No Child Left Behind Act

No Child Left Behind Act

In 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act was created to improve achievements with students and change the culture of the United States’ schools. According to the United States Department of Education (2011), President George W. Bush describes this law as the “cornerstone of my administration.” Clearly, our children are our future, and, as President Bush has expressed, "Too many of our neediest children are being left behind." The No Child Left Behind Act amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. In amending the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the new law represents a sweeping overhaul of federal efforts to support elementary and secondary education in the United States (United States Department of Education, 2011). It is built on four common-sense pillars: accountability for results, an emphasis on doing what works based on scientific research, expanded parental options, and expanded local control of flexibility (United States Department of Education, 2011). The No Child Left Behind Act, as with many other acts, has associated positives and negatives. Ultimately, if the positives outweigh the negatives and education for children improves than the future of the No Child Left Behind Act should be secure.
Positives of the No Child Left Behind Act

The No Child Left Behind Act identifies that teachers have a vast impact upon students’ lives in school and outside of school. Therefore, the act instituted in-depth checks of teachers credentials to make sure teachers were highly qualified to teach students. Existing research indicates that nothing is more important to high achievement as possessing effective teachers, implying that the impact of new incentives on teachers will be central to any consideration of the accountability statutes (Hanushek & Rivkin, 2010). With the value of teachers being priceless, phenomenal teachers are needed to teach our children good values, prepare them for further education, and for working life conditions.

New testing and testing standards accompany the No Child Left Behind Act. These new regulations set a higher standard that educational institutions must work toward or face consequences like having the state take them over, bringing in a private management company to run them, or replacing the principal. With new testing and testing standards, the government can clearly know which educational institutions are doing a phenomenal job with raising proficiencies in reading and math, and which educational institutions are not. By monitoring educational institution’s practices that are acceding expectations, these practices can be transferred and adopted by educational institutions with failing practices.

Negatives of the No Child Left Behind Act

With any new act implemented come negative perceptions and realities. The No Child Left Behind Act is no exception to this. The increased testing and testing standards have positive traits but over the past decade, many negatives have been associated with the changed testing and testing standards. For instance, the new testing procedures may be allowing teachers to focus more on basic skills just to fulfill the No Child Left Behind Act, as opposed to focusing on growing the child as an individual. Second, the subjects tested in schools need to be increased to include such topics as world history, geography, United States history, civics, and others if students are to succeed in the future. Third, test need to be cumulative and comprehensive and not only focus on what is taught that year. Education is worthless if students are not able to retain information learned from year to year. The No Child Left Behind Act’s new testing standards are not aligning with excellence as once thought.

Under the No Child Left Behind Act a teacher who joins and educational institution that is failing and makes remarkable gains, but does not meet the No Child Left Behind Act’s standards is labeled a failure. This is wrong. According to Hanushek and Rivkin (2010), a good teacher is somebody who regularly produces high average learning gains in a class, although a bad teacher regularly produces low gains. If the good teacher is allowed to continually to produce positive gains, eventually, he or she will meet the No Child Left Behind Act’s standards and eventually exceed them.

My Personal Beliefs of the No Child Left Behind Act

I believe the act is a phenomenal aggressive approach to education reform. The problem I see is in educational institutions that deal with a great deal of underprivileged or special needs students. In the No Child Left Behind Act, educational institutions receive or lose money based on their test scores. Therefore, educational institutions that have enrolled more than the average amount of special needs students could suffer low score consequences. Taking money from these institutions could definitely hurt the development of the special needs students, not to mention, setback any planned purchases for special needs student’s resources.

I agree with the No Child Left Behind Act’s provision of screening teachers more in-depth, so that fully qualified teachers may be hired to properly teach our students to the best of their abilities. However with highly qualified teachers comes bigger salary requirements, and currently educational institutions across the United States are struggling financially. Murnane and Papay (2010) wrote, teachers are concerned that the incentives created by some provisions of the law have elicited unintended responses that reduce the quality of education provided to at least some children. I understand that no matter what provisions are established, there will be some students who fall outside the lines, but educational institutions should provide these students with every means possible to succeed.

The Future of the No Child Left Behind Act

Currently, the future of the No Child Left Behind Act is uncertain. President Obama and Congress has not made a definitive decision whether or not to renew the policy or enact an updated version. However, In a speech made by President Obama at Kenmore Middle School in 2011, he urged Congress to fix the No Child Left Behind Act before the new school year begins. According to the White House (2011), The president articulated key priorities for reforming NCLB that will enable us to win the future and prepare our students to out-educate and out-compete the world in the 21st century economy:

• A fair accountability system that shares responsibility for improvement and rewards excellence, and is based on high standards and is informed by sophisticated assessments that measure individual student growth.

• A flexible system that empowers principals and teachers, and supports reform and innovation at the state and local level.

• A system focused on the schools and the students most at risk--that targets resources to persistently low-performing schools and ensures the most effective teachers serve students most in need.

If these key points are implemented the No Child Left Behind Act has a fair chance at sticking around and even improving.

Conclusion

The No Child Left Behind Act is an aggressive attempt at reforming education in the United States because of declining test scores and the United States falling placement regarding education when compared to other countries.

The main effects of No Child Left Behind on the quality of teaching are likely to come through two provisions of the act. First, NCLB establishes benchmarks based on test score pass rates that schools must meet to remain in good standing and avoid sanctions. Since teachers are central to student performance, this accountability component of NCLB is likely to have direct effects on both the demand for and supply of teachers and therefore on both the composition of the stock of public schoolteachers and the distribution of those teachers among schools. Second, NCLB explicitly requires districts to have “highly qualified” teachers, and the enunciation and enforcement of such a standard may have an additional effect on the composition of teachers. (Hanushek & Rivkin, 2010)

By continuing to use the positive aspects of the No Child Left Behind Act and improving upon the negative, the No Child Left Behind Act could be more beneficial to students and an educational institutions. With improvements made, the No Child Left Behind Act has a phenomenal chance of continuing in the future and setting new standards for the United States’ children and students to achieve and progress beyond.

References

Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (2010). The quality and distribution of teachers under the No Child Left Behind Act. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(3), 133-150. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.24.3.133

Murnane, R. J., & Papay, J. P. (2010). Teachers' views on No Child Left Behind: Support for the principles, concerns about the practices. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(3), 151-166. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.24.3.151

United States Department of Education (2011). Introduction: No Child Left Behind. Retrieved on July 16, 2011 from http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/index.html

The White House (2011). President Obama calls on congress to fix No Child Left Behind before the start of the next school year. Retrieved on July 18, 2011 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/03/14/president-obama-calls-congress-fix-no-child-left-behind-start-next-schoo


What else is there to say but goodnight and goodnight to you Mrs. Amore, wherever you may be.