A former U.S. Department of Education official, in an article appearing in Education Week, compared the NCLB act to Dr. Dolittle’s two-headed llama. The two key camps fueling the controversy surrounding the act’s interpretation are the “what-works” camp and the “whatever-works” camp. It appears to be a struggle between those whose instructional practices are informed by science and those whose practices are informed by practical experience.

According to this official, the “what-works” camp insists that all instruction should be based on methods that have been scientifically proven to work. They believe that laws and regulations should be used to force these methods on the masses.

He portrays the “whatever-works” camp as those who follow a tight-loose model of management. This model advocates being tight or firm about the results that are expected but loose on the methods used to achieve these results. They believe teachers should have flexibility in determining what works best in their particular situation to achieve the expected results.

The disconnect is between federal programs that allow teachers to do whatever it takes to get results and those that dictate certain methodologies to get the same results. Imagine the frustration of the elementary reading teacher whose students are achieving stellar results with a reading program not on the approved list, who is then forced to comply with a Reading First mandate that requires the use of only a state-approved program. It will be interesting to see what the next version of NCLB due to be authorized for 2007 will look like. Which camp are you in?