Is the No Child Left Behind Law Leaving Children Behind?

On January 8, 2002 , President George Bush stated (as he signed into law the new bipartisan "No Child Left Behind" Law ) " We know that every child can learn, now is the time to ensure that every child does learn." During the balance of this year, Congress will review the performance of the law since that signing. Let's briefly review whether the No Child left behind law is leaving children behind.

Time Magazine recently (June 2007) graded the major provisions of the No Child Left Behind Law as follows:

1. Informing the public on school failure: Spotlighting schools that fail to educate all the children, including minorities, poor and disabled kids. Grade A 
2. Raising student achievement: Though some districts are reporting significant gains, results on national math and reading are mostly flat so far. Grade Incomplete
3. Measuring school improvement: The laws reliance on a single pass/fail system for assessing adequate yearly progress is one of its weakest parts. Grade C-
4. Raising Standards for Teachers: The law is the first Federal statue to require that Teachers already know the subjects they teach, though there are still some loopholes. Grade B
5. Helping Schools improve: Even the Department of Education concedes that its remedies for chronic school failure are not working.    Grade F

So why do many of the provisions of the program get such low marks from Time Magazine and other critics of the law? It appears that some of the reasons can be summarized as follows:

Law was never fully funded:
The funding of No Child Left Behind Law has never come close to what was originally promised as witnessed by anyone that has attended their local School Committee Meeting in the last few years. The funding accounts for less than ten percent of most school budgets. This certainly does not meet the needs of the under resourced schools where students need the funding the most. The law seeks to improve these schools poor students through threats and sanctions rather than proper educational investment.

The concentration of testing in math/reading is narrowing the curriculum:
In a survey of three hundred schools by the Center On Education policy, seventy one percent of local administrators indicated that their schools are focused on math and reading at the expense of other subjects because the law holds schools accountable only in Math and English. Science and Social Studies are sure to represent the most lost instruction time in many schools.

Testing focus to determine annual yearly progress:
The laws focus has been on testing rather than investing. It seems that the law may have misdiagnosed the problem. Its assumption was that schools needed more of a carrot and stick approach rather than fundamental change. The law does not address the educational inequalities that are at the heart of the system. High spending schools outspend low spending schools at least three to one in most states. School funding lawsuits have been brought by schools in more than twenty five states that describe low income students in crumbling facilities with out of date resources and unqualified teachers.

Distracting schools from reform:
The law has a very complex accountability scheme which analysts project will label between eighty five and ninety nine percent of the nation's schools "failing" within the next five years., even when they are improving in achievement and are high performing. This happens as states raise their proficiency level to a national benchmark set far above grade level and meet test scores and participation rates for students in special classified groups.

Finally, we may want to try some of the things that higher achieving countries have been doing for the past twenty years. The United States is currently ranked twenty eighth out of the forty ranked countries in mathematics and graduates about seventy five percent of students instead of the more than ninety five
percent now common elsewhere.

As can be seen, the No Child Left Behind Law has many problems. To move education forward for our children, many of the original concepts of this law need to be dramatically overhauled or just left behind by this Congress.

Time Magazine June 4 2007 - Report Card on No Child left behind, Wallis, Steptoe
The Nation: May 21, 2007 - Evaluating No Child Left Behind, Linda Darling- Hammo

http://www.eworldvu.com