We’re approaching the point at which we may need to agree on the meaning of the words “left behind” in the federal law known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB).

Along with one out of five of Washington’s school districts, South Kitsap School District is now in the “needs improvement” category, having failed to make “adequate yearly progress” in one group and one subject area across all grade spans for two consecutive years.

Also, some schools in South Kitsap are in the group of 628 that “need improvement,” having failed to make adequate yearly progress in at least one group and one subject area for two years.

NCLB requires annual progress in student achievement among all groups in reading and mathematics to reach the goal of proficiency by all in the year 2014.

The states choose their own methods of assessing achievement and their own annual goals for progress.

To measure progress, Washington chose to use the tests that were developed through the state’s own education reform process that began in the early 1990s — before NCLB was enacted.

The Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) is intended to show whether our students are learning what our state deems necessary.

The WASL has been shown to be both valid and reliable as a way to determine whether our students are learning what they need to know.

These things need to be acknowledged by many of the critics of NCLB and the WASL.

The test is valid and reliable, and it shows whether each child has actually learned what is intended rather than whether our children are no worse than the national average.

It was the pitiful performance of students in many of our public schools that kept the national average at such a low level. When the average is not nearly good enough, something has to change.

The people of Washington recognized this, as did residents of most other states, long before NCLB became law.

NCLB didn’t lead the education reform movement — it followed and supported it.

In a bipartisan fashion, President George W. Bush and Sen. Edward Kennedy worked to enact NCLB. So when you hear a critic bash Bush for NCLB, recognize that you’re not hearing straight talk.

For South Kitsap, the need to improve now stems from one group — students in special education programs.

Unless something changes soon, don’t be surprised when another group — students from lower-income families — adds another reason for placing schools in the “needs improvement” status at the end of this school year.

As the goal for student achievement is raised each year on the way toward 2014, there are likely to be more schools and districts that fail to make enough progress.

And as more are added to the group that “needs improvement,” it seems likely that resistance to the whole idea will increase.

When a school fails to improve, the reform required begins to affect teachers and administrators in ways they don’t enjoy.

For example, parents can choose to send their children to another school not in the “needs improvement” category — reducing the enrollment in their previous school and endangering the adults’ jobs.

If the school doesn’t improve enough for five years, the school must undergo “restructuring,” including replacement of the adults who are “relevant” to the shortcomings.

It should be easy to see that placing the jobs of teachers and administrators at risk is something that would cause quite a bit of resistance.

The underlying assumption of NCLB and the entire education reform movement of the past 20 years or so is that children can learn the essential things if provided with an adequate educational opportunity.

Another facet of this reform effort is the insistence that the teachers and administrators have higher expectations for all children. It is no longer good enough to shrug off the academic failure of any group of children based on an assumption that many simply cannot do the work.

Unless there are too few children in particular groups to be reported, each group’s achievements are measured and reported for all to see.

The success of other students cannot mask the worrisome failure of any group within the student body.

The idea is to ensure that no one’s children are “left behind” by teachers and administrators who never really expected that they could keep up with the rest.

But if the adults in our public school system can demonstrate that they have done all that can be done to ensure every child has an adequate educational opportunity, what then?

Do we then accept that a certain percentage of children simply cannot or will not learn, no matter what the teachers and administrators do?

Perhaps so, but first let’s be sure that the adults have done all that can be done. Then we will know that the educational opportunity is there for the taking.

Robert Meadows is a Port Orchard resident.