The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and aimed to improve educational equity and outcomes for students from lower-income families. NCLB required annual student testing, "adequate yearly progress" targets, and interventions for low-performing schools. Starting in 2011, the Department of Education offered waivers from some NCLB requirements in exchange for states adopting new academic standards and accountability systems. While waivers allowed flexibility, implementation has proved controversial.

1. No Child Left Behind - Overview
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) is the most recent iteration of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), the major federal law authorizing federal spending on
programs to support K-12 schooling. ESEA is the largest source of federal spending on elementary and
secondary education.
History
ESEA was enacted in 1965 as part of the Johnson Administration’s War on Poverty campaign. The law’s
original goal, which remains today, was to improve educational equity for students from lower income
families by providing federal funds to school districts serving poor students. School districts serving
lower income students often receive less state and local funding than those serving more affluent
children.
Since its initial passage in 1965, ESEA has been reauthorized seven times, most recently in January 2002
as the No Child left Behind Act. Each reauthorization has brought changes to the program, but its central
goal of improving the educational opportunities for children from lower income families remains. The
1994 reauthorization, the Improving America’s Schools Act, put in place key standards and
accountability elements for states and local school districts that receive funding under the law. These
accountability provisions were further developed in the most recent reauthorization, the No Child Left
Behind Act.
NCLB and Accountability
Although NCLB covers numerous federal education programs, the law’s requirements for testing,
accountability, and school improvement receive the most attention. NCLB requires states to test
students in reading and mathematics annually in grades 3-8 and once in grades 10-12. States must test
students in science once in grades 3-5, 6-8, and 10-12. Individual schools, school districts and states
must publicly report test results in the aggregate and for specific student subgroups, including low-income
students, students with disabilities, English language learners, and major racial and ethnic
groups.
NCLB required states, school districts, and schools to ensure all students are proficient in grade -level
math and reading by 2014. States define grade-level performance. Schools must make "adequate yearly
progress" toward this goal, whereby proficiency rates increase in the years leading up to 2014. The rate
of increase required is chosen by each state. In order for a school to make adequate yearly progress
(AYP), it must meet its targets for student reading and math proficiency each year. A state’s total
student proficiency rate and the rate achieved by student subgroups are all considered in the AYP
determination.
ESEA Flexibility and Waivers
However, Wisconsin – along with 42 other states, Washington, D.C., a group of California school
districts, Puerto Rico, and the Bureau of Indian Education – applied for a waiver from these targets and
other NCLB requirements from the Department of Education. In September 2011, President Obama and
Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced that the administration would allow states to request
flexibility in meeting some of the requirements under NCLB in the absence of the law’s reauthorization.

2. Requirements that the Department of Education offered to waive include states meeting AYP targets
whereby students must reach 100 percent student proficiency by 2014 in reading and math, and
mandated interventions, whereby districts must allow students to attend different schools and offer
Supplemental Educational Services for Title I schools and school districts failing to meet the AYP targets.
The waivers also allowed states to opt out of mandatory interventions for districts failing to meet
requirements to staff only ‘Highly Qualified Teachers’ in their schools. (For more, read New America's
recent report, "It's All Relative: How NCLB Waivers Did--and Did Not--Transform School Accountability.")
In order to receive flexibility through a waiver, states needed to demonstrate that they had adopted or
would implement a series of reforms to their academic standards, student assessments, and
accountability systems for schools and educators. Specifically, the Department required states to
implement 1) college- and career-ready standards and assessments that measure student achievement
and growth; 2) a differentiated accountability system that both recognizes high-achieving, high progress
schools (reward schools) and supports chronically low-achieving schools (priority and focus schools); and
3) teacher and principal evaluation and support systems to improve instruction. A team of peer
reviewers, along with Department staff, studied the proposals, commented on each request, and
offered suggestions to states to help them win approval.
Since February 2012, 43 states and Washington, D.C. have been granted waivers, most of which will be
in effect until the end of the 2013-14 school year, when states will have the opportunity to extend their
waivers for another two years. For states without waivers, NCLB remains in full effect.
States have struggled with implementing the policies outlined in their waiver agreements with the
Department of Education. Just like the provisions in NCLB that the waivers allow states to escape,
reforms states set in motion using waivers have been controversial. Some constituencies have objected
to the new policies. These include the new Common Core State Standards and assessments many states
have adopted; the annual student achievement targets that states have set (which are often different
for historically disadvantaged groups of students); states’ new systems for measuring school quality
and/or identifying schools for improvement; and states’ plans to implement teacher and principal
evaluations based in part on student test scores. Despite these difficulties, it appears likely that waivers
will continue to serve as de facto federal policy until NCLB is reauthorized.
School Improvement, Corrective Action, and Restructuring
Schools that fail to make adequate yearly progress for two consecutive years are identified for " school
improvement," and must draft a school improvement plan, devote at least 10 percent of federal funds
provided under Title I of NCLB to teacher professional development. Schools that fail to make AYP f or a
third year are identified for corrective action, and must institute interventions designed to improve
school performance from a list specified in the legislation. Schools that fail to make AYP for a fourth year
are identified for restructuring, which requires more significant interventions. If schools fail to make AYP
for a fifth year, they much implement a restructuring plan that includes reconstituting school staff
and/or leadership, changing the school’s governance arrangement, converting the school to a charter,
turning it over to a private management company, or some other major change.
School districts in which a high percentage of schools fail to make AYP for multiple years can also be
identified for school improvement, corrective action, and restructuring.

3. NCLB School Improvement Timeline
Years Not
Making AYP
Action
One No Action
Two No Action
Three
Year One of School Improvement
Implement Public School Choice
Four
Year Two of School Improvement
Continue offering public school choice. Implement Supplemental Education Services
Five
Corrective Action
Continue offering school choice and supplemental education services
Six
Restructuring Planning Year
Continue offering school choice and supplemental education services
Seven Implement Restructuring
Source: Elementary and Secondary Education Act
Parent Information, School Choice, Supplemental Educational Services
NCLB requires school districts to provide immediate assistance to children attending schools in need of
improvement, in the form of public school choice and supplemental educational services.
The first year that a school is in school improvement (after it fails to make AYP for two consecutive
years), the school district must offer children the option to transfer to a higher-performing school in the
same district. The second year a school is in school improvement, the district must also offer children
the option to receive supplemental educational services—tutoring and other outside-of-school services
designed to improve academic achievement. School districts must spend up to 20 percent of their
federal NCLB Title I funds on public school choice and supplemental services for students in schools
identified for school improvement.
NCLB seeks to empower parents by providing them with information about how students, schools, and
school districts are performing. NCLB requires that states and local school districts disseminate to
parents annual school report cards describing their student and school performance. Local school
districts must also produce and distribute to parents a report card for each individual school.
Highly Qualified Teachers
No Child Left Behind requires all teachers be highly qualified. All teachers must be fully certified by the
state or have passed the state teacher licensure exam and have a license to teach in the state. In
addition, highly qualified teachers must demonstrate their knowledge of the subject they teach through
certain credentials or test scores. NCLB also requires states to take steps to ensure that low-income and

4. minority students are not taught by teachers who are not highly qualified at higher rates than are non-minority
and low-income students.
NCLB gives parents the right to know about the qualifications of their child’s teacher. Specifically,
parents have the right to know if their child’s teacher meets state licensure and other qualifications, if
the teacher is teaching under an emergency license or other waiver, the teacher’s undergraduate major,
and any graduate degrees he or she holds. Parents also have the right to know if their child is receiving
educational services from paraprofessionals (i.e. teacher aides) and what qualifications those
paraprofessionals have. School districts are obligated to inform parents in writing if a teacher who is not
highly qualified teaches their child for more than four weeks.
Other NCLB Programs
Although public debate around NCLB tends to focus on the law’s testing, accountability, and teacher
quality requirements, NCLB authorizes 45 programs, organized into ten sections, and funded at $25.7
billion in fiscal year 2014.
Title I
The Title I program under NCLB provides funds to local school districts to improve the education of
disadvantaged students from birth through the 12th grade. It is the largest federal program supporting
elementary and secondary education and was funded at $14.4 billion in fiscal year 2014. Funds are
distributed to school districts according to a set of formulas based on the size and characteristics of a
school district’s student population. School districts have some discretion in how they distribute Title I
funds among schools within the district, but the law requires them to prioritize the highest -poverty
schools. More than 50,000 schools (almost half of all public schools) receive Title I funds annually.
Because Title I is NCLB’s largest program and most school districts receive some funding from it, the
law’s requirements for annual testing, accountability, school improvement, and highly-qualified teachers
are all part of Title I.
Published Apr 24 2014
febp.newamerica.net/.../no-child-left-behind-o...
New America Foundation
December 2, 2014 Huffpost Education Karl Gude
Instructor at Michigan State University's School of Journalism teaching infographics and creative
problem solving. Previously infographics director at Newsweek and The Associated Press.
Instead of focusing on the high performing, front-row kids and neglecting the lost, skid-row kids in the
back of the room, teachers can turn their classrooms into fertile ground that nurtures all students.
Here are some ideas that might help:

5. • Create a safe environment where all ideas are celebrated and "different" thinkers are embraced.
• Make sure students evaluate ideas instead of judging them.
• Look for opportunities for play and fun and get students moving.
• Don't just lecture and show slides. Involve your students, have them collaborate, and let them
discover for themselves.
• Offer alternative ways for assessing the various kinds of thinkers in your classes.
• Bring the real world into the classroom. Have experiential projects to drive home the relevance of the
material.
• Employ creative brainstorming techniques in group projects so that everyone's voice is heard.
• Value questions, not answers.
• Get students listening to understand, not to respond.
• View problems from different perspectives and ask open-ended questions. "How can we...?"
• Give second chances. Failure is a step toward success.
• Find new ways to reward kids beyond the grades.
• And finally, care about your students equally, and make sure they know that you care. As Benjamin
Franklin once said, "Want of care does us more damage than want of knowledge."
The system will be slow to change, and I hope that one day it will, but a single teacher can make a
difference right now.
Follow Karl Gude on Twitter: www.twitter.com/karlgude
More:
Teachers No Child Left Behind Distilled Perspective Fostering Creativity Teaching Schools K 12 Education
K 12 Classroom Classrooms Classroom Management Disruptive Students High School