NCLB Act: Policy Analysis

In 2001, NCLB established legislation in a sweeping overhaul of federal effort to support elementary and secondary education. The legislation (Section 11: Title III) holds school districts accountable for English proficiency and is based upon improved student achievement and accountability for results with an emphasis on doing what works based on scientific research (Boward County Public Schools, 2010). With NCLB accountability, districts much describe how they will hold elementary and secondary schools accountable for meeting the goals and objectives for increasing the English proficiency of current ELL’s (Boward County Public Schools, 2010). Districts must also hold elementary and secondary schools accountable for meeting the goals and objectives for increasing academic achievement for all current and former ELL’s (Boward County Public Schools, 2010). Further required is an improvement plan that outlines interventions and procedures implemented if districts fail to meet the Annual Measureable Achievement Objectives (AMAO). Procedures and implementation are monitored by SALA (Bureau of Student Achievement through Language Acquisition) (Florida Department of Education).

Explanation of choosing the “No Child Left Behind” Act The “No Child Left Behind” (NCLB) Act is an important topic in education to me,

The NCLB was structured to place the responsibility of our children on the shoulders of each state individually. In addition, it is also beneficial to parents and students who are living in impoverished communities with little to no resources available resulting in low performing test scores. The NCLB also states that local educational agencies now have federal education funding in their disposal.

When President George W. Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) into law in 2002, the legislation had one goal-- to improve educational equity for all students in the United States by implementing standards for student achievement and school district and teacher performance. Before the No Child Left Behind Act, the program of study for most schools was developed and implemented by individual states and local communities’ school boards. Proponents of the NCLB believed that lax oversight and lack of measurable standards by state and local communities was leading to the failure of the education system and required federal government intervention to correct. At the time, the Act seemed to be what the American educational system

Since the No Child Left Behind Act, also known as NCLB, has come into effect, it has caused some concerns with teachers and parents alike on how well it is working for the students. There have been issues that have arisen that needed to be addressed and instead been overlooked when a child does not meet with the school’s standardized testing and is pushed onto the next grade level.

NCLB is a federal law that mandates a number of programs aimed at improving U.S. education in elementary, middle and high schools by increasing accountability standards. In 2002 there was a revision that, states must test more often to close the gap between minority students and those with disabilities.

Bush’s No Child Left Behind (NCLB) federal policy. Both Clinton and Bush administrations regulated freedom of choice within their educational policies. Clinton’s Goals 2000 increased standards for student scores within core subjects. Legislation targeting Title I, required States and school districts to “turn-around” low-performing schools, and in 1993, public charter schools increased to over 2, 000 (www.clinton5.nara.gov). Bush’s No Child Left Behind’s structure demanded high-stakes testing and created provision for privatization of public education, as well as “school choice .” No Child Left Behind not only increased the Clinton’s strong accountability disposition, but it also superimposed a new set of accountability rules that would adversely affect public schools (Porter, Linn, & Trimble, 2005). One significant requirement of NCLB is that each state must adopt challenging academic content standards and challenging student achievement standards. Additionally, states must establish Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) goals for each year from 2002 to 2014—that would culminate in the 2014 goal that all American students would be at or above the proficient student academic achievement standard (P.L. 107–110, 2001). When local educational agencies (LEA) failed to meet their state’s AYP goals, in addition to other criteria, they [LEA] faced the inevitability of losing their accredited status and eventually face school

The NCLB Act has become the largest intervention by the federal government. This act promises to improve student learning and to close the achievement gap between the white students and students of color. The law is aimed at having standardized test to measure student performance and quality of teacher. The Standardized exams are fully focused on reading and mathematics. This law characterizes an unequalled extension of the federal role into the realm of local educational accountability. High school graduation rates are also a requirement as an indicator of performance at secondary level. In low performing schools they get punished by receiving less funds and students have the choice to move to high performing school. The quality of our

Several critical elements in NCLB ensure that schools are held accountable for educational results so that the best education possible is provided to each and

Another example of the NCLB Act failing in the area of funding is seen in a Mexican-American school, located Houston, Texas, which does not have a library, lab equipment, or an adequate number of textbooks. This is because they are not receiving funding, because the school is being penalized for failing to improve test scores to meet AYP. The school board and administration cannot meet the needs to improve the resources for learning, thus cannot improve the overall test scores at the school. However, the administration does spend $20,000 for commercial test-preparation books and other testing materials in an effort to meet the AYP (Ellis 228). With a focus solely on raising test scores and not the actual learning process, their school will continue in this cycle of low test scores and lacking resources.

Another major problem of NCLB is the people who create the tests. State senators across the country make different tests and decide what should be in the learning curriculum. To become a state senator you do not need a degree, and the senators that do have degrees are typically degrees of business or law. Why did senators make the tests and not teachers? Many of the state senators writing the tests do not have the educational background needed to write tests. And because every state senate makes a different test for every state, students who move out of state are supposed to be able to pass a test that they have not learned about.

In this discussion the only question I have is that the I cannot understand how a school can meet the letter of the law in NCLB by setting a curriculum and working with resources and materials, since NCLB does not set curriculum for a school - it increased federal presence in schools, create some funding for low funded schools but mostly it measures the effectiveness of school. I do, however, believe that NCLB has a huge part in as you write, education is rapidly changing each and every day so it would seem that students and teachers are responsible for accountability, then the model being used should be VAM (Value-Added Actual Growth). This will enable the school to review data from the expected growth to the actual growth.

NCLB (what is it/)requires states to break out test scores according to student poverty status, language and disability status. Identifying true achievement gap schools will allow for the following has the school undertaken whole school, subject matter, reforms? Curriculum change to incorporate content/materials for boosting achievements. Changes instructional practices. Gap-closing school graduating students in higher proportions. Moving larger proportions of graduates in postsecondary schools. Within the subgroups the achievement gap diminished by more than half for the African-American subgroup between 1970 and 1988, which came to an abrupt stop in the 1990s. All the while, the Hispanic subgroup continued to make great progress until 1992

NCLB sets some new strategic directions to reform American education. The focus of President Bush's education agenda is to shift federal education dollars away from an emphasis on improving schools to an improvement of student performance and a closing of the gap between disadvantaged students and their peers. NCLB is structured to tie funding to accountability and results.

In order to address how and why agenda setting of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) came about, it is important to begin with addressing the education situation of 1965. According to McGuire (2008), the Congress passed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act