No Child Left Behind: The Very Good, the Not Good, the Ugly

By William L. Librera, Commissioner of Education

The Very Good

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) signed into law on January 8, 2002 is a very good law because its goals for educating all children are excellent. For too long, populations of students such as special education and limited English proficient (LEP) children and their academic achievement have been unreported and generally very low. Additionally, unacceptable differences exist in achievement between majority students who are usually white, as well as middle class, and students of either color or lower socioeconomic status. Nationally and in New Jersey, much work needs to be done.

In New Jersey, we have worked with the State Board of Education to increase the rigor of our Core Curriculum Content Standards, originally adopted in 1996. States are also required to assess their standards in language arts and mathematics in grades 3-8. New Jersey has aggressively begun developing new tests to meet this requirement within a designated timeframe. In this first year, the federal government has supported NCLB developmental initiatives with additional aid.

The Not Good

Unfortunately, the history of federal government support for education in terms of fully funding its legal commitments has been disappointing because states rarely receive the money to which they are entitled. Therefore, we are understandably skeptical about the promises that have been made to implement NCLB over the next decade.

The principal area of concern, however, is the reporting system mandated by NCLB. There are 41 decision points that determine Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), a key component of NCLB. If a school does not meet adequate yearly progress for two consecutive years, it is labeled as a school in need of improvement. A school has no more than four years to improve without severe sanctions despite the fact that the low performance of one or more students may be the cause of performance falling below progress goals in one subgroup. This is not realistic given the fact that some subgroups have historically performed at lower levels. In the private sector, how many companies or organizations draw conclusions about their overall performance when one part out of 41 divisions is under-performing?

Because of the problems created by this “all or nothing at all” approach, New Jersey has more than two-thirds of its high schools in warning status because at least one of its subgroups has not met state proficiency standards. Based on preliminary data, New Jersey’s percentage of high schools on warning status is similar to that of other states in the country. Like these other states, we have some of our finest high schools on this list. These schools are among the strongest schools in the country.

Educators recognize that all schools need to assess improvement efforts in order to meet the challenges of raising achievement levels of all students so that they can compete in an increasingly global economy. We need the resources, mostly in the form of time, to do this important work.

The Ugly

The worst part of this well-intentioned legislation, that contains a number of counterproductive strategies and timetables, is the conclusion invited by some of the labels associated with NCLB. Schools that have groups of students performing below state standards need to work to improve the performance of those students. In no way are they “failing” schools, just as a person who fails to get to work on time for some days in a work year is not a failure.

Labels have a way of interfering with important work because they distract us from the important work that we do. We know we need to focus on all of our students, especially those who have historically performed below standard and have previously been exempted from assessment reporting. That work is critical to all of us, and we must remove the obstacles. We are confident that we will reach the excellent goals of NCLB, and we will continue to work with the federal government to improve the timetables and the implementation strategies.