Left Behind Effects

The No Child Left Behind act is a nationwide legal system that is considered to improve our education system. The NCLB act improves our education system by setting a standard for each school to meet (a required academic standard), hire high quality teachers, improve communication with parents, and provide a safe environment for the students. However after the NCLB act took effect, not much was accomplished. Now many question whether the NCLB is really necessary.

This law was a way to force the improvement of the school system, if a school does not meet the ‘adequate yearly progress’ toward getting every student a satisfactory level of learning then the school is put on a warning list. If in three years, the school still has not meet the proper yearly progression then the school will be labeled “In Need of Improvement’ and parents have the option of moving their child to a better school and the school faces some consequences. Obviously schools do not want to be labeled as ineffective at teaching students and most of the responsibility for making the students ready for this assessment falls on the teachers. This is not the best way to assess students or the school but it is the cheapest ways and can be used as a guideline across different states which is why the federal government is not getting rid of it. Now with the implementation of Common Core Standards there is also a new test that students will be assessed on. A part of this transition to a new test especially since it is computer based is allowing a three year waiver to all schools. This waiver is necessary to allow students to learn the skills that the computer programmed test requires of them.

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, signed into law by President Bush on Jan 8, 2002, was a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education act, which included Title 1, the government’s flagship aid program for disadvantage students.

Recent reform acts such as the NCLB (No Child Left Behind Act) focused on holding schools accountable for student success; however, this, like many other acts failed in many ways. The NCLB

At its core “were a number of measures designed to drive broad gains in student achievement and to hold states and schools more accountable for student progress. They represented significant changes to the education landscape” (U.S. Department of Education, 2001). NCLB affected almost every public school in the US and introduced a level of involvement by

Although its intentions were good, its results were not quite the same. At first the idea of holding all students to the same standards may sound like a good idea, but without taking into consideration other factors this could cause problems in schools. All students under the Act are held to the same achievement standards which are set by the state and when the state decides these standards they don’t observe each individual child’s ability level, socioeconomic status, or native language (Pros). Most public schools throughout the nation will have a variety of different types of students. If you hold all students to the same standards you are restricting the “more advanced” students from furthering their learning by holding them to the standards of their less intelligent peers. The only students who are not held to the same standards as the rest are those with severe physical or mental

The purpose of this Act was to strengthen all level of the American school system and encourage students to continue their education after high school. The Government would award grants to states that had programs in Science, Mathematics and Foreign Languages.

Democrats and Republicans should challenge the No Child Left Behind Act. Even though the No Child Left Behind Act has good intentions to help children, there are many hazardous strategies involved. The No Child Left Behind Act may do more harm than good. The strategies in the No Child Left Behind Act do not contain research evidence to support the law. The No Child Left Behind Act guidelines that were published in December, 2002 by the United States Department of Education, insist that parents of students in poorly performing schools be allowed to transfer them to a different school, even if it causes overcrowding somewhere else.

In 2001, the 107th congress of the United States of America passed the No Child Left behind Act (NCLBA). This act is a federal law that denoted that lower income children be granted additional educational assistance in exchange for improvements in their academics. One of the stipulations within the act states that each year, a school must have standardized test improvement and better scores in order to receive further funding in the following years. If a school does not improve its scores, it is punished by receiving less funding than the year previous. However, there are some positives to this act. State and local education programs are enabled to transfer over fifty percent of federally allocated funds to address gaps in the local and state

The aim is to “fix” low-performing schools. Schools and teachers would be held accountable, for low performance and the law was considered by many to be overly punitive rather than supportive (Jost, Ravitch).

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was established to create research-based teaching methods, stronger accountability for schools and teachers, increased flexibility and local control over federal funds, and greater schooling options for parents. Even with all of its positive and great intentions there are also millions of opponents and proponents of NCLB. There are many changes that the NCLB can improve on and there are some that it should strap all together. The current status of NCLB today is a failing system. The schools that scores high on the standardized test get the funding, while the school that makes lower scores gets little or no funding is the biggest problem for most opponents of NCLB. The NCLB does not give students enough time to develop and learn on subject that they may struggle with. The NCLB assessment tools lack the needed guidelines to help students from different learning abilities. Funding is distributed to school with the higher test scores and the schools with test scores under the set standard gets the opportunity to lower their standards to receive standard scores. When the standards are lowered it takes away needed resources from the students and holds back the students with a higher level of learning.

The Act No Child Left Behind has been beneficial to both students and teachers. Students are kept track of so they can improve their skills with standardized tests and qualified teachers. This Act keeps children on the same page and have education requirements so that students learn at a required pace. This Act gives a guide to the speed at which teachers need to teach subjects such as Reading and Math. Teachers are given standardized tests for both Reading and Math so the teachers use this information to schedule their lessons so that all the students will be ready for the tests. These tests will give the government a record of how the school is teaching and how well the students are performing. Although the Act can be good it can also bad

The current debates surrounding the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 are both positive and negative. Many politicians and people that previously supported the Act are now standing against it. In the beginning many supported the new Act because everyone was aware that a change needed to happen in the education system and the proposal of No Child Left Behind seemed like the answer we were looking for. As the No Child Left Behind requirements began to be felt in the school systems across America and the assessments results started coming in, everyone took a step back and really began to look at the new law. The results were not what everyone expected, what was once considered an answer was now becoming the problem.

What I know before doing my research paper on No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act is that president Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965 passed the law before George W. Buch resigned on January 8th, 2002. It was emphases, by increasing funds for poor school districts with higher achievement on low- income students. During this NCLB act there was a debate on whether states should maintain them standardize and tests. Another thing is that whether schools would be held accountable whether by National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP). Should schools change the curriculum that is important in today’s word? Why or why not? Would you let your children be in a classroom that is not have a degree in teachings? All over the states have been dealing with

In the United States, there is an achievement gap between elementary and secondary school students from different districts, races, and social backgrounds. Therefore, “to close this achievement gap, President George W. Bush signed into law the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act on January 8, 2002” (Aronson & Miller, 2007). In addition, it is the most current repetition and popular “of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act” (febp.newamerica.net, 2014). Therefore, this paper will search more about this document by answering three main questions. What is it about? How does it effect on American education? Does the education change after it?