Two Reports Illuminate Limitations of NCLB

The majority of state education departments do not have the fiscal or technical capacity to aid low-performing schools, according to a recent study released by the American Institutes for Research (AIR). The study focused on five components of state support that it used as a framework to determine the low-performing schools’ capacity to improve. These components were, (1) tools to support the school improvement process, (2) providers who deliver support, (3) support activities, (4) funding for school improvement, and (5) the content of the improvement themselves. Based on these components, the study found that sixteen states have severe capacity limitations, seventeen have mild capacity limitations, and sixteen have moderate capacity limitations.

AIR’s study highlights the interconnectedness of a state’s capacity to provide a quality education and the state systems of support. The study found that many states have a limited “capacity to put into practice state systems of support for schools identified for improvement.” Three-quarters of the AIR study’s participants reported that limited funding hindered their schools’ abilities to improve their existing conditions. When read in the context of current state budget constraints, the study’s results take on a heightened significance. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, as of July 2008, states throughout the United States are experiencing over $40 billion in combined budget shortfalls. Considerable budget cuts throughout the states could affect the funding of a wide-array of services, including, of course, education, which constituted a hefty portion of every state’s budget.

A recent study conducted by the Washington, D.C.-based, Center on Education Policy confirmed AIR’s general conclusions. The study entitled, “A Call to Restructure Restructuring,” found that in the 2007-2008 school year, there were 3,599 Title I schools that were involved in sanctioned restructuring under NCLB, a 56% increase from the previous school year. The report focused on the restructuring efforts of five states—California, Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, and Ohio. It reported that despite restructuring efforts, only 19% of identified schools in those states were able to pull up the performance levels of their school systems and make their Annual Year Progress goals.

Jack Jennings, president of the Washington-based Center on Education policy, stated: “The states are pivotal actors under NCLB, and the presumption is they will be able to carry out their duties—and the fact of the matter is the states are not in the position of being able to do that.”

The Center of Education Policy report suggests that schools that focused on implementing ground-level change—such as training and supporting teachers, and providing additional support to the students through supplementary programs, such as tutoring—were more successful at increasing their schools’ level of achievement.