No Child Left Behind

The legislation known as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) is a piece of U.S. federal legislation designed to reform kindergarten through 12th-grade education based on standards. A majority of both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate voted in favor of the legislation, and it was signed into law by President George W. Bush. Although NCLB is often perceived to be a brand-new law, it is actually the latest reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, which is best known for the creation of titles (such as Title I, a federal program for low-income children, and Title 9, a mandate for gender equity in education). The Elementary and Secondary Education Act is reauthorized every few years; similarly, NCLB will need to be reauthorized—an issue that Congress is currently considering.

The foundation of NCLB is standards-based education—the theory that combining high standards with intermittent checkpoints is the most effective way to improve individual educational outcomes. Although NCLB is federal legislation, it does not mandate standards for individual states; instead, it mandates that individual states set standards and then implement a series of standardized assessments to evaluate student progress on those standards. The assessment program is a prerequisite for obtaining federal funding for public schools in a given state.

The broad measurement of a school's success in educating students is called Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). AYP was designed as a tool that schools could use to help students know where they were ineffective in producing positive student outcomes. AYP is composed of testing scores in the areas of language arts and mathematics and a measure of graduation (for high schools and districts overall) or attendance rates (for elementary and middle schools). Schools and districts must show a higher percentage of achievement from one year to the next. If schools or districts do not increase their percentage of achievement, they have not met AYP. The consequences of not meeting AYP increase progressively for each year AYP is not met; they include offering tutoring to students, state takeover, reconstitution, and opening the school as a charter.

Supporters of NCLB argue that the legislation is having positive effects. National Assessment of [Page 1015]Education Progress (NAEP) results demonstrate increased average levels of achievement over scores recorded before 2001. In addition, NAEP results indicate that at least some achievement gaps have narrowed. Supporters also argue that mandating that teachers meet particular content-area mastery requirements results in a more professional and effective teacher workforce. Finally, supporters argue that the requirement that schools implement “scientifically based research practices” increases curriculum effectiveness for all students.

Critics of NCLB argue that increased test scores do not necessarily transfer to real-world learning, as the test questions themselves may reflect a narrow set of skills rather than broad understandings. In addition, critics argue that teachers may be pressured to teach specific skills that they know are tested rather than teaching higher-order thinking skills or nontested concepts or even content areas. Critics also argue that the emphasis on low-performing students may harm gifted and talented students. Finally, critics are concerned that the specificity of the legislation limits what schools may choose to teach while simultaneously limiting local control.

...