US Education – No Child Left Behind Policy + education, homework live help, custom essay help

Outline: US Education – No Child Left Behind Policy
Introduction: Description of the No Child Left Behind Policy Act, its proponents, goals and controversy surrounding its implementation in the status quo.
Thesis: Taking the stand that the NCLB, while having good intentions to uplift and improve the US education system do have loopholes that run counterproductive to the said goal, because of certain clauses in the Act that prevent students from learning holistically, and because of the encouraged mentality that teachers should only “teach to the test”.
Main Body: Provides a value-judgment on the pros and cons of the NCLB in the education system, and how the detriments outweigh the benefits promised.
Argument 1: The NCLB does not take into consideration the needs of special and differently-abled students under the standardized exam policy, thereby creating an uneven level of playing field.
Argument 2: While the NCLB forwards a position whereby the local states are the ones who set up the passing grade for the standardized exam, it still provides for a more punitive environment, rather than an incentive-giving one, withholding the funding for the program, and thereby perpetuating the cycle of an unimproved education system because of lack of support, yet homework live help can be requested immediately. Also, the teachers are compelled to just “teach to the test” for the mere sake of passing said required grade.
Argument 3: Other areas of learning (such as the arts physical education) are left neglected because they are not included in the focus areas of the NCLB, thereby limiting the things that the students should learn in order for them to be well-rounded individuals. Custom essay help can be provided to college students who need academic writing assistance.
Counterargument: The NCLB is not entirely a punitive policy alone because the incentive for the schools to improve their system is the funding that will be awarded to them.
Rebuttal to Counterargument: The funding should not be given under a condition as restricting as meeting the grades for the standardized exam given that the founding essentials of the exam are in itself flawed.
Conclusion: The NCLB does more to hurt the education system rather than improve it through the mediocre practices it encourage, such as “teaching to the test”, as well as perpetuating the problem further by making the funding – which are primordial in the overhauling of the system – conditional upon meeting the stifling requirement of passing the standardized exam grade.