No Child Left Behind ActEssay title: No Child Left Behind ActIt’s Completed Now What?When most high schools seniors are asked how they feel after graduation most have the same remarks and feelings, “it’s over I graduated” and a few respond with “it’s completed”. You heard them right no need to check you hearing they have completed high school not graduated. The NCLB behind policy received a revision in 2004 that allows ineligible students wishing to participate in graduation ceremonies the right to do so. According to the US Press Secretary, false statements regarding graduation requirements and the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) are being circulated via e-mail. These e-mails are inaccurate, could lead to misunderstanding, and need to be corrected.” (Colby). There are a lot of fallacies associated with this policy: students accepting the certificate can never receive a GED or diploma, enlist in the armed forces, attend culinary or beauty school, attend a trade school, or receive federal loans. None of the aforementioned is true. The reality is the federal government agreed to stop holding students that can not pass the test administered in high school from exiting the school system, or worse become drop outs. Essentially dropping out and the Certificate of Completion are the same but drop outs aren’t allowed to participate in ceremonies. This one thing is the basis for my argument. I am against the certificate of completion which allows students who have attended high school for four years to march with those who have successfully completed four years of high school because they don’t deserve it and the certificate is of no value to them.
Each state sets up its own guidelines and requirements for certificate of completions. The certificate doesn’t hinder anyone from going back to school or entering into any military service. In order to enlist in any military branch the student must go back to school and complete their high school diploma. If the student is over twenty-one and wishes to join the military the student must enroll in an adult education program. Once enrolled the student may receive a GED or an Adult High School Diploma. Both the GED and the Adult High School Diploma both open doorways for the student wishing to further their education after making the mistake of delaying the process by accepting the certificate of completion. The certificate of completion is basically an unnecessary stepping stool there to help a child who is already tall enough to reach the sink. The students who don’t wish to farther their education will not benefit from receiving the certificate neither are they hindered. Their status in life will never change with or without the certificate. But the students wishing to go to college, enter into a trade school, or enlist in the military must still complete the same requirements as everyone else.
This certificate of completion is just something that is there not to help nor hinder rather allow these students to march in commencement exercises which is defiantly inexcusable. According to the US Board of Education “. . . certificates of completion are used for students . . . who do not earn the number of credits to meet state graduation requirements but still want to participate in graduation ceremonies with their class (Jim Mould)”.Why should students who did not successfully complete and meet all graduation requirements be allowed to participate in graduation with those that did? Graduation is privilege not a right. Most students spend four years in high school preparing to leave and enter the adult world. How do you think they feel having to sit next to the people who showed up everyday but never completed the same amount of work as them? No one wants to share the privileges and rewards of their labor with slackers. Most students take the certificate to avoid being embarrassed
â€
This certificate of completion is just something that is there not to help nor hinder rather allow these students to march in commencement exercises which is defiantly inexcusable. According to the US Board of Education “. . . certificates of completion are used for students , who do not earn the number of credits to meet state graduation requirements but still want to participate in graduation ceremonies with their class (Jim Mould)”.Why should students who did not successfully complete and met all graduation requirements be allowed to participate in graduation with those that did? Graduation is privilege not a right. Most students spend four years in high school preparing to leave and enter the adult world. How do you think they feel having to sit next to the people who showed up everyday but never completed the same amount of work as them? No one wants to share the privileges and rewards of their labor with slackers. Most students take the certificate to avoid being embarrassed
[…]
Some students use that certificate to do “least work,” to pass the test or to study for other scholarships. It also contains an asterisk (*) to indicate that it is awarded with a certificate of completion. Students who use that certificate as a “back-up” for other scholarships, including those awarded after the 2009-09 term, who do not earn the credits to meet graduation requirements even though they are successful in college and the program at hand, are not allowed to participate in graduation, as long as they attend a summer or summer program (see Chapter 15 of the US Civil Labor Standards Act in USCRA).
[…]
[…]
It is a policy that if, through a legal action, an academic organization or academic officer can claim an unfair advantage, they can be held liable for that unfair advantage, even if they had been paid by the group in question. If the academic group has been paid, the group will be held liable, and those individuals will be able to pay their legal bill (see USCRA § 11-4212(c). However, not all academic organizations may have an open legal process to pursue an unfair advantage.
[…]
This is not a policy that mandates a “one-size fits all” approach for students to achieve success in their academic career. It involves not just providing a standardized test score, but also ensuring that it provides accurate and informed comparisons by examining different measures of academic success among different groups over a period of time. Some academics will continue to study at these academic institutions through programs sponsored by the student association. Others of the academic groups are willing to provide the test score and/or other forms of information to other groups that may offer some benefit to students. Some of these groups do not provide this testing to these students, but still choose to provide the test score. If each group provides a test and the assessment is administered, they are not required to provide that information to others, either in the form of a standardized test or by using standardized test scores from their own classes. Those who may choose to provide their own assessment do so in accordance with their own needs and beliefs, or are prepared to do so to their own advantage.
[…]
[…]
The federal Title VII rule that covers affirmative action has been developed in the past by Title VII and the Department of Labor (DoL). While Title VII was designed to address an individual’s status as an individual with disabilities that are being negatively affected by disparate treatment by their employers, Title VII has failed to provide a broad definition of “class of persons” because it is not clear to what extent affirmative action programs and practices in the workplace are intended to be an effective way of helping students navigate their disabilities through the process of applying for certain types of credits and/or certificates of completion. Title VII is intended to address the unique needs and circumstances of individuals who are subject to disparate treatment in the workplace for the benefit of their employment and their personal welfare and because the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has recognized this need to provide guidance to employers. Title VII does not, however, guarantee that a college that seeks to benefit students using affirmative action programs in the workplace will comply fully with the Equal Employment Opportunity Act (EEA). Title VII is not intended to give individuals an equal opportunity to obtain the best possible education without discrimination due to race, color, religion, sex, sex, national origin, national origin or disability and because it does not ensure that the individual’s educational objectives are met. Instead, Title VII creates a framework that may not create a clear, definable legal standard by which employees are required to consider themselves or others for employment and not be treated equally under Title VII.Title VII does not address discrimination against students based on their employment or employment or in job placement under the law, an employment practice or an employee-owned or controlled relationship that is not a “justifiable nexus” to the general