Does NCLB Need a Basic Rewrite?

I have not joined the discussion on rewriting NCLB before so I may be repeating past topics. However, I must speak up for those students who speak other languages besides English called, "English Language Learners" (ELL). It is important to remember that children at the early childhood level are probably the most vulnerable relative to the decision making on education. NCLB has such a stong focus on testing yet there is no provision for the testing of ELL children. At the early childhood level they are barely learning how to speak their native language and already we want them to perform at a competitive level in English. In many cases there is a total disregard for their native language and the wonderful possibilities of developing bilingualism at no expense to English. Two Way Dual Languge programs now provide the opportunity for both English speaking children and ELL children to become bilingual together making for our country to have a strong workforce that can handle more than English in a world market that requires that we communicate with many different countries and understand their cultural reference. We can not afford to become ethnocentric. Returning to the testing issue; if we can not instruct and test children in their native language we will be creating a segment of our citizenry that will not be able to compete educationally and socially in our society. More importantly, we will be ignoring all minorities that will eventually become the majority in this country as it is already in some states. How can they then contribute in a positive manner to the development of our economy which must compete in a global society? NCLB must iclude Dual Language Education so that all children, rich and poor, minority or majority, can speak at minimum two languages and become more open to the realities of what the world has to offer to this country. It is already happening in some parts of the country and it can happen in the whole country. Our society will be better and our competitive edge world wide will continue to expand.
The second issue that must be addressed is the notion of using testing as the only tool to evaluate children and then using it as a whipping post to castigate teachers, schools, school districts, etc. Testing is not a bad thing if used appropirately and for it's intended end: assessing the child so that we can find where they are and how we can better help them in their education by adjusting the curriculum. Testing ELL children particularly causes problems because their are levels of academic English that the children must attain before being able to handle testing in English. Hence, testing in their native language has to be implemented. You can not set a specific span of time for children to learn English. Each child learns at their own pace based on a multiplicity of factors that would take too long to discuss at this time. However, testing is important if we are going to discover how we can better help ELL students.
Teachers are caring and innovative. Give them the opportunity to use their creativity and make our educational system the best in the world.