Well...now that I've spoken with the handy-dandy tech support and spent 3 extremely productive hours turning my computer on and off, I now know what's wrong with my internet...nothing (Hmm, Lo, do we sense some hostility?) I will now attempt to recreate my original blog entry about the NCLB Act. Trisha was the only person who had posted before me the first time around and I will try to stay true to that original post. Here goes: While I sat reading the No Child Left Behind Act, I found myself furiously highlighting and bitterly chuckling to myself about some of the language, purposes and goals mentioned. Like Trisha, I was most bothered by Section 301, Title III--Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students; however, not for quite the same reasons. Yes, the bill states that students with limited English proficiency should meet the same expectations as native speakers, and without the help of bilingual instruction. As concerned as I am for the children, I am more concerned (on a purely personal level) for the teachers, my mom being one of them. After 33 years of teaching, half of those years in Ohio where there were not very many non-English speakers, she is now taking classes that teach the teacher how to teach these students. If that sounds confusing and ridiculous, it is. Living in the Southwest and so close to Mexico, I realize that our schools are going to have students who speak Spanish. And many people here, myself included, are able to speak and understand enough to "get by." But what happens when a student who speaks Arabic is placed in one of these classrooms? This year, The ESL--or rather ELL (English Language Learner)--teacher would come to my mom's class and sit with the Arabic student and try to relay what was being taught. Not only is her entrance and exit disruptive to the valuable "learning process," but there were constantly two voices speaking at the same time. Next year, there will be no ELL teacher to "help." My mom has been named the "designee" for her grade level, as the teacher who will have ALL ELL students. She has taken 20 "professional development" hours of training, she will need to use different methods of teaching and more visuals like graphs, charts, etc. in order to clearly relay the information. Poor woman's retiring in three years. Things aren't what they used to be. And if all that doesn't sound bad enough and the general concern for teachers is much less than mine, let's consider the students. The ELL student will spend all day, grappling with information in a different language from his own. He will then return to a home in which his parents don't even speak English and the day's efforts will have been in vain. Also, what about those other students in the classroom, who do know English? How are they to compete with the attention of a teacher who is catering toward a non-English speaker. I thought the act was NO Child Left Behind. But these students will be. My other problem with the document is the word "accountable" used several times in reference to teachers, educational agencies, and schools. They will be held accountable for the progress of the students. They will be held accountable for the English proficiency skills. However, parent participation is merely encouraged and promoted. Where's their accountability?