In January 2002 President George W. Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) into law and imposed the most expansive and regimented educational law in the history of the United States. Since the enactment of the Act and its extensive testing regime, controversies have arisen regarding the testing elements of the Act; but also who the Act may harm, as well as its fairness, both educationally and financially. The “unfunded mandates” debate has been popular in the media as well as in the legal system because of the staunch opposition to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on the basis of the amount of money it will cost states and public school districts. Providing timely notice for supplemental services as well as the stipulation for highly qualified teachers in every classroom are two NCLB issues that have also garnered adequate attention in the courts.
The well-known and highly contested issue of adequate yearly progress (AYP), which must be demonstrated through test scores by every school and district for mathematics and reading has received the majority of attention during the previous five years of NCLB’s life. The Department of Education has attempted to be more lenient in the rules and regulations initially outlined by the Act. This has spurred not only criticism from the educational community, but also praise from others. The issue of AYP is closely related to the massive and unprecedented level of student testing that has resulted from the enactment of NCLB. This unprecedented level of testing, unseen prior to NCLB, has raised concern for the reliability and validity of the tests being used to measure student performance. With annually mandated testing occurring in grades three through eight, with a test in high school having been implemented in the 2005-2006 school year; this issue, and the possible numerous faults of the tests being used, will assuredly propel more scholarly research in the years to come as these tests are scrutinized more carefully.
This report is designed to discuss in detail the issues of the controversy around meeting AYP and the assessments used to measure it; legal issues involving NCLB; sanctions imposed on failing schools; the differing state academic standards, and some of the measurement issues related to the assessment measures of NCLB. This report aims to paint a balanced picture of what has happened in the past five years of NCLB’s life and to offer suggestions for new directions for improvement in what some believe is a comprehensive and worthwhile educational policy.