As President Bush's controversial education act comes up for reauthorization, critics and supporters are taking a hard look at the law's provisions.
Read more
The No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law on January 8, 2002 by President Bush.
Read more
On October 3, 2006, One Day convened a round table of education experts to discuss the federal No Child Left Behind Act.
Read more
Rebecca Flores (Houston '00)
Jeff Good (D.C. '93)
Laura Stramel (Chicago '04)
Tracy Wright (Metro D.C. '96)
Read more
The No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law on January 8, 2002 by President Bush. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), Rep. John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), and Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.)—known as "the big four"—worked together with the White House to craft the bill and push it through Congress. The bipartisan legislation, which is up for reauthorization next year, says students must meet annual achievement goals or schools and districts face consequences. Some of the law's main provisions are:
On the Books: States must test students annually in reading and math in grades three through eight and at least once in high school. Starting in the 2006-2007 school year, districts must test for science, but those results aren't required to count toward achievement goals.
Up for Debate: Critics say because states create their own tests and standards, some are less rigorous than others, creating a false sense of student achievement.
On the Books: States must set annual education targets for students to place them on track to reach grade-level proficiency by the 2013-2014 school year. Each subgroup of students, including all major ethnic and racial groups, low-income students, students with disabilities, and students with limited English, must meet annual targets or make adequate yearly progress.
Up for Debate: Critics say this measure doesn't accurately reflect student achievement. Some argue that it should be combined with other measures, such as school attendance or graduation rates, to provide a fuller picture of student progress. Others support scrapping AYP in favor of a 'growth' metric that takes into account where the student started the year and tracks individual academic gains.
On the Books: Schools and districts that do not make AYP for two years in a row are identified as 'in need of improvement' and must allow students to transfer to a higher-performing public school. Schools that fail to make AYP for a third year must offer low-income students tutoring from a state-approved provider. After five years of not making AYP, schools must begin planning for restructuring, which can mean the principal and staff are replaced, or the school reopens as a charter school, or the state or a private management company takes over management of the school.
Up for Debate: Critics say the consequences are too punitive and often don’t work in real schools and districts.
On the Books: All teachers of core academic subjects must by 'highly qualified.' To reach this level, teachers must have a bachelor's degree, full state certification, and demonstrate competency in the subject they teach. Competency may be demonstrated by passing a rigorous state test or by meeting alternative standards outlined by the state under a 'High, objective uniform state standard of evaluation,' often referred to as HOUSSE. Teachers who are enrolled in alternative certification programs (including Teach For America corps members) are usually considered certified by the state, but must still meet the law's subject-matter requirements.
Up for Debate: Critics say this measure doesn't accurately reflect student achievement. Some argue that it should be combined with other measures, such as school attendance or graduation rates, to provide a fuller picture of student progress. Others support scrapping AYP in favor of a 'growth' metric that takes into account where the student started the year and tracks individual academic gains.