Nclb Thesis

Introduction The United States educational system is preforming poorly compared to the rest of the world: America is ranked 17th in educational performance, 25th in Math, 17th in Science, and 14th in Reading skills. Disabled, minority, and underprivileged children are lacking the adequate resources to succeed in our school system. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was a revised version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (EASA) proposed by former President George Bush in 2001. The intent was to reform the educational system so American’s schools could have the opportunity to thrive domestically and internationally, grant children equality of opportunity, and boost students K-12 level of understanding in core subjects, such as science, technology, and math. This initiative sought to improve our lagging educational system in the U.S to inch closer to higher achieving educational standards, such as the United Kingdom. However, No Child Left Act is hindering children’s chance of a “healthy start, a head start, a fair start, a safe start, and a moral start in life,” by amplifying undesired pressure on students through standardized testing, increasing federal jurisdiction within schools, and minimizing the roles of additional core subjects, such as social studies and foreign languages. This
memorandum will evaluate the background of NCLB, the benefits and complications of this legislation, as well as policy recommendations for the revisions of this bill in the future.
Background
Creation of the Education and Secondary Elementary Act
The initial conversation of education reform occurred during Lyndon Johnsons’ declaration of the War on Poverty. With this declaration, it allowed the federal government to zone in on the educational systems contribution to poverty, and formulate strategies to combat the inadequate curriculums. Thus, under the War on Poverty battle, Johnson proposed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1964, which increased the federal government’s jurisdiction over public schools. The government was funding categorical grants that were focused on “professional development, instruction materials, resources to support educational programs, and the promotion of parental involvement,” within a five-year period.
Issues with the ESEA
• ESEA failed to take into account the migrant, abandoned, or delinquent kids in the educational sector. Thus, in 1968, Congress passed the Bilingual Education Act to include these children that were left behind.
• Two years after the bilingual educational act was passed, there were reports that surfaced that school districts were unlawfully spending the Title 1 aid funding granted to the states for educational purposes. Congress had no choice but to step in and change the wording of the act to clarify that “federal money should supplement, not supplant money spent by state and localities.”
• From 1979-1981, President Ronal Regan advocated for an update of the ESEA which lumped several of the educational programs into a single block grant, but excluded the Title 1 provision. This initiative initially slashed the standardized criteria for districts and the states.
Creation of No Child Left Behind
Thus, President George Bush took the initiative to create the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which was a revision of the ESEA that was signed in 2002.
NCLB continued to increase the role of the federal government in states, but increased standardized testing standards which required schools to be at 100% proficiency level and diminished the focus of additional subject matter, such as foreign language and history. It allowed the federal government the provision to categorize school’s improvement within five years, as well as punish schools who fail to reach the proficiency levels by forcing these schools to restructure, give management power away, or give up and shut
down.
Increased Standardized Tests
Benefits
• Granting teachers and governmental officials data to pinpoint subjects where students are struggling to reach proficiency
• Provides an overall focused curriculum in the classroom so teachers can be better equipped to teach students the materials covered on the test.
Negatives
• Federally mandated tests can be seen as restrictive to the teacher’s flexibility in the classroom
• Greater emphasis on tests could hinder other core subjects, such as history, foreign language, and art to be covered in the classroom
• Students that do not perform well on tests may fall behind
Adequately Yearly Progress Criteria
Benefits
• Sets a goal for teachers and states to meet in order to be competitive on the international sector
• Provides a roadmap for both, the federal government and states to follow. NCLB allows states and the federal government to be on the same page when it comes to educational standards.

Negatives
• The goal is unattainable. When NCLB was initially created, the goal was to reach a 100% test proficiency. Records have shown that 38% of the schools were failing to reach the achievement targets set out in this legislation and 82% of these schools are distant from reaching this proficiency threshold.
• Sanctions that are imposed on the schools for not meeting the criteria set forth is only escalating the issue instead of fixing the situation. Schools that are ranked in the fifth threshold have to convert to a charter school, turn the power over to management authority, or take the option of allowing the state to take control.
Increased Federal Intervention
Benefits
• Allows the federal government to have a stronger hand in the education system by monitoring students’ overall performance
• Pressure teachers and states to prepare students for these tests more rigorously
• Allow more resources and funds to be allocated to state schools through categorical grants
Negatives
• Transferring power from initial state rights to the federal government which could diminish initial state rights in the educational system by granting the federal government authority to shut down schools that fail to meet the educational requirements in the fifth year.
• Requirements that are mandated by the federal government can be seen as unrealistic in determining the proficiency of students
Policy Recommendations
Less Federal Intervention
• Allows teachers the occasion to form curriculum and tests for their classroom, which could grant instructors the flexibility to focus on the true needs of the students
• States will have the option to create tutoring and mentoring programs for students who are struggling by providing them with a fair and head start. These programs will allow peers that fall behind the chance to catch up in classrooms, as well as have an opportunity to have a mentor that could mentally guide them in school.
Less Standardized Tests
• Grants teachers the decision to choose the type of curriculum that is best suited for the students and implement that option in the class room
• Permits teachers extended time to prepare students for upcoming tests
• Reduces the overwhelming pressure on all students to perform well on tests

Reform the Adequate Yearly Progress Report
• Implementing a state yearly progress report where districts can report standardized tests findings to the State Board of Educators, where an annual meeting could be held discussing the improvement methods of test scores in the state
• Strike down the 100% school proficiency clause of the adequate yearly progress report could decrease the pressure on students and schools to reach the 100% threshold and increase educational growth for the student
Conclusion
The motto of the Children’s Defense Fund is a “strong, effective, independent voice for all of the children of America,” by ensuring that children have equality of opportunity to flourish in life. Hence, education plays a crucial role in the growth of children and No Child Left Behind is hindering the chance of kid’s opportunity to thrive, because this legislation fails to take into account alternative learning techniques, societal circumstances, and overall pressure that these students face in their lives. NCLB can be seen as destructive to the chances of a child’s opportunity of a future. These policy recommendations were created to improve the educational sector for kids and ensure them the adequate foundation they need to proper. As Troy Preswood stated, "we need to provide low income and working class parents with more options,” and the social economic injustices in our school system is failing to provide this fair start. Guest Speaker Jennifer Martin pointed out that NCLB was failing to meet students individually and felt that there needed to be a mixture of idealism and realism that recognizes the educational goals, but incorporate teachers into this plan to best serve the students. There is a huge population of disconnected youth: an absence of long lasting relationships with work, teachers, and parents in their community. Thus, these policy recommendations will provide mentors for the disconnected youths to ensure they do not get left behind, empower teachers to motivate and teach their students the importance of learning, and grant jurisdiction back to the states where they can make the best decisions about the educational needs for their districts. Hence, these revisions put the children first to ensure them the occasion to prosper.