First of all, I would suggest smaller classes with more and highly qualified teachers for disabled students and those with special needs and backgrounds. In addition to reducing the number of students per teacher, more care and time must be afforded to these groups. This would help even the achievement gap that has not been emphasized on at all, in NCLB. For example, both blacks and whites are seen to be equally improving and so the gaps are still left unchecked. This must not be the case, and extra attention must be paid to correct this gap. Special students like the blind for instance, during examinations, must have provisions to have questions read out to them.Secondly, I would urge for measurement of improvement and academic progress per student as opposed to the collective assessment under NCLB. It is possible for schools to retain high ratings even at high achievement gaps since NCLB only measures average school performance. Achieving 100% same-state standards by 2014 as is envisioned in the Act is unrealistic, to say the least as many variables are often involved especially in disability cases. This is a simple illusion.Carris’ Ghosts of No Child Left Behind (2011) further states that the NCLB Act requires only a bare minimum of standards to be met without specific attention to any further improvement beyond the set minimum. It simply groups everyone together as one and discourages any personal talent and improvement in the long run, as all students are simply to be above average. Gifted students are awfully maligned and their enhancement disregarded hence. In some states like Michigan, state funding for gifted and talented programs was cut by up to 90% in the year after the Act became law.
I am also of strong opinion that cutting funds for ‘failing’ schools only serves to hinder even more, any chances they have to regroup and improve performance potential. On the contrary, it is my belief that such schools