No Child Left Behind Legislation
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Passed with bipartisan support and signed into law on January 8, 2002, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, constitutes a massive attempt by the federal government to exert its power over the reform of elementary and secondary education in the U.S (Ritter and Lucas 54). Based on its goal of "ensuring that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education" (NCLB, 2001, qtd. in Simpson, LaCava and Graner 67), the NCLB utilizes high-stakes assessments to determine whether students have achieved annual yearly progress according to the rigorous standards erected by individual states. While schools that fulfill the criteria of success in accordance with the NCLB guidelines are rewarded with public recognition and financial resources, their counterparts who fail to meet the criteria of success are sanctioned and risk being taken over by the state. The monumental nature of this legislation lies in the fact that the federal government has expanded its role in education - traditionally the domain of State and local governments - by exercising its power through the use of discretionary funds (Simpson et al. 67).In the remainder of this paper, the primary themes of the NCLB legislation will be presented and discussed. The initial reactions of the various legislators and educators to the NCLB will also be highlighted and explored. The outcome of the NCLB, particularly in terms of its objective of improving the acad
. . .
bed above. The school superintendents association of New Hampshire even published a report to highlight the discrepancy between the federal funding and the cost of compliance with the law -- $70 vs. $570.
Just as disturbingly, educators also illuminated the unreasonably high standards erected by the NCLB. According to Edward Haertel of Standard University, the level of proficiency is set so high that it would take 100 years for all students to reach proficiency at the current rate of progress (in Lewis 179). The California Department of Education also utilized simulation models to predict the schools' abilities to meet the standards of NCLB requirements that are increased every year. These simulations indicated that within five to six years, every school in the state of California would be considered to have failed (Ritter and Lucas 57).
Education officials in New Hampshire and Texas also stated that the assessment requirement that students in all subgroups meet NCLB standards also demonstrates a lack of recognition of educational realities. For certain subgroups of students such as students with disabilities and those with limited English proficiency (LEP), the annual yearly progress (AYP) requirements do not take i
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Paraeducators Spurred, Implementation NCLB, LaCava Graner, Ritter Lucas, Practices NCLB's, Standardized Testing, Department Education, Teachers Paraeducators, York City, NCLB Based, simpson et, simpson et al, school districts, et al, child left, qualified teachers, teachers paraeducators, qualified teachers paraeducators, requirements nclb, ritter lucas, implementation nclb, child left act, michelau shreve 22, educational practices, highly qualified teachers,
Approximate Word count = 2855
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page)
More Essays on No Child Left Behind Legislation
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
