CEP Reports Progress and Problems of NCLB

On January 26, 2004, the Center for Education Policy released its second annual progress report on the implementation of the federal "No Child Left Behind" Act. This comprehensive report, entitled "From the Capital to the Classroom: Year 2 of the No Child Left Behind Act," effectively analyzes the impacts of this federal legislation and how it has affected operations at the federal, state, and local school district levels. While the study has found many school officials to be generally supportive of the goals of NCLB, surveys of school officials demonstrate that some remain uneasy about particular aspects of the federal mandate.

Findings presented in this report were collected during 2003, the second year of NCLB. Researchers conducted interviews with various types of education officials, including congressional leaders, U.S. Department of Education officials, state department of education administrators, and local superintendents. This wide array allowed the authors of the report to recognize a difference in the perception of the effect of the federal mandate among the levels of school administration. While federal and state administrators were generally optimistic about the law's potential to improve education, many local educators, suggested by the study to be those who most immediately see the effects of NCLB, indicated significant concerns. The study conducted surveys in 47 states and 247 school districts, in addition to in-depth case studies of 33 school districts.

Adequate Yearly Progress

Although the study shows that many educators applaud NCLB for renewing national interest in raising student achievement, some claim that NCLB lacks flexibility and its definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) may unfairly designate schools as "in need of improvement." Respondents criticized a strict 95% participation rate for all subgroups and NCLB's 2014 deadline for all subgroups to reach 100% proficiency. The study shows that many district officials strongly support a change to the law's requirement that all English Language Learners (ELL) and special education students must reach 100% proficiency by that date.

Data indicates that urban and very large school districts are more likely to include at least one school that was identified as "in need of improvement."

Teacher Quality and Paraprofessionals

Improving teacher and paraprofessional quality was a major area of focus for officials in 2003. Although states have struggled to implement NCLB's teacher and paraprofessional requirements, new hires were required to be qualified according to NCLB, and schools were required to inform parents of the status of their children's teachers.

The study also noted that although many states are reporting the majority of their teachers as highly qualified, experts have questioned the legitimacy of the data. The study also confirmed a long-standing problem, that is that urban school districts, which educate students in greatest need of qualified teachers, are more likely to employ teachers that are not "highly qualified."

Inadequate Funding

NCLB implementation has proven a costly task for school districts during 2003. Although the federal government has contributed a little funding for NCLB, many of the study's respondents indicated a need for additional financial support. Current fiscal difficulties have led to staff reductions in state education departments, limiting guidance and support services for local schools. The necessity for increased tutoring programs, after-school help, costs of the school-choice option, and other additional expenditures forced by NCLB have placed a strain on local budgets already facing cutbacks in state aid.

For a related story, see "Study Finds NCLB Will Cost $1.5 Billion in Ohio."

"From the Capital to the Classroom: Year 2 of the No Child Left Behind Act" emphasizes that as the 2014 deadline approaches and schools must implement additional programs and services to reach proficiency, costs will continue to rise. The federal government must answer the call for increased technical and financial support and "open-mindedness…to fine-tune provisions that are not working well."

Prepared January 30, 2004.