The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 aimed to increase accountability for K-12 public schools. It required states to develop standards and annual student assessments in math and reading. Schools that received Title I funding had to meet adequate yearly progress targets for all student subgroups or face consequences. The act increased the federal role in education and sought to close achievement gaps, but critics argued its one-size-fits-all approach and unrealistic proficiency goals negatively impacted schools, teachers, and students. Revisions to the law have been proposed to better balance accountability and local control over curriculum.

1. “No Child Left Behind”
Jeff Christian
Briana Johnson
Brittany Shields

2. "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“
(2002)
- George W. Bush

3. Introduction to No Child
Left Behind Act of 2001
Increased accountability placed on schools and
teachers as well as on states
 Setting Standards
 Standardized Testing in Mathematics and Reading
 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) – Meeting the
Minimum
 Detailed Report Card/ Progress reports
 Title I funding
 “Highly Qualified Teachers”
 School Choice
 Scientifically Based Research

4. Example of a Detailed Progress Report

5. Example of a Summary Report
Card (including AYP Criteria)

6. History of Education Law
 1965 – Elementary and Secondary
 Stemmed from 1964 Civil Rights Act
 1980 – National Commission of Excellence in Education
 Emphasized tougher standards, longer days, & change in
teachers
 1994 – Goals 2000: Education America Act
 Expectation levels increased & student achievement levels
severed as indicators
 January 8th 2002 – President George W. Bush signed the “No
Child Left Behind” Act (Public Law 101-110)

7. Purpose of NCLB
 To create a standardize way of teaching for all school districts,
teachers and students guaranteeing fair, equal, and significant
opportunities to achieve the highest level of academic learning

8. How NCLB is calculated
 Adequate Yearly Process (AYP) – an assessment of how each
every school is performing academically according to the
results of the standardized tests
 AYP holds each school accountable by:
 Standardized testing
 Flexibility in funding
 Parent Involvement
 Highly qualified teachers

9. Why the Law Is Needed
 To make sure that each student is getting a fair and equal
opportunity.
 Ex. How do you decide on student A vs. student B as an
college admissions officer if that do not take the same test?

10. Defining the Issue’s
 Students getting pushed through schools
 Narrow focus on literacy, reading, and arithmetic
 Eliminates the fun
 Teachers lose freedom
 Effects students later on in college/workforce

11. Groups that are Affected
 Low income areas (mainly minorities)
 Test are tailored towards high income white areas

12. What Sectors of Government
are responsible for the
Improvement of Educational
Outcomes
 Federal Government
 Extended Power by taking reserved power from the
state to organize education
 No Child Left Behind Waivers (February 2012)
 State Government – State School Boards
 Conditions of the Waivers
 Local Government - School Districts
 Pushing educational growth
 Hiring and Firing
 Monitoring both revenues and expenditures

13. Relation to Class
 Ethics
 “Ethical Obligations and the Public Service” (Stillman p. 474-475)
 Obligation to Law
 Obligation to Self
 Obligation to the Public Interest or General Welfare
 Administrative Discretion
 AYP forces schools to push kids through school in order to stay afloat.
 AYP – 2 years of failing

14. Best Practices
 Test-based accountability
- Performance Achievements
 9-year-olds posted the best scores in reading (since 1971) and math (since
1973) in the history of the report.
 13-year-olds earned the highest math scores the test ever recorded.
 States & Government are recognizing the need to improve our
educational system.
 Funding Increases







Federal education funding (29%)
K-12 funding (33%)
Total NCLB funding (40%),
Title 1 (45%)
Special Education (68.5%)
Reading (quadrupled- 300%)
($286 million in 2001 - $1.2 billion in 2007)

15. Implementation Problems
 Realistic Goals
 Is universal proficiency by 2014 a realistic goal?
 Equality
 Is it fair for all districts, teachers, and students to be
held accountable for the same goal?
 State Standards
 Each state has a different set of standards

16. The Aftermath
 Teachers
 Many teachers are thankful for their jobs but are being deprived of
creativity & passion within their lesson plans and classroom activities.
 Students
 Students are being deprived of a well rounded educational
experience
 Arts, music, extracurricular activities, the ability to be creative &
collaborate
 The System
 Districts as well as teachers are experiencing a great amount of
stress to get students to perform well on standardized tests.
 As a result, students who are not ready for a higher level of
education are being passed through to improve the overall
district numbers.

17. Should we Scrap or keep the
NCLB Act?
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvwjNBZ1z8E
&list=PLC7C04A200690F7C4&index=1

18. Questions
 If you were to pick, would you: Keep, Scrap, or
Revise the “No Child Left Behind” Act
 Do you have friends or family that are a teacher
or student have discussed the issues of NCLB?
 What sector of government do you think should
have more responsibility in the roll of education?