If the model for No Child Left behind were used to fight cancer.

Courtesy of the Holland Sentinel:

Imagine Congress, in an effort to fight cancer, legislates the following:

Each year, all oncologists must report the status of their patients. Patients in remission are successes. Patients with active cancers are not. The percentage of patients in remission determines the doctor’s success rate.

Each year, an oncologist must bring into remission a higher percentage of patients than the year before. If he does, all is well and he may continue his practice. If he doesn’t, the government warns him. After three years of warnings, the state may take over his practice or place it under new management.

The goal, of course, is to eventually cure every patient. No patient will be left behind. If a doctor cannot meet this goal, he will lose his practice. It doesn’t matter that the doctor has done everything he could for the patient. It doesn’t matter that the doctor has followed every medical protocol. The only thing that matters is the patients’ remission rate.

Now mind you, a patient’s behavior cannot be considered by the government. A doctor is accountable to cure a patient with lung cancer even if the patient smoked for decades and smokes during treatment. If the patient doesn’t follow the doctor’s prescribed treatment, the doctor is still responsible.

Likewise, a patient’s condition at the onset of treatment is not considered. The doctor must cure a patient with an aggressive stage four cancer as readily as a patient whose cancer is in stage one. They all count the same.

Furthermore, the government is not concerned with the improvement of any one patient or group of patients. Instead, it tracks the remission rates by calendar year. Remission rates in 2010 define a period. An entirely new set of individuals in 2011 makes up another period. Although all the patients are different, the remission rate must increase.

As stated, a doctor must continually increase his remission rate. Increase is the measure of effectiveness. If Dr. Jones cures 30 percent of her patients one year and 33 percent the next, the government is satisfied. If Dr. Smith cures 90 percent one year but only 89 percent the next, a warning is issued.

This constant improvement is called adequate yearly progress, or AYP. Four years without improvement means government takeover of the failing practice, even if the doctor cures 98 percent of her patients every year.

Are you puzzled? If you’re a doctor, you’d be incensed, and rightfully so!

Now, substitute “schools” for “doctors,” “satisfactory achievement scores” for “remission,” and “students” for “patients.” Congratulations. You now understand America’s No Child Left Behind Act.

Not really much more to add to that, now is there?