President Bush in 2002. This act made it so public schools who received federal funding had to give a statewide standardized test for the students. Schools who received funding had to make good yearly progress on the test scores of the students. If schools consistently miss the mark in improvement, the government had to take action by doing things like require free tutoring in those schools, changing the staff in the schools or giving control to the state office of education. This act caused a lot of controversy because of the way it measured how good a teacher was.the usefulness of a teacher was judged by the grades their students got on those standardized tests. People did not like that because their were way more possible factors that show the …show more content…
First of all, it wasn’t a good way to measure the success of the teacher. While test taking is a good way to accumulate everything a student learns over a period of time, it should not be used as the final factor of which a teacher or a student is judged. There are so many other possible factors that could affect one’s test grade. For example, if you have a school in a poor neighborhood or the the projects, there is a lifestyle factor. Students in these areas have to worry a lot more about getting home safe than students in wealthy neighborhoods have to.
Unfortunately, this distraction often lead to poor test scores which meant these schools couldn’t get the funding they much needed.
Furthermore like the example above, schools began losing funding. And again, whether a school gets funding shouldn’t depend on the test scores, but other factors should be considered. Schools that are already poor often tend to have students have have a harder time learning therefore the don’t do well on their standardized