English

The negative impact of the ‘No Child Left Behind Act’

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 was created for the purpose of improving learner achievement by raising education standards across schools around the country. President George Bush who signed it in to law hoped to create more learning opportunities for young students and close the achievement gap (Bush, 2009). In his speech at Kearny School where he had visited, Bush lobbied for the support of the same law called upon the stakeholders to keep the law strong. While a good law should have shined the path towards the liberation of the young learners, this one seemed to require support for its survival.

There are various reasons why the law failed to receive the support it demanded (Markowitz, 2018). To begin with, they viewed as being too demanding and authoritative towards teachers and the various schools. In their article, Dee et al. (2010) observe that the No Child Left Behind Act placed a very high requirement for instructors, leaving no room for their adjustment. According to the law, the teachers were expected to hold at least a bachelor’s degree in teaching. It also required them to meet the standards placed in the state testing criteria for them to be allowed to teach above the 200/2006 school year. Without meeting these, the law determined upon the discontinuation of the professional from service until a time when they met the standards.

As one would be expected, many teachers were not impressed with the law. Grissom (2015) observes how the law not only burned the lot out, but also left them feeling undermined and demotivated. Grissom (2015) cites an assessment carried out by Sean Nicholson-Crotty and peers evaluate data they gather from the federal Schools and Staffing Survey, which spanned between 1994 and 2008. Over this time, they examine teacher-grade satisfaction, job satisfaction and obligation, including how the law has affected their stance. Crotty and peers observe that the No Child Left Behind Act affected teacher commitment to their jobs. According to them, by 2008, 77% of the instructors wished to retire late compared to 65% in 1994 (Grissom, 2015). The idea of having instructors discontinued from their careers until they meet the specified requirements also left many aspiring teachers with little hope to work as they pursue further education.

The issue with heightened pressure on schools was defined by the Acts standards of student ‘proficiency’ by the 2013/2014 year. This demanded schools to have helped learners achieved higher proficiency levels by then, as they were all expected to produce proficient learners, thus demonstrating academic progress. In the event that they failed to meet these specifications, the school’s district was mandated to step in and provide aid to the parents and students of the institutions, in addition to heightening disciplinary measures as defined by federal policy. Penalties included the state deciding if to take over if no improvement was made. School administrators and their teachers felt the amounting pressure and were equally demoralized by the event.

In their article, Bleiberg and West (2013) observe how the new law forgot to include the special education students. They believe the reason was led by the challenge that challenges that exists with assessing this group. According to them, there exists a major challenge in measuring the progress of a disabled child with severe cognitive disabilities. As such, disabled children are often left behind because they do not have any means of achieving proficiency, neither does it improve their social-emotional outcomes. The education law failed to come up with ways to help this special group of kids, thereby leaving them at the mercies of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) as well as relying on the Minority Students Association Network.

Just like the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the No Child Left Behind Act currently faces funding problems even though the government had pledged to cover the entire cost. According to Dee et al. (2010), the Act’s whose initial estimate budget was $7 billion for 7 years is now underfunded as the state issues only four million dollars that go towards aiding states with creating and implementing the tests. Schools are then left with the burden of sourcing for remaining deficit, which obviously comes from the parents. There is yet a sign of hope to this matter.

Even so, there are those who believe that the Act has left a positive impact. Whitney and Candelaria (2017) argue that the law helped them achieve adequate yearly progress by citing the 2005 results of the National Assessment of Education Progress. In 2001 and 2005, nine-year-old learners indicate progress in their reading skills, something the former policy had failed to realize. The authors also note that the accountability level in schools has improved, with this, in addition to the new teacher requirement standards contributing to this positive effect. Even so, there was a racial disparity as Hispanic and Black children did not perform as well as their White counterparts (Jennings and Lauen, 2016).

The solution to the negative impacts of the No Child Left Behind Act is have some parts reviewed, in order to create room for adjustment which should be based on research-based education. There is a call for the scrapping of the law, which should be replaced by a more meaningful one. However, the positive impacts of the Act are proof that it has lived its cause, which helps with creating flexibility for state and local agencies as they lobby for its support. It means that scrapping it would only restore the former environment in schools, which saw children perform poorly. For this reason, there is need to consider the areas that require improvement, such as restoring teacher morale and motivation, which would improve their commitment. There is also needed to include parent options in the learning process of their children. The fact is motivation births motivation, which is an essential aspect in teaching. As for the budget issue, the state needs to reconsider its promise and consider what departments can function with a lower budget in order to cut from them and contribute more to education.

The No Child Left Behind Act is a 2002 education law has been through thick and thin as its efficiency has been tested through time. With its objective of improving learner outcome and creating opportunity for all students, the law has proved its effect on the education sector. Even so, it comes with many negative impacts that leave its existence and value under contention. Many deem it necessary to scrap it off and have a new law effected. However, it has struggled to meet its intention, and as such, should be supported in all ways possible to give it the chance to keep improving student academic outcome.

References