This is a Trident University course (MAE506), Module 1 Case, Elementary and Secondary Education Act: No Child Left Behind. It is written in APA format, has been graded by an instructor (A), and includes references. Most higher-education assignments are submitted to turnitin, so remember to paraphrase. Let us begin.

1. Running head: ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT 1
Elementary and Secondary Education Act: No Child Left Behind
A Review of the Literature
Trident University International
Orlanda Haynes
Author Note
This paper was prepared for MAE 506 Module 1 Case
August 2012
Taught by Professor Anna Lint

2. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT 2
The purpose of this paper is to complete module 1 case assignment. Literature is presented
using the following headings: general provisions, origin, and function of the No Child Left
Behind (NCLB) Act (Title 1); the impact of high-stakes accountability on teachers’ roles and
tasks; and recommendations.
General Provisions, Origin, and Function of the NCLB Act (Title 1)
Provisions of the NCLB Act emphasis state and federal administrative and regulatory
requirements such as the accountability measure for educators, schools, and districts. The act
stipulates that all parties are responsible for the outcomes of students’ learning. It also provides
parents and students with schooling alternatives. That is, schools that receive Title 1 funds must
make adequate yearly progress (AYP); if not, parents can opt to change school within the district
at its expense. AYP is determines by annual standardized test scores. For example, each grade
level must be greater than the prior year. The act provides for a five-year benchmark.
For example, schools that fail for two years consecutively are labeled “in need of
improvement, and a two-year improve plan must be implemented. Third year failure, schools
must offer free education services (tutoring, etc.). Fourth year failure, the school is labeled as”
requiring corrective actions (staff replacement, among others), and plans to restructure the entire
school occur in the fifth year of failure (closure, convert to charter school, private school, or state
education agency control). If the school still does not meet the AYP in the sixth year, the plan is
implemented. In addition, state education agencies are required to assist homeless children with
enrollment, attendance issues, transportation, and health care services as well as establish an
office of coordinator (homeless assistance), among other requirements (Valencia & Buly, 2004;
Valli & Buese, 2007; Perna & Thomas, 2008).

3. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT 3
President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Elementary Secondary Education Act into law in
1965. It is the United States federal education law that describes state and federal requirements
for operation of American’s public schools. The Bush Administration, on the other hand, signed
the NCLB Act of 2001, into law (2002). The principle function of this act is to eliminate
achievement gaps between poor and wealthy students. Research suggests that achievement gaps
exist in the areas of reading, math, and science. As mentioned, educators, schools, and districts
are accountable for bridging these gaps.
Students’ standardized test scores are used as measures of AYP. Standardized testing refers
to testing done in a predetermined manner (same condition and time); therefore, results are
attributed to students’ performance rather than procedural issues (administration and/or test
format). As such, outcomes are comparative to those of any schools, districts, or states.
Consequences that are attached to the results is what give rise to the definition of high stakes or
low states testing—not the test itself. For example, low stakes tests may only be relevant to
students and parents, but high states tests have far greater consequences attached.
Results, for example, could have negative or positive affects on entire schools, districts, and
states. The AYP is a good example of high states accountability (Wilde, 2004; Popham, 1999;
Resnick, 2004; Sutton & Seifert, 2009; http://www.harborhouselaw.com/articles/highstakes.
togut.htm#1; McBrien & Brandt, 1997; Annual Yearly Progress, 1999). Critics argue that high-
stakes accountability (teachers’ roles and tasks) is unreasonable, and that it sends conflicting
signals to education administrators and teachers. For instance—rather than focusing on the
diverse needs of students—administrators are urging teachers to divert all efforts toward
improving standardized test scores. According to some researchers, that means some students

4. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT 4
will not get the help they need because, in most cases, it take longer than one year (AYP) to
adequately address learning gaps with some students, especially those suffering from reading and
writing deficiencies. Research suggests a large number of teachers find this task impossible.
They also claim that pedagogy approach to teaching and learning have been altered to reflect
standardization and control, and that student/teacher relationships are more strained than usual,
less conducive to learning, and time restraints are far greater since the AYP provision was
implemented (McTighe, Brown, 2005; Valli & Buese, 2007).
Recommendations
Critics claim that curriculum development should not only focus on bridging achievement
gaps but also its affects on both students and teachers. They emphasize that well-developed
curriculum considers the effects of unintended changes and consequences; it is also flexible,
inclusive of different learning principles and alternative assessments, among other factors. High-
stakes accountability measures should be constructed around a holistic approach to learning and
assessment rather than a scientific-liner approach (Valli & Buese, 2007; Perna &Thomas, 2008;
Watanabe, 2000; Valencia & Buly, 2004).
In brief, the ESEA ensures that children attending public schools have access to quality
education resources, and the NCLB Act helps bridge the achievement gaps between poor and
wealthy students. Critics argue that consequences attached to high-stakes testing cause learning
issues for students, instructional barriers for educators, and policy conflicts for education
administrators. Nonetheless, the debate is ongoing, which means a comprehensive solution is
still possible.

5. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT 5
Reference
Faulkner, S., & Cook, C. (2006). Teaching vs. testing: The perceived impact of assessment
demands on middle grades instructional practices. Research in Middle Level Education
Online, 29 (7), 1-13
Annual Yearly Progress. (1999). In Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary (Tenth Ed.)
Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc.
McBrien, L. J., & Brandt, R. S. (1997). The language of learning: A guide to education terms.
Alexandria VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
National Education Association. (2007). The history of the NCLB. Retrieved August 15, 2012
2012, from http://www.nea.org/home/NoChildLeftBehindAct.html
National Education Association. (2006). NEA's positive agenda for the ESEA reauthorization.
Retrieved March 2012 from http://www.nea.org/home/1335.htm
Perna, L., & Thomas, S., (2008). Barriers to college opportunity: The unintended consequences
of state-mandated testing. Educational Policy, 23(3), 451-479
Sutton, R., & Seifert, K. (2009. Educational psychology. (2nd Ed.). In Chapter 1: The
changing teaching profession and you. Retrieved on August 9, 2012, from
http://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Educational-Psychology.pdf
Valencia, S., & Buly, M. R. (2004). Behind the test scores: what struggling readers really need.
Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 27(3), 217-233
Valli, L., & Buese, D. (2007). The changing roles of teachers in an era of high-stakes
Accountability. American Educational Research Journal, 44 (3).

6. Dear Orlanda,
The case assignment of Module 1 is expected to be a discussion of the possible pitfalls and
strengths of the NCLB Act and the impact on the roles and tasks of teachers. You should discuss
the general and detailed aspects of NCLB Act and identify the sources of information to support
your research. Lastly, your paper should be written in a clear and coherent manner according to
the APA manual.
You had a nice approach answering the case assignment. You summarized the NCLB Act and
elaborated on the impact on teachers’ tasks and roles under the Act while presenting your
rational opinion. Your paper discussed the general and detailed aspects of NCLB Act and the
background research in a scholarly manner. In your paper, “… high stakes accountability
(teachers’ roles and tasks) is unreasonable, and that it sends conflicting signals to education
administrators and teachers. For instance—rather than focusing on the diverse needs of
students—administrators are urging teachers to divert all efforts toward improving standardized
test scores” demonstrates the challenge of teacher’s roles and tasks in diverse circumstances.
Overall, your paper is well organized through introduction, body, and conclusion. Your paper is
very informative in summarizing the positive and negative aspects of the NCLB Act including
your analysis of the impact of high-stakes accountability on teachers’ roles and tasks. Your paper
is well written in a clear and coherent in manner in accordance with APA format. I look forward
to reading your future assignments. Keep up the good work! Grade A
Dr. Lint
Anna H. Lint, Ph.D.
College of Education

7. Trident University International
Email: Anna.Lint@trident.edu
"Aspire. Believe. Achieve."
www.trident.edu