Negative Side

Your information is BIASED.

*Although the NCLB Act has introduced "an element of accountability", it already existed before in previous Acts such as the IASA (Improving America's Schools Act), in 1994. The difference is that the goverment with the NCLB Act has enforced it in a federal scale, which is not necessarily positive. Why? Because the corrective actions imposed to failing schools have not considered the local needs to really correct the perfomance gap between white and black, for instance. The AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) tests are inadequate because the States just cannot provide the proper help to the high number of schools that have missed the test's standards. Just look at the nationsreportcard.gov website, you will see the achievement gap between white and black is far from being eliminated until 2014 as the Act has promised. MOREOVER, the proficiency standards are not uniform among different States, which means that States with higher standards will have more failing schools. Thus, the tests do not show if students below proficiency are actually making strides.

* You say the Act has focused attention on under-served groups, but actually its requirement to evaluate school progress on the basis of demographic subgroups have disproportionately penalized schools with diverse student populations, which stimulates segregation. Take a look on "Policy Analysis for California Education", 2003.

Look at the name, "No Child Left Behind"! It's misleading and intended to make promisses the Act could not keep during these 9 years since it has been passed. Actually after the Act has passed, an opinion poll released in December 2003 found that nearly half of school principals and superintendents view the federal legislation as either politically motivated or aimed at undermining public schools