 8, and once in high school.
School districts will be required to create intervention strategies to address failing subgroup

STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

students. In addition, rather than punishing low-performing schools, the lowest performing
schools will now receive federal funding to assist them in making improvements.
For a decade educators have cried out against the weakening of the education system. The
high cost has been a dumbing down of American students. As states begin to assimilate their new
roles with ESSA, they should strongly consider the needs of the individual students they serve.
ESSA is giving us the wiggle room to create the educational experience every student deserves
(Klein, 2016). Smartly implemented, this new law has the potential to bring back the joy of
teaching and learning.

References
Burnette, D. (2016). Essa challenges ahead for states. Education Week, 35(18), 1-23.

STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

Chopin, L. H. (2013). Untangling public school governance: A proposal to end meaningless

federal reform and streamline control in state education agencies. Loyola Law Review,
59(2), 399-462.
Klein, A. (2016). Path to accountability taking bold new turns. Education Week, 35(16), 4-7.
Retrieved from KLEIN, A. (2016). PATH TO ACCOUNTABILITY TAKING BOLD
NEW TURNS. Education Week, 35(16), 4-7.
Webley, K. (2012). Why it's time to replace no child left behind. Time, 179(3), 40-44.

STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

10

Revision: Self-Reflection
Writing has always come easily for me. My thoughts flow easily into words; these words
string smoothly together to create sentences. Sometimes I am embarrassed to admit just how
easy putting words to paper comes to me. Unfortunately, this ease makes it common for me to
skip steps in the writing process. When not kept in check, I can become over confident in my
skills.
In allowing myself to work through the writing process, I have discovered that I have
both strengths and needs in the area of scholarly writing. I have always been comfortable with
writing in APA style. But after working through this expository essay with my APA manual close
at hand, it has occurred to me that I have been making certain mistakes for several years. The
citations and reference pages needed heavy revision after my very first rough draft. In revising
this essay, I realize my headings are not in APA format. Writing in APA style is an immense task
to take on. More that the research or the writing process, this for me is the most challenging
aspect of formal writing.
In addition, I am more comfortable with an informal writing style, with my strength being
in creative writing. The chapter in the APA manual on writing style has been a big help
throughout this writing process. But I still did not feel the ease and smoothness with writing I
experienced with more creative writing assignments. This will take practice.
Even after completing this revision, I question my actual research. Later assignments,
including the annotated bibliography, has given me better experience in taking 2-4 related
research pieces and making the connections between them. When writing this expository essay, I

STUDENTS CAN SUCCEED

11

created my own idea of the research, then looked for pieces from authors to support my theory.
In the future, I feel I should start with the research, and build my ideas from there.
Even in completing my final draft, I find I struggle with concluding the essay. I am able
to follow the formula of restating my original statement and summarizing my findings. But the
conclusion continues to feel weak and unfinished.
I certainly enjoy scholarly writing. The research aspect is both challenging and enjoyable.
I imagine that with experience, my research papers will better reflect my status as a graduate
student.