NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND: BACKGROUND & CRITICISM

No Child Left Behind (NCLB): Background and Criticism

[Name of the Supervisor]

No Child Left Behind (NCLB): Background and Criticism

No Child Left Behind (NCLB): Background

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was signed into law by U.S. president George W. Bush on Jan. 8, 2002; it is considered the most significant federal education-policy initiative in generations and a broad expansion of the government's role in the nation's schools. NCLB was created to overcome an achievement gap among U.S. students at a time when only about 70 percent of inner-city and rural 4th graders could read at a basic level and low-income students lagged behind other students by an average of 20 percentage points on national assessment tests.

The "four pillars" of the act focused on school accountability; flexibility for states and communities in deciding how federal funds were to be used; determination of educational methods that would be effective; and providing more choice for parents, who could transfer their child to another school if they were not satisfied with a school's progress (Lemann, 2008). According to the law, students from grades 3 through 8 had to be tested every year in English/language arts and mathematics to gauge if they met state standards (see National Assessment of Educational Progress). The school would provide remedial assistance if test scores did not improve. This remediation included tutoring or after-school programs. These points followed President Bush's education philosophy: an emphasis on standards and accountability and a requirement that states set targets and issue detailed reports on student performance.

Politically- Discuss Why did Bush Pick NCLB to run on?

President Bush picked NCLB to run on in order to get people's support especially of minority. NCLB put special emphasis on closing the achievement gap between African Americans and Hispanics and other students. It also emphasized hiring high-quality teachers and implementing plans for students with disabilities. It called for the assessment of academic criteria for charter schools.

Supporters of NCLB believed that the law provided sufficient federal funding for schools to reach the government's goals. Title I aid for disadvantaged students also rose. NCLB allowed flexibility in how each state planned and assessed its progress (Rosentha, 2002).

After initial support, some lawmakers—including Republicans as well as Democrats—joined critics who claimed that the law failed to allocate sufficient funds to make the required improvements. A growing number of state legislatures explored challenging parts of the law. Several states took legal steps against the act's provisions. Connecticut (in 2005) became the first state to sue the federal government regarding the NCLB mandates. They claimed that Washington was illegally requiring states to spend millions of dollars on standardized tests that many believed unnecessary (Rosentha, 2002).

Supporters of NCLB point to its successes: as of 2008, test scores have risen. However, oppponents of NCLB point out that there is no evidence that it is improving student achievement and that the initiatives of the law are too narrow to make real change in schools. Despite hearings and debates through 2007-08, no legislation was introduced ...