No Child Left Behind Act
Traditionally, the states bore responsibility for educating children; however, for some time, the federal government has required the states to do more. Not every child learns at the same pace, and some children are disadvantaged. In an attempt to narrow the gap between advantaged and disadvantaged children, Congress has passed several laws, most recently the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2002.
Under the No Child Left Behind Act, the federal government required schools and school districts to implement measures to hold schools responsible for every student’s progress. NCLB requires states to give students standardized tests in mathematics, reading, and other subjects and report the test results. Further, NCLB dictates that schools must have qualified and certified teachers and tutors and emphasizes improving the learning progress of particular students such as those learning English as a second language, those having special needs, and those from poor and minority families. This emphasis reflected Congress’s response to the reality that generally speaking, disadvantaged students’ academic progress paled in comparison to their more advantaged cohorts.
While many people applauded NCLB, the law had its critics. There has been no clear evidence, across the board, that the remedies NCLB provided actually improved schools with low-performance rates. Moreover, regardless of the law’s intent, some schools could not locate qualified and certified teachers and tutors. In addition, states and their school districts had to work together on numerous issues, both large and small, and not surprisingly some states were not prepared to impose drastic changes on failing schools or in those schools whose students were failing to meet the national standards. Some NCLB opponents objected to the federal government’s role in shaping the curriculum for kindergarten through twelfth grade and that federal guidelines placed too much importance on standardized mathematics and reading testing at the expense of other subjects. Thus, they argued that this emphasis on mathematics and reading robbed students of time to adequately study history, foreign language, music, and more.
Fortunately, revisions to NCLB are in the works. Suggested revisions would reduce the federal government’s involvement in local schools and not allow the U.S. Department of Education to dictate the tools to measure the performance and progress of schools, teachers, and students or the methods that must be used to improve schools with low-performance rates. Thus, the proposed revisions would give more control and power to states and local school districts. Testing still would be one method and tool used, but other methods and measures like graduation rates may be used.
The planned revisions still dictate that states must take action concerning the schools with the lowest-performance rates, schools with recurring student progress gaps, and high schools with high dropout rates. The revised law intends to end the federal government practice of exempting schools from having to comply with NCLB, a practice granted to several states in response to those states’ inability to meet certain NCLB mandates and deadlines (such as schoolwide mathematics and reading proficiency by 2014). Under the proposed revisions, schools also must allow the public access to information about schools’ overall results of student progress and share demographic information about schools such as race, average family income, and disability status.
The new legislation still would require states to intervene in schools with extremely low-performance rates and ensure that every student, including poor and minority students, has the opportunity to receive a good education. It also places emphasis on preschool education.
The No Child Left Behind Act and the planned revisions do not cover every aspect of education law. If you are or know someone whose rights covered by America’s education laws are being incorrectly applied, ignored, or outright violated, there may be legal remedies available to you. If you have questions or concerns about America’s or Tennessee’s education laws, talk to a lawyer. For more information, to have your questions answered, and to have your concerns addressed, contact Nashville Education Lawyer Perry A. Craft.
Perry A. Craft has dedicated his life to helping people in need. He has tried, settled, or resolved numerous civil and criminal cases in State and Federal courts, and has represented teachers and administrators before school boards, administrative judges, and the state Board of Education. Learn more about Attorney Craft.