No Child Left Behind Act
 | |
| Long title | An act to close the achievement gap with accountability, flexibility, and choice, so that no child is left behind. |
|---|---|
| Acronyms (colloquial) | NCLB |
| Enacted by | the 107th United States Congress |
| Citations | |
| Public law | Pub. L. 107–110 (text) (PDF) |
| Statutes at Large | 115 Stat. 1425 |
| Codification | |
| Acts amended | List
|
| Titles amended | 15 U.S.C.: Commerce and Trade 20 U.S.C.: Education 42 U.S.C.: Public Health and Social Welfare 47 U.S.C.: Telegraphy |
| U.S.C. sections amended | 15 U.S.C. ch. 53, subch. I §§ 2601–2629 20 U.S.C. ch. 28 § 1001 et seq. 20 U.S.C. ch. 70 42 U.S.C. ch. 119 § 11301 et seq. 47 U.S.C. ch. 5, subch. VI § 609 47 U.S.C. ch. 5, subch. II § 251 et seq. 47 U.S.C. ch. 5, subch. I § 151 et seq. 47 U.S.C. ch. 5, subch. II § 271 et seq. |
| Legislative history | |
| |
| Major amendments | |
| Repealed on December 10, 2015. Replaced with Every Student Succeeds Act | |
| ||
|---|---|---|
|
46th Governor of Texas
43rd President of the United States
Policies
Appointments
First term
Second term
Presidential campaigns Post-presidency
 |
||
| This article is part of a series on |
| Education in the United States |
|---|
| Summary |
| Issues |
| Levels of education |
 Education portal United States portal |
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB)[1][2] was a U.S. Act of Congress promoted by the Presidency of George W. Bush. It reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and included Title I provisions applying to disadvantaged students.[3] It mandated standards-based education reform based on the premise that setting high standards and establishing measurable goals could improve individual outcomes in education. To receive federal school funding, states had to create and give assessments to all students at select grade levels.
The act did not set national achievement standards. Instead, each state developed its own standards.[4] NCLB expanded the federal role in public education through further emphasis on annual testing, annual academic progress, report cards, and teacher qualifications, as well as significant changes in funding.[3] While the bill faced challenges from both Democrats and Republicans, it passed in both chambers of the legislature with significant bipartisan support.[5]
Many provisions of the act generated significant controversy. By 2015, bipartisan criticism had increased so much that a bipartisan Congress stripped away the national features of No Child Left Behind. Its replacement, the Every Student Succeeds Act, turned the remnants over to the states.[6][7]
Background[edit]
Prior to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965.[8] Its goal was to provide additional resources to low-income students, but following its enactment, the nation repeatedly fell short of meeting the law's goal of providing full educational opportunities to students.[9] Fears concerning the American education system culminated with the 1983 release of a report entitled A Nation at Risk, written by President Ronald Reagan's National Commission on Excellence in Education.[10] This report suggested that America's economic security would be severely compromised unless there were a complete reorientation of the education system and an increase in the set of academic standards that students were expected to achieve.[11] Though many Republican groups historically opposed the active role of the federal government in education, lobbying efforts, public opinion, and other political developments in Washington (such as the Republican defeat in the 1996 presidential election) caused congressional Republicans to push for federal educational reforms that emphasized standardized testing and other accountability measures.[12] At the time, increased attention was being paid to the state of education in the nation because prior to the 2000 United States presidential election, then-candidate George Bush made a number of campaign promises related to bipartisan education reform.[13][14][15]
The increased focus in the United States on educational standards and accountability reflected international education policy developments and debates. After World War II, international organizations such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the World Bank, and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) devoted their attention to global educational development. From the 1960s onward, these organizations increasingly focused on learning outcomes and evaluation procedures that included the evaluation of education systems against defined standards of performance. The 2001 NCLB Act was part of this global movement toward greater accountability in education.[16]
Legislative history[edit]
President George W. Bush first proposed the use of federal aid to create a plan by which to hold schools accountable for the educational outcomes of their students on January 23, 2001; however, as it was initially described, the Act faced significant criticism from interest groups such as the Education Trust because of its inclusion of vouchers.[17][12] Vouchers would enable parents to choose a different school (public, private, or otherwise) for their child to attend if their district failed to meet state standards; however, critics stated that this move would take funds away from schools that needed the most funding.[17][18] The NCLB Act was introduced in the United States House of Representatives on March 22, 2001, and it was coauthored by Representatives John Boehner (R-OH), George Miller (D-CA), and Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Judd Gregg (R-NH).[19][20] As it made its way through the House of Representatives and the Senate, the bill faced a number of challenges, ranging from Democratic appeals for more funding, to Republican pushback on the increased role of the Federal government in the realm of education.[21] Despite this, the Act garnered bipartisan support in both chambers of the legislature, and it was passed in the United States House of Representatives on December 13, 2001 (voting 381–41),[22] and in the United States Senate on December 18, 2001 (voting 87–10).[12][23] The Act was then signed into law by President Bush on January 8, 2002.[20]
Provisions of the act[edit]
According to the U.S. Department of Education, some of the most important things that the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 sets out to accomplish are increasing the accountability of schools for the educational outcomes of their students and bridging the gap between poor and high-performing students and districts.[24] In order to do this, NCLB requires all public schools receiving federal funding to administer a nationwide standardized test annually to students in select grades.[25] Furthermore, in order to improve the educational outcomes of students, the act names several methods that could be utilized by school districts to help their students achieve educational growth, such as teacher professional development, educational technology, and parental involvement activities, among others.[26] In order to determine how much grant money schools should be allocated for the programs enacted in the various sections of NCLB, the act asks each local agency to determine the average number of students in daily attendance in the K-12 schools that the agencies serve.[27] Also, the law calls for the improvement of the dissemination of information on student achievement and school performance to parents through reporting systems that reflect best educational practices.[28]
Schools that receive Title I funding through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 must make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in test scores (e.g. each year, fifth graders must do better on standardized tests than the previous year's fifth graders).[29]
If the school's results are repeatedly poor, then steps are taken to improve the school.[30]
- Schools that miss AYP for a second consecutive year are publicly labeled as "In Need of Improvement," and must develop a two-year improvement plan for the subject that the school is not teaching well. Students have the option to transfer to a higher performing school within the school district, if any exists.
- Missing AYP in the third year forces the school to offer free tutoring and other supplemental education services to students who are struggling.
- If a school misses its AYP target for a fourth consecutive year, the school is labelled as requiring "corrective action," which might involve wholesale replacement of staff, introduction of a new curriculum, or extending the amount of time students spend in class.
- A fifth year of failure results in planning to restructure the entire school; the plan is implemented if the school unsuccessfully hits its AYP targets for the sixth consecutive year. Common options include closing the school, turning the school into a charter school, hiring a private company to run the school, or asking the state office of education to run the school directly.[31]
States must create AYP objectives consistent with the following requirements of the law:[32]
- States must develop AYP statewide measurable objectives for improved achievement by all students and for specific groups: economically disadvantaged students, students with disabilities, and students with limited English proficiency.
- The objectives must be set with the goal of having all students at the proficient level or above within 12 years (i.e. by the end of the 2013–14 school year).
- AYP must be primarily based on state assessments, but must also include one additional academic indicator, which is defined by the states.[31]
- The AYP objectives must be assessed at the school level. Schools that failed to meet their AYP objective for two consecutive years are identified for improvement.
- School AYP results must be reported separately for each group of students identified above so that it can be determined whether each student group met the AYP objective.
- At least 95% of each group must participate in state assessments.
- States may aggregate up to three years of data in making AYP determinations.
The act requires states to provide "highly qualified" teachers to all students. Each state sets its own standards for what counts as "highly qualified."[33] Similarly, the act requires states to set "one high, challenging standard" for its students. Each state decides for itself what counts as "one high, challenging standard," but the curriculum standards must be applied to all students, rather than having different standards for students in different cities or other parts of the state.
The act also requires schools to let military recruiters have students' contact information and other access to the student, if the school provides that information to universities or employers, unless the students opt out of giving military recruiters access. This portion of the law has drawn a fair amount of criticism and has even led to political resistance. For instance, in 2003 in Santa Cruz, California, student-led efforts forced school districts to create an "opt-in" policy that required students affirm they wanted the military to have their information. This successful student organizing effort was copied in various other cities throughout the United States.[34]
The act outlines programs and requirements that have the intended purpose of preventing drug and alcohol use by students, as well as programs that would deter students from committing acts of violence in schools.[35] The act also provides funds to states in order to enable students who have been expelled from school for certain offenses to perform acts of community service.
Title II – Mathematics and Science Partnerships[edit]
Mathematics and Science Partnerships (MSP) is education policy from Title 2, Part B, Sections 2201–2203 of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The purpose of MSP is to increase student achievement in science and mathematics by partnering IHE science, math, and engineering departments with elementary and secondary science and math teachers in high-need local educational agencies (LEAs) in order to develop teachers' content knowledge and instructional performance. SEAs may apply for competitive grants and then IHEs and LEAs may apply for a subgrant of the SEA.
Effects on teachers, schools, and school districts[edit]
Increased accountability[edit]
Supporters of the NCLB claim one of the strong positive points of the bill is the increased accountability that is required of schools and teachers. According to the legislation, schools must pass yearly tests that judge student improvement over the fiscal year. These yearly standardized tests are the main means of determining whether schools live up to required standards. If required improvements are not made, the schools face decreased funding and other punishments that contribute to the increased accountability. According to supporters, these goals help teachers and schools realize the significance and importance of the educational system and how it affects the nation. Opponents of this law say that the punishments only hurt the schools and do not contribute to the improvement of student education.
In addition to and in support of the above points, proponents claim that No Child Left Behind:
- Links state academic content standards with student outcomes
- Measures student performance: a student's progress in reading and math must be measured annually in grades 3 through 8 and at least once during high school via standardized tests
- Provides information for parents by requiring states and school districts to give parents detailed report cards on schools and districts explaining the school's AYP performance; schools must inform parents when their child is taught by a teacher or para-professional who does not meet "highly qualified" requirements
- Establishes the foundation for schools and school districts to significantly enhance parental involvement and improved administration through the use of the assessment data to drive decisions on instruction, curriculum and business practices
The commonwealth of Pennsylvania has proposed tying teacher's salaries to test scores. If a district's students do poorly, the state cuts the district's budget the following year and the teachers get a pay cut. Critics point out that if a school does poorly, reducing its budget and cutting teacher salaries will likely hamper the school's ability to improve.
School choice[edit]
- Gives options to students enrolled in schools failing to meet AYP. If a school fails to meet AYP targets two or more years running, the school must offer eligible children the chance to transfer to higher-performing local schools, receive free tutoring, or attend after-school programs.
- Gives school districts the opportunity to demonstrate proficiency, even for subgroups that do not meet State Minimum Achievement standards, through a process called "safe harbor," a precursor to growth-based or value-added assessments.
Narrow definition of research[edit]
The act requires schools to rely on scientifically based research for programs and teaching methods. The act defines this as "research that involves the application of rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid knowledge relevant to education activities and programs." Scientifically based research results in "replicable and applicable findings" from research that used appropriate methods to generate persuasive, empirical conclusions.[36]
Quality and distribution of teachers[
We need Your Support. Make a Donation now! or 