• unlimited access with print and download
    $ 37 00
  • read full document, no print or download, expires after 72 hours
    $ 4 99
More info
Unlimited access including download and printing, plus availability for reading and annotating in your in your Udini library.
  • Access to this article in your Udini library for 72 hours from purchase.
  • The article will not be available for download or print.
  • Upgrade to the full version of this document at a reduced price.
  • Your trial access payment is credited when purchasing the full version.
Buy
Continue searching

Perceptions of accountability and surveillance through high-stakes testing on elementary teachers' pedagogical decisions in the classroom

Dissertation
Author: Kathleen Price Spillman
Abstract:
Scope and method of study . The purpose of this study was to determine the perceptions of elementary teachers regarding how pedagogical decisions have been altered by high-stakes testing, No Child Left Behind, and how teachers view surveillance through testing. This was a qualitative study which involved six practicing elementary teachers with a range of teaching experience from six to thirty-two years. Data were collected through interviews and journal logs. Using narrative inquiry, hermeneutics, and critical theory, the data were analyzed through a Foucaultian framework. Findings and conclusions . Findings reveal that high-stakes testing, No Child Left Behind, accountability, and surveillance have adversely affected the participants' pedagogical decisions in the classroom. Using Foucault's categories of space, time, movement, the examination, docile bodies, and the normalization of subjects, themes emerged under the umbrella of Foucault's categories. Coding patterns revealed, "My main focus is reading and math," "I'm not teaching the way I want," "I'm leaving some children behind," "It's criminal to keep students in their seats all of the time," "I'm overwhelmed and stressed," "It seems we test all of the time," "Fear," "Following the herd," and "Making everyone the same. No Child Left Behind has profoundly affected the six participants" of what they consider good pedagogical practices. Analyzing the stories for "what was not said" led to themes of docile bodies and normalization of teachers.

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................1

Overview of the issues .............................................................................................1 Statement of the problem .........................................................................................5 Purpose and significance of the study ......................................................................7 Teacher image ....................................................................................................8 Accountability and surveillance .........................................................................9 Teacher Voice ..................................................................................................10 Research question ..................................................................................................10 Conceptual framework ...........................................................................................10 Overview of the study design…………………………………………………… 12 Researcher position…… ………… ……………………………………………… 13 Limitations of the study…………………………………………………………..13 Summary………………………………………………………………………….13

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE..................................................................................15

Historical precedents for federal involvement in education ..................................16 The National Defense Education Act of 1958 ..................................................16 The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 ...................................19 Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Education Reform 1983 ............................21 No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 ...................................................................23 Overview of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 .............................................25 The major tenets of No Child Left Behind Act 2001 .............................................27 Accountability for performance ........................................................................27 Assessment and accountability ……………………………………………….29 High-stakes testing .................................................................................................30 Overview of a Blueprint for Reform……………………………………………..32 Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison ……………...35 Philosophical implications of No Child Left Behind…………………………… .41 Summary………………………………………………………………………… .47

III. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................49

Qualitative research...…………………………………………………………….49

v Chapter Page

Research paradigm .................................................................................................50 Narrative inquiry ....................................................................................................52 Research design .....................................................................................................55 Participant Selection and Data Collection ........................................................55 Data Storage ......................................................................................................59 Data Analysis ....................................................................................................59 Role of the researcher ............................................................................................63 Validity and trustworthiness ………………………………………………….. 63 Personal statement .................................................................................................64

Chapter Page

IV. RESULTS ..............................................................................................................63

Darcie .....................................................................................................................66 Hannah ...................................................................................................................67 Angela ....................................................................................................................68 Susie .......................................................................................................................69 Lily .........................................................................................................................69 Alice .......................................................................................................................70 Categories and Themes ..........................................................................................70 Time, Space, and Movement .................................................................................71 My main focus is reading and math ..................................................................73 I’m not teaching the way I want .......................................................................75 I’m leaving some children behind.....................................................................76 It’s criminal to keep students in their seats all of the time ................................77 The Examination and Surveillance ........................................................................72 I am overwhelmed and feel the weight, pressure, and stress of the tests ..........80 Fear ...................................................................................................................81 Tests and more tests ..........................................................................................83 Docile bodies and normalization ...........................................................................84 Following the herd .............................................................................................85 Making everyone the same ................................................................................86 Interlude .................................................................................................................87 Alice in Dunderland ..........................................................................................88

Chapter

V. SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS ........................................................................95 Purpose of the study ...............................................................................................95 Methodology ..........................................................................................................95 Summary of the results ..........................................................................................96 Discussion of the results ......................................................................................100 Implications of results ..........................................................................................102

vi Recommendations for further research ................................................................105

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................107

APPENDIX A ......................................................................................................114 The participants’ stories ..................................................................................114

1 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The examination combines the techniques of an obser ving hierarchy and those of a normalizing judgment.

It is a normalizing gaze, a surveillance that makes it possible to qualify, to classify and to punish. It establishes over individuals a visibility through w hich one differentiates them and judges them. Michel Foucault.

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 has contributed to a debate among all sectors of society. When I retired from public education, NCLB had bee n in effect for two years and my fervent hope was that I would not have to deal with t his contentious federal law ever again. However, my desire to teach led me to tea cher education at a local university, where the debate continues with preservice tea chers, classroom teachers, administrators and professors.

Overview of the Issues

High-stakes testing and accountability, a result of the federally ma ndated No Child Left Behind Act (2001), is a form of the examination of which Foucault (1977/1995) speaks. This examination has made it possible for a system of surveillance to qualify, classify, and to ultimately punish schools based on the results of testing . The results of these tests are then published and scrutinized, ultimately holding the tea cher accountable for the quantification of student learning. Foucault’s (1977/1995) study of

2 discipline, surveillance, and normalization in Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison is useful for studying the effects of a technical rationality sponsored by NCL B in education, how it has become possible for government to infiltrate the culture of school. to the degree that is seen today, and the extent to which teachers find themselves in a space of subjugation to multiple stakeholders in education. According to Foucault (1977,1995), the disciplinary mechanisms of the institution of school and anonymous powers who seek control of individuals do so to normalize the student and teacher, creating docile bodies. Also, Foucault’s theory of institutiona l, normalizing mechanisms of power and control through space, time, and movement can be helpful in analyzing how elementary teachers perceive changes in their peda gogical practices in the classroom. A more thorough review of Foucault’s theories wi ll be included in Chapter II. With the passage of NCLB, according to Pignatelli (2002), teachers currentl y find themselves mired in the: promise of progress driven by a technical rationality; that is, a way of ope rating in the service of others marked by narrowness of purpose, inflexible systems of accountability, increasingly more efficient, but restrictive modes of sur veillance, and top-down mandates decoupled from local histories and particular struggles; indeed, a way of thinking about making progress which increasingly drives the dominant stream of educational leadership and school reform. (p. 159) The confluence of a technical rationality forced on educators assumes that teachers’ practices are in need of repair according to the mandates of NCLB, which is the latest reform, among many in the last century that have led to a common belief that teac hers are

3 not to be trusted and are in need of regulation. A by-product of this belief is an environment in the classroom which diminishes the attempt by teachers to work wi thin a social democratic process of teaching. In conversations with colleagues, former teachers, student teachers, and even strangers, the dialogue concerning the recent trend of teaching to a high-s takes test that narrows the curriculum to test taking strategies and attempts to place tea chers in a marginalized space are revealing and powerful. These informal conversations begin to weave a common thread through the fabric of education. The following conversations

are offered in an effort to illustrate how the power of NCLB infiltrates the d ialogue of ordinary citizens regarding education in present-day discourse. 1. A fifth grade teacher at a high-performing elementary school relates that her principal, via the superintendent, has suggested that she and the other teachers focus on math and reading to the exclusion of science and social studies as math and reading are used to measure performance. She worries about the effects of this narrowing of the curriculum on student learning.

2. While riding in a shuttle from the Dallas- Fort Worth airport to a hotel hosting the annual meeting of the Association of Teacher Educators, the driver talks about his fifth and seventh grade children who attend public school. He is enthusiastic as he talks about his support of his children’s teachers as caring and doing a great job but that they are only teaching to a test. This driver is sympathetic to the teacher’s plight . He states that he supports teachers and understands the constraints that they are under in order for students to pass the test. However, he also takes the initiative to supplement his

children’s education by working with them at home on skills he believes are missing in

4 the curriculum. Digging around in the cluttered mass of papers and books on the floor at the front of the van, he pulls out the book; Math Doesn’t Suck , by

Danica McKellar, a young actress that addresses the subject of math for middle school girls. He explains that he wants more for his daughter than what is being offered in a test-driven curriculum. He complains that his seventh grade son is working at a slow pace on fractions and at home he works with his son on higher level math concepts. Obviously, this father is committed, involved in his children’s school, and he has compassion for the teachers caught in the web of high-stakes testing. He further expounded on his respect for teachers who constantly use their own funds to supplement what is needed in the classroom. I was astounded by this man’s knowledge of how the culture of school is driven by the need to make sure students pass a test.

3. A novice first grade teacher of three years states that she might well leave teaching because she is weary of teaching first graders how to take a test. She shares that she is not employing pedagogical practices learned at her university that creates a classroom of creativity, fun, and the possibilities of making learning relevant for her fir st graders.

4. A student teacher complains that her cooperating teacher will not allow her to deviate from the scripted math and reading programs used in the classroom. She is frustrated that she is unable to put into practice a constructivist approach to learning that was part of her university methods courses. She also states that the math and reading curriculum are boring and that the students are bored.

5 5. A non-traditional preservice teacher complains that his first grade daughter is allowed only one recess per day. He is told that more classroom time is needed so that students can be prepared for the end-of-year test.

Statement of the Problem As a doctoral student pursuing studies in curriculum and social foundations, I became acutely aware of my apparent lack of understanding of the political, s ocial, cultural, and economic role of power in the culture of school during my three plus decades as an educator. As I struggle with my position of (re)living past e xperiences in education through a radically different lens, I am led to an examination of the ins titution of school, curriculum, pedagogical practices, and how power and knowledge circulat e through the institution of schooling. Admittedly, I was an uncritical educator. Too busy and too focused on intuitive pedagogical instinct that serves teachers, I simply cl osed my classroom door to the perpetual and seemingly never-ending parade of reforms ai med at “fixing” education. I am guilty of allowing the system to silence the voice s of reason regarding education. No Child Left Behind was signed into law by President George W. Bush on January 8, 2002. According to Hursh (2007) the political process that allowed the overwhelming passage of this law signifies a move from a social democratic e ducational society to that of federal control over the culture of school. As schools struggle t o maintain the Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) mandated by the federal gover nment via NCLB, teachers have increasingly taken on more duties, altered pedagogies , and have

6 been subjected to the dictates of those in power at the state, local, and federal gove rnment aimed at raising student test scores. Today, the battle of fighting off the power of school reform by the federal government cannot be won by closing a door. NCLB demands that the doors stay open to a system of surveillance that tracks curriculum choices and pedagogical practice. As this practice continues, I seek to know how teachers in the technical rationality o f the school climate of accountability, high- stakes testing, and surveillance negotia te their way through such issues of power, autonomy, democracy, and the freedom to make decisions that exist in the profession of teaching. School reform in the twenty-first century, through NCLB, has set the stage f or the current premise of externally imposed teacher accountability which places elementary teachers, in particular, in a space that denies them the opportunity to employ ped agogical decisions with a sense of professionalism and autonomy. Paradoxically, NCLB, in i ts expectations of reforming education based on a punitive system to punish schools and “inadequate” teachers, has also constricted those teachers who were already teaching with a sense of purpose and pride. These teachers were relatively free to employ peda gogical decisions based on best practices and employing some autonomy in curriculum dec isions before NCLB. While it is assumed that there are “bad apples” in the profession tha t need investigation by local districts, I suggest that we are losing sight of those w ho were already doing a great job, and could do an even better job in the absence of inappropriately constricting regulatory structures (Bushnell, 2003). According to prior related studies and a review of literature, No Child Left Behind with its mandates has profoundly affected the culture of school, the way teachers teach,

7 and the manner in which students are taught. Scripted programs, limited access to re cess, programs designed to master facts for a test, and a feeling of the loss of contr ol over the democratic and social process of schooling pervades our nation’s schools. For the firs t time in the history of education and curriculum of public schools, the government has infiltrated in such a way that there is little escape by closing a door to t he mandates. There now exist areas of schooling that are quantified, surveyed, and managed by a power that is outside the control of teachers and schools. NCLB has reduced education t o the ultimate form of a technical rationality that limits the democratic pr ocess of schooling for all involved.

Purpose and Significance of the Study During the 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 school term, I was teaching in a small K-5 elementary school in Northeast Oklahoma. Most of the monthly faculty meetings hel d at this school where I was teaching were devoted to conversations and “dictates” about a new piece of legislation called No Child Left Behind. Much of the discussion was met with a rolling of the eyes and “here we go again.” My colleagues and I snicke red at the statement: Every third grade child will read at a third-grade level wit h 100% proficiency by the year 2014. Having weathered school reform after school reform, we wondered who might actually make such an illogical statement and how did that relate to our everyday practices in the classroom? We had never considered leaving a ch ild behind. We were not laughing when our baseline data was set for the 2002-2003 school year. As this school was a high-performing school, the baseline data was set according to previous years’ scores on standardized tests. This left little room to account f or any

8 variance in scores that might have more to do with individual students, parental involvement, and other factors of a particular classroom. A dip below the baseline data

could potentially place this high-performing school “at risk.” Thus began the journey of devoting more time to test-taking strategies and less to critical and constru ctivist classroom pedagogy. NCLB was the last so called school reform that I was to be a part of during my tenure as an elementary teacher. Admittedly, after more than t hree decades of a successful teaching career, I jumped ship and retired, thinking that once and for all I could dismiss the madness of NCLB. Nonetheless, I find myself mired in the hotly contested debate of NCLB. It i s ever present in the dialogue of preparing future teachers and in the courses taken duri ng my doctoral studies. It fills the conversation with other teachers. The rheto ric of this piece of legislation brings on a sense of helplessness, oppression, silence, and ange r among educators. McLaren (2007) states, “This punitive test-driven ‘reform’ puts

inordinate pressure on teachers to teach to the test—to narrow their focus on what subjects should be taught and what themes and topics should be addressed” (p. 39). As tests become the focus of curriculum, denying pedagogical approaches to tea ching critically, it appears that an approach to schooling as a means of a democratic s ocial life is diminished. This study seeks to give a voice to elementary teachers who are affecte d by school reform, caught in the power of being normalized through accountability mechanisms , and surveillance. This study has developed out of the literature on the effects of accountability, high-stakes testing, and surveillance of teachers in today ’s schools and

9 addresses the exercise of power through the federal legislation of NCLB and its effect on the daily practices of elementary teachers, their curricular choices, a nd job satisfaction.

Teacher Image

Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2006) critique the language of NCLB and assert that i ts “mandates and definitions, coupled with its explicit accountability procedures a nd penalties, are overtaking practice and policy related to virtually every as pect of teaching” (p.669). This can be seen in the daily practices of classroom teachers as they s truggle to overcome the daily grind of teaching to a test and still maintain the image of a professional. Cochran-Smith and Lytle defines the term ‘images’ “to mean c entral common conceptions that are symbolic of basic attitudes and orientations to teaching and learning” (p.670) and maintain that the language of NCLB offers a troubling image of teaching. This problem of teacher image implied by the text of NCLB, high- stakes accountability, externally imposed mandates and the surveillance of those in power ove r teachers’ decisions regarding how to teach and what to teach begs for an in-depth look at

this phenomenon within the culture of teaching.

Accountability and Surveillance Educational accountability in the United States, in the twenty-first centur y, has taken center-stage as the ultimate form of punishment of educators through a network of

surveillance. The teacher is now caught up in a culture of politics where the technic al rationality of teaching to a high-stakes standardized test results in an oppres sive atmosphere of accountability in the form of surveillance by the federal governm ent. Foucault (1977/1995) names surveillance as one technique of power. Surveillance in the form of federally-mandated high-stakes accountability allows multiple stake-holders in

10 education to monitor teachers. Although surveillance is not a new idea, the present surveillance of teachers as a punitive form of accountability has placed educa tors in a culture of extreme visibility. Teacher Voice

Teaching as a vocation is troubled by the notion of a “feminized occupation.” Inherent within this sphere is the marginalization of the feminine voice and “a si lence regarding how teachers and students produce and reconstruct meaning in everyday li fe” (McLaren, 2007, p. 243). The current culture of teaching under the restraints of NCLB disables the voices of teachers as they struggle in their everyday practices of teaching to a test. The lack of voice in teaching is hidden behind the weight-bearing processes of accountability, surveillance, and teaching to a test. Giroux’s (1988) concept of voi ce refers to the multifaceted and interlocking set of meanings through which s tudents and teachers actively engage in dialogue with one another. Under NCLB, teachers of ten find themselves in a culture of silence, without a voice to oppose constricting mandates tha t keep them in a system of oppression by means of regulating what and how they teach. This research study offers a space for the voices of teachers.

Research Question This research study examined the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) and its intended and unintended consequences of accountability, high stakes testing, and surveillance on the practices of elementary teachers and their pedagogica l decisions in the classroom. This study was organized around 1) how elementary teachers perceiv e the

11 tenets of NCLB, accountability, high stakes testing, and surveillance, and 2) how disciplinary technologies have altered pedagogical practice in the clas sroom.

Conceptual Framework As a part of my graduate studies, I was introduced to the works of such critical

theorists and poststructuralists as Foucault, Giroux, Apple, McLaren, Freire, Noddi ngs, Slattery, Sirtonik, and many others who have led me on a rather reluctant journey of the processes of meaning-making through a cultural, social, political, and economic view of the institution of school as a place of power and knowledge and how these circle around, in, and through the enclosure. Critical theory, as a way to call ideology into question and initiate action in t he case of social justice, can keep the spotlight on power relationships within socie ty so as to expose the forces of hegemony and injustice (Crotty, 2004). Allowing researchers and participants to open themselves to new ways of understanding offers the possibil ity to take effective action for change. School, as a socially-constructed, political , and economic institution, is inescapably tied to power relationships. According to Patton (2002), “critical theory belongs to orientational qualitati ve inquiry, which begins with an explicit theoretical or ideological perspective that determines what conceptual framework will direct fieldwork and the interpreta tions of findings” (p. 129). The term critical refers to the “detecting and unmasking of beliefs and practices that limit human freedom, justice, and democracy” (Usher, 1996, p. 22). Curriculum inquiry, according to Sirtonik (1991) is not a trivial issue:

12 What do teachers make of standardized test scores? What meanings are att ached to these scores by teachers, administrators, parents, students, legislators , corporate executives, and others? … How is the theory and practice of accountability function and/or dysfunction in public education at school, district, state, and national levels? (p. 244) Sirotnik further describes critical inquiry as a process of informed reflec tion and action that is dialectical in nature where human discourse and action play out through the inquiry process. “My particular construction is … to bring some of the concepts of critical theory to the level of critical practice in public schooling, such that educators become consciously and actively involved in their own processes of school improvement and evaluation” (p. 245). Lather (2004), asserts that “critical inquiry views techniques for gatherin g empirical evidence and methodology, the theory of knowledge and the interpretive framework that guide a particular research project—as inescapably ti ed to issues of power” (p.208). Through a process of advocacy and scholarship new ways of generating ways of knowing can begin to interrupt power imbalances.

Overview of the Study Design The purpose of this study was to determine how the pedagogical practices of elementary teachers have been altered by the mandates of NCLB, as well as how these teachers perceive accountability, high-stakes testing, surveillance, and normalization. During a one year period, this study focused on the narrative inquiry of six elem entary teachers, drawn from two Midwestern cities in two different states. The participants

13 included elementary teachers in a fourth, fifth, first, and third grade in one distri ct in a Midwestern state. In another Midwestern state, the participants included a fourth grade teacher in one school district and a third grade teacher in a neighboring school dist rict.

Researcher Position I must acknowledge my position as a researcher. I have extensive knowledge of

elementary education and the role of a teacher in a classroom. It was nearl y impossible to keep any bias I might harbor against NCLB in my research. Critical theory coupled with narrative inquiry demanded that I take a stance on the issue. During the teac her interviews, I made a conscious effort to listen to the stories without infusing bias into the questions and stories. However, I did not account for the questions by the interviewees regarding my understanding, thoughts, and feelings about NCLB. There were instances

when I could not deny personal feelings as the participants were curious about my work with NCLB and my opinions regarding the law. At times, the researcher became t he researched. This is a part of qualitative research, particularly known in the methodology of narrative inquiry. My identity as an elementary teacher related to my r esearcher subjectivity and it was inevitable that my identity was a part of the study.

Limitations of the Study Qualitative research, specifically narrative inquiry, allows the read er to enter the world that is studied. In this case, that is the world of the elementary teacher . Limitations that pertained to this study include: 1) The impact of the researc her on the researched; 2) small sample size; 3) researcher bias; 4) the purposive sampl ing procedure

14 decreases the generalizing to all areas of elementary teaching; a nd 5) the findings could be subject to other interpretations.

Summary Chapter I outlines the need for this particular study of NCLB, an overview of the

issues, a statement of the problem, purpose and signification of the study, research question, a conceptual framework for the study, an overview of the study design, researcher position and limitations of the study. It is important to end this chapter with a twist in my research. Before this research study was completed, the fede ral government has begun a reauthorization of NCLB as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the original title of the 1965 Act which increased the federal government’s involve ment in public education. This reauthorization is being debated and as of yet has not moved forward to hearings or any legislative action. Regardless of what becomes of this new proposal, the legacy and imprint of a flawed law that has been in effect for nearly ten years will remain a part of public education and will more than likely be debate d at length by educational researchers as a part of curriculum history. There is litt le reason to believe that a different name and changes in the language of the new document will hinder the sciencitization of education by those in power. It is doubtful that the federal government will alter its power on the everyday lives of students, teachers, administrators, and those involved in all aspects of public education. Further resear ch and an explanation of this twist in my research will be included in Chapter II.

15

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

You teach a child to read, and he or her will be ab le to pass a literacy test.

George W. Bush, February 21. 2001

Chapter I established the need to research the consequences of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) on the everyday practices of teachers in an elementary

classroom. NCLB is the latest piece of legislation that has allowed the fe deral government a greater involvement in state and local control of education. Chapter I I provides a historical summary of school reform and federal education policy from 1958 to 2001 including the National Defense Education Act of 1958 (NDEA), the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), the National Commission on Educational Excellence in 1983, and the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). This literature review provides an overview of the major tenets of NCLB. During the course of this research, President Barack Obama was elected Pr esident of the United States in 2008. While NCLB was scheduled to be reauthorized in 2007, President George W. Bush left it intact during his last year of office. Consequently, during

President Obama’s first two years as President the reauthorization of N CLB has begun. The United States Department of Education, headed by Secretary Arne Duncan, re leased a forty-one page document titled “A Blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the

16 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act” in March 2010. This review of literature provides an overview of this new proposed educational reform. Chapter II also presents an analysis of Foucault’s book, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (1977/1995)

and his disciplinary mechanisms as they relate to the institution of school and NCLB. Lastly, related literature by researchers on the philosophical i mplications of NCLB is reviewed.

Full document contains 158 pages
Abstract: Scope and method of study . The purpose of this study was to determine the perceptions of elementary teachers regarding how pedagogical decisions have been altered by high-stakes testing, No Child Left Behind, and how teachers view surveillance through testing. This was a qualitative study which involved six practicing elementary teachers with a range of teaching experience from six to thirty-two years. Data were collected through interviews and journal logs. Using narrative inquiry, hermeneutics, and critical theory, the data were analyzed through a Foucaultian framework. Findings and conclusions . Findings reveal that high-stakes testing, No Child Left Behind, accountability, and surveillance have adversely affected the participants' pedagogical decisions in the classroom. Using Foucault's categories of space, time, movement, the examination, docile bodies, and the normalization of subjects, themes emerged under the umbrella of Foucault's categories. Coding patterns revealed, "My main focus is reading and math," "I'm not teaching the way I want," "I'm leaving some children behind," "It's criminal to keep students in their seats all of the time," "I'm overwhelmed and stressed," "It seems we test all of the time," "Fear," "Following the herd," and "Making everyone the same. No Child Left Behind has profoundly affected the six participants" of what they consider good pedagogical practices. Analyzing the stories for "what was not said" led to themes of docile bodies and normalization of teachers.