OCR Text |
Show Hingkley Journal of Politics 2006 The ABCs of No Child Left Behind: Accountability, Benefits and Controversies Cameron Diehl Aiming to address major inequalities and shortcomings within the American education establishment, the Elementary and Secondary Act of 2002 (No Child Left Behind Act, NCLB) propelled the Federal Government to an unprecedented commitment into public education. Since its inception, criticism has mounted from educators to policymakers, claiming that NCLB is an "unfunded mandate" that actually inhibits public education. Proponents respond that the accountability measures and goals of NCLB are long overdue. This policy paper analyzes the core controversies of NCLB and offers additional proposals to improve public education in America. To borrow from a recent president, the paper's recommended approach to NCLB is "mend it, don't end it." Introduction Three days into his first term of office, President George W. Bush fulfilled a major campaign pledge by sending his revolutionary education reform plan to Congress. H.R. 1, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act-No Child Left Behind (NCLB)-was co-sponsored by prominent Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy, enacted by convincing Margins of 87-10 in the Senate and 381-41 in the House of Representatives and was signed into law by President Bush on January 8, 2002. Since then, the initial warm feelings have faded into criticism and finger-pointing by those both inside and outside the education and political establishments. State support for the Program has declined, especially in Utah. In 2005, Republican Representative Margaret Dayton called the battle the last bastion of state sovereignty... Utah just wants the traditional state control of its own children" (Sack, 2005). After a six-week negotiating period for Utah and federal education leaders, the legislature passed HB 1001 in a special session which prioritized Utah education laws over No Child Left Behind (Toomer-Cook, 2005). What led Utah, the state that voted for President George W. Bush by a larger margin than any other in 2004, to be a leader in the opposition to NCLB? That specific question can only be understood in the context of a broader examination of the need for federal intervention in modern academic direction, the focus and preliminary results of NCLB, the legislative and legal challenges filed by states (including Utah), and an analysis of the future of American education. Opponents give NCLB a report card of three "Fs" and one "P": federalism, flexibility (teacher qualifications and accountability), funding and penalties. Of major concern to opponents is the misguided focus on a "one-size-fits-all" approach and standardized test scores as the sole indicator of academic progress. While the intentions of NCLB are generally viewed in a positive light, modifications in the federal-state relationship, compliance flexibility, funding mechanisms and accountability standards are necessary in order to successfully raise student achievement across the board. NCLB Standards: A brief overview of NCLB is necessary to understand the criticism. With NCLB, each state is "required to: 1) set standards for grade-level achievement and 2) develop a system to measure the progress of all students and subgroups of students in meeting those state-determined grade-level standards." (U.S. Department of Education, 2005a) For the fiscal year 2005, the Bush administration budgeted $410 million to directly support the professional development and implementation of state assessments to enable students, parents and educators to understand the performance of every student, school, and local school district. Results are exhibited in a school and district report card that is available to the public and is defined as "adequate yearly progress" (AYP). These annual assessments detail the progress of children in key academic subjects, the achievement gap between disadvantaged students and others, the qualifications of teachers, and the overall quality of the schools. While the approval rating for the intentions of NCLB and AYP is nearly universal, the devil is in the details. 25 |