The No Child Left Behind Act

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.

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

The NCLB Act has undoubtedly established a focus on testing and data like no other testing reform in recent history. Now with end of NCLB and the beginning of the ESSA era, it is very possible that more parents and students will stand by their right to opt-out of high-stakes/standardized testing. It is fairly common for public schools in every state to start administering standardized test by at least third grade and every year thereafter on through high school. Although the ESSA also requires that all schools and districts have a testing rate of 95% or higher (as NCLB did as well), the likelihood of any disciplinary actions or penalties coming from not meeting that threshold seem to be nonexistent. Proof of this was seen when New York State

The purpose of this paper is to address the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) which was signed into law by President Barack Obama in December 10, 2015. The paper will also address the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) which was signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2002. The paper will talk about some of the key components of ESSA in comparison with NCLB and identify some possible strengths and weaknesses in ESSA’s new approach.

When assessing educational legislation and whether it is good or bad law can be muddled by the fact that some part of the law is good versus some being bad. Also, the passing of time can change the viewpoint of such legislation. For instance, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was largely accepted as a good piece of legislation when the law was enacted, but with the passing of time, we have seen that the NCLB has its problems. The lack of truly funding the legislation, coupled with the fact that standardized testing given to each student, regardless of disability or English as a second language (ESL) status causes issues within some areas of the education system. Even so, there are still parts of the NCLB that are good for education as a

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was authorized by and signed into law in 2002. NCLB was a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965. NCLB was meant to hold schools to higher standards, enforce accountability, and close achievement gaps that had existed in education since ESEA was enacted. Nevertheless, the rigorous standards and goals set forth under NCLB were never attained. ESEA Flexibility could be attained from the U.S. Department of Education starting in 2012. The accountability plans states were allowed to develop under their ESEA Flexibility replaced Adequate Yearly Progress or AYP that was established under No Child Left Behind.

“Accountability is incredibly important for the school systems. People shouldn't fear accountability, they ought to welcome an accountability system as a useful tool to make sure no child is left behind” George Bush quoted. When the No Child Left Behind Act was passed in 2001, president George Bush along with many other people had different expectations at that time. Expectations that included improvement in testing scores, progress increase in grades along with improvement in teachers. For a short period of time this appeared to have worked, however with the course of time it is evident that NCLB has many flaws that have reflected in the outcome.

The No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law January 8, 2002 , by George .W Bush. The Act is a re-authorization of the Secondary Education Act, The No Child Behind Act was put into effect in order to help close achievement gaps and improve education within the public school system using various techniques so that no child would be left behind. In order to achieve the goals of the act, procedures were to be followed by public school system, Bush suggested that schools test students in grades third through eight, in math and reading and publicly release the results. So therefore the regulations were set, but less progressing schools would experience penalties. These penalties included, using massive piece of school funding toward teaching development, as well as replacing staff if needed, making new curriculum, and any school that fail over six times within a row could experiences a shut down. The regulations and penalties that followed the No Child Left Behind Act, added pressures on students as well as teachers whom were forced to teach to the test and achieving difficult short term goals. Indeed, the idea behind the No Child Left Behind Act sort out to provide beneficial goals for students worldwide, however only left majority involved disappointed and distressed. Within the last ten years that the Act has been in effect it has caused teachers to simplify test materials in hopes of gaining higher test score in order to keep schools from shutting down. This

“We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail,” is a quote said by former president, George W. Bush, in his address to a joint session of Congress after the September eleventh attacks. The beginning of the twenty-first century marked a start of a revolution. A revolution of social change and global peace. The 2000’s is a decade of advanced technology, new and improved adjustments, and a decade of remembrance.

As far as learning for standardized testing goes there is a federal act involved that plays a role in the educational system and controls how the educational system teaches and tests these students. This act is named, The No Child Left Behind Act. This act makes standardized assessments mandatory for all fifty states. This law serves a purpose to test students in reading and math for grades three through eight. In high school, students are required to test and they are expected to meet or exceed state standards in reading and math. (Elementary and Secondary Education Act) “The major focus of No Child Left Behind is to close student achievement gaps by providing all children with a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education” (Elementary and Secondary Education Act). But since the early 2000s, has this act kept it promise or has the responsibility of this act been not meeting these standards? When this law was first placed, it was said that this act would make it possible for students in the United States to become proficient in math and reading by the year 2014. (National Council of Churches Committee on Public Education and Literacy) But, does this mean that every student in the U.S. will meet these expectations? The National Council of Churches Committee on Public Education and Literacy does not believe so. “The No Child Left Behind Act sets an impossibly high bar—that every single student will be proficient in reading and math by 2014. We

The No Child Left Behind Act essentially mandates standardized testing. Every state is expected to develop standards and a testing system. With this act, each state is required to test students of grades 3-8 on reading and math every year, and students in high school are expected to be tested once throughout their high school career. Another important aspect of the No Child Left Behind Act is its establishment of academic early progress, or benchmarks, schools are expected to meet each year. Every school is expected to demonstrate its academic yearly progress, or AYP, and if it does not, the school may be forced to send their students to a higher performing school or offer free tutoring (Klein, par. 9). If a school consistently misses AYP,

In an attempt to create educational reform, pieces of legislation like the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) have been passed with the hopes of making schools “accountable” to the children within their walls. Although this piece of legislation was eventually overturned its effects are still being felt within Americas public schools and it is estimated that this generation will be less literate than their precursors (Kohn). Although well intentioned, the NCLB failed schools, teachers, and most importantly students all as a result of one key aspect of the law: high-stakes testing. According to the No Child Left Behind act, all states are required to give standardized tests to their students in the hopes of holding teachers accountable for their scores and ensuring all students become “proficient.” These tests have come to determine whether or not students can graduate, how and what teachers teach, as well as how much funding a school will receive. High-stakes tests can make or break a school, but with all this pressure are kids really showing sizable gains in areas like math, science, or reading? The answer is no and time and time again

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was passed in 2001.This law mandates that all students are required to have access to the general education curriculum and participate in accountability testing. Specifically “all students with disabilities should have access to, participate in, and make progress in, the general curriculum,” (Ayres, K. M., Lowrey, K. A., Douglas, K. H., & Sievers, C., 2011). The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) of 2004 ensures students with disabilities have access to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE), meaningful, and in the least restrictive environment. There is a huge disconnect between implementing both laws because NCLB holds stakeholder’s accountable for teaching students with severe disabilities from the general curricula but on the other hand IDEA mandates students learn from an individualized curricula that support their post- secondary needs.

The No Child Left Behind Act was the biggest educational step taken by president Bush and his administration. Its main goal included the increase of achievement in education and completely eliminate the gap between different racial and ethnic groups. Its strategies had a major focus on uplifting test scores in schools, hiring “highly qualified teachers” and deliver choices in education. Unluckily, the excessive demands of the law have not succeeded in achieving the goals that were set, and have caused multiple opposing consequences. These unintended consequences affect students negatively which are who the law is most intended in helping. These consequences include a high focus on the low‐level skills which are reflected on high stakes tests; bad assessment of students who have English as a second language and students with special needs; and compelling incentives to eliminate students who score very low from school, so the test scores are achieved to their full potential and their goal (Darling‐Hammond, 2007).