Essay: No Child Left Behind Act

Summary
The paper is fundamental as it looks at the No Child Left Behind Act that was put into practice because the American education system was no longer internationally competitive. The outcome of the challenge is the federal education system function was increased towards holding schools accountable for the academic progress of all students. The implication here is that the No Child Left Behind Act focused primarily on states and schools, so as to boost the performance of different groups of students as a way of fulfilling their education rights. The primary agencies associated with the implementation and benefits offered under the policy are federal government, states and schools. They are encouraged to work as a team, so as to effectively ascertain that students are in the right way and successful.
The programs that assist the No Child left Behind Act to work effectively in terms of funding are the federal education system, the Safe and Drug-free Schools programs and etc. The magnitude and dimensions of the social issue that the No Child Left Behind enumerates that based on the flexibility of NCLB, the policy permits States to require Local Education Agencies and schools to report on additional data elements beyond the Federal requirements, and any State. The services of the No Child Left Behind Act are based on the fact that the modification of combining the Eisenhower Professional Development and Class Size Reduction Program into what is now known as the Improving Quality State Grants program. It is apparent that the policy is significant because it tends to favor the needs of American students in a positive manner. Thus, practicing the services of the No Child Left Behind Act within the American education system is the best route path for the American sector.
No Child Left Behind Act
Introduction
According to Carlson & Levin (2009), the “No Child Left Behind Act” was passed by the Congress with overwhelming bipartisan in 2001 and was signed into law by president George W. Bush on January/8/2002. The Act is looked at as the most recent update to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The No Child Left Behind Act was initiated because the American education system was no longer internationally competitive, as a result, it increased the federal role in holding schools responsible for the academic progress of all students. Thus, the presence of the Act is it put a special focus on making certain that states and schools boost the performance of certain groups of students. The groups in this case entail English-language learners, students in special education, poor and minority children and those that trail their peers. Significantly, the target by the policy is appropriate because the rights of children in terms of attaining the necessary education are put into consideration.
Agency charged with its implementation and benefits offered
The primary agency charged with the responsibility of ascertaining that the needs of children education are adhered to is the federal government. The federal government as an agency ensures that the quality of the public education for all children within the United States and further ascertain that an increase in funding for poor school districts is put into consideration. The federal government also ensures that funding is initiated for the higher achievement for poor and minority students. The implication here is that the federal agency helps students attain gaps by offering all children with a fair and appropriate opportunity to obtain a high quality form of learning (Sadovnik et al., 2013). The agency also emphasizes on the relevance of schools being accountable, flexible, undertake a research based education and offer parents what they prefer for their children.
The other agencies involved in the implementation of the law are the state and schools consecutively. States are required to test students in reading and math in grades 3 through 8 and once in high school. The same has to be done for the English-learners, children from low income families, racial minorities and students in special education. Carlson & Levin (2009), show that the No Child Left Behind Act required that each state ought to bring all the students to the “proficient level” as of 2013-2014 amendments. On the other hand, schools as agencies are required to reach the states set “annual yearly progresses” (Carlson & Levin, 2009). Fundamentally, the federal government, states and schools are tasked with the objective of ascertaining that the needs of children are dealt with effectively and as a result, help students attain their goals in life without any fear or favor.
How the policy and programs created by the policy are funded
According to Sadovnik et al., (2013), funding for major elementary and secondary learning programs have been increase by 40% within the first three years of the Act. Carlson & Levin (2009), enumerates that as of 2005, states and local schools were offered $24.4billion in federal elementary and secondary learning aid. On the other hand, there is funding for Title I which has been increased as well. The implication here is the Title I receives a bigger share, especially during the first two years of the Act’s operation under president George compared to the time frames of president Clinton combined (Sadovnik et al., 2013). Moreover, Carlson & Levin (2009), illustrates that funding for the United States Department of Education under the leadership of the Republicans has increased by 150% under the GOP control of the House. According to Carlson & Levin (2009), the funding for the United States Department of Education has increased from $23billion in FY 1996 to about $57billion in FY 2005.
Apparently, the federal government has increased federal education funding to such an extent that states are having trouble spending all the funds. Title I Grants to Local Agencies is fundamental as it offers supplemental education funding. Funding by Title I is done annually, and as a result, it sensitizes on the relevance of testing, accountability, school improvement and the presence of highly qualified tutors. Olivert (2007), shows that as of 2012, the Teacher Incentive Fund received $299 million and the Transition to Teaching Program got hold of $26 million meant to improve teacher and principal quality. Moreover, Olivert (2007), illustrates that Education Technology State Grants offers funds to states and schools for technology in elementary and secondary schools, whereby in 2010, it was funded $100 million.
There is also the English Language Acquisition Grants Program, which funds states and school districts to develop education and English dialects. Olivert (2007), demonstrates that the English Language Acquisition Grants Program was funded $732 million as of 2012 and its services are also under the No Child Left Behind Act initiated annually. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, there is the Impact Aid program that funds school districts that serve federally connected, to offset school districts’ loss of revenue. Sadovnik et al., (2013), further shows that the Impact Aid program was funded $1.3 billion in 2012 and funds are often distributed directly to schools. Lastly, there is the Safe and Drug-Free Schools program that offers financial help to states and districts meant to counter challenging atmospheres for students (Sadovnik et al., 2013). Thus, huge funding is done after every four years whereas smaller funding is undertaken annually, to ensure that children getting the best form of learning.
The magnitude and dimensions of the social issue that the policy was designed to address
The issue that led to the presence of the “No Child left Behid Act” is that United States apparently lacked an advanced American competitiveness and an achievement gap lacked between the poor and minority students who were more advantaged peers. Fundamentally, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was changed to the No Child Left Behind Act with the objective of helping advantaged children attain the right form of education (Carlson & Levin, 2009). The implication here is that the No Child Left Behind Act was put into effect to ascertain that students in every public school attains the relevant learning objectives while being educated in a safe atmosphere with qualified tutors.
The No Child Left Behind Act has undertaken the initiative of countering problems facing the education sector especially the disadvantaged ones by closing the gap on the basis of ensuring that schools assume responsibility for all students. To attain the set objective of the Act, schools are encouraged to develop assessments in basic skills for all students, so as to receive federal school funding (Ashby, 2008). Fundamentally, the aspects being practiced by the No Child Left Behind Act is appropriate because of its ability to assist children in the United States reach their set goals equally without fear or favor.
Annual Federal NCLB Report Card reporting requirements for Title I, Part A recipients is below.
Federal Data
Requirements for Report Cards for Title I, Part A Recipients Under
No Child Left Behind
Level of Reporting
Disaggregation Subgroups
State-Level
LEA-Level
School-Level
All Stu-dents
Major Racial & Ethnic Groups
Students With Dis-abilities
Limited English Proficient
Econom-ically
Disad-vantaged
Migrant1
Gen-der1
High Poverty Schools2
Low Poverty Schools2
Reading and Mathematics Assessment Data3
Percentage of students tested
Percentage of students achieving at each proficiency level
Most recent 2-year trend data in student achievement for each subject and grade assessed
LEA achievement compared to State achievement
School achievement compared to LEA and State achievement
Accountability Data
Comparison between actual achievement and State\’s annual measurable objectives
Student achievement on other academic indicators used for AYP (e.g., high school graduation rate)
Number and names of LEAs and schools identified for improvement, corrective action, and restructuring
Percentage of schools identified for school improvement, corrective action, or restructuring
Teacher Quality Data
Professional qualifications of all public elementary and secondary school teachers (e.g., bachelors and advanced degrees, licensure)
Percentage of all public elementary and secondary school teachers with emergency or provisional credentials
Percentage of core academic subject classes not taught by highly qualified teachers
The above table indicates that the magnitude and dimension of social issue of the Policy is it is based on the flexibility of NCLB that permits States to require Local Education Agencies and schools to report on additional data elements beyond the Federal requirements, and any State. Therefore, it is indispensable that teachers and administrators have the content that they can trust as they put into practice instructional programs.
Development and evolution of the policy
Brown & Hunter (2011), enumerates that as of January/8th/2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The process entailed reauthorization and offering a major implementation to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Prior to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, education decisions had exclusively been within the hands of state and local administrators. Various modifications have been put into practice, so as to ensure that American students get the best education despite their lifestyle status (Brown & Hunter, 2011). One of the modifications that has been utilized is the combination of the Eisenhower Professional Development and Class Size Reduction Program into what is now known as the Improving Quality State Grants program.
The Improving Quality State Grants program is under the No Child Left Behind Act with the aim of using practices grounded in scientifically based research to prepare, train and recruit the best teachers possible. Brown & Hunter (2011), show that in 1994, there was also the reauthorization of the Act that came to be known as the Improving America’s Schools Act. The Act emphasized on the relevance of undertaking key standards and accountability elements meant for the states and local schools that received funding under the law (Ashby, 2008). The political conditions that led to the introduction of the No Child Left Behind Act is President Bush deep belief in the American public schools. Ashby (2008), illustrates that the other reason for President Bush participation was because of the greater concern of too many of the needy children that were being left behind, despite the fact that nearly $200 billion in Federal spending since the presence of the ESEA in 1965.
To sum up: the paper is fundamental because of its nature to offer the reader a better understanding of how the No Child Left Behind Act came into the limelight. Since its inception, the No Child Left Behind Act has focused on its primary objective of improving the educational opportunities for children from lower income families. Moreover, the relevance of the No Child Left Behind further enumerates that states and schools ought to boost the performance students, so as to ascertain that their objectives are attained.
References
Ashby, C. (2008). No Child Left Behind Act: Education Actions Could Improve the Targeting of School Improvement Funds to Schools Most in Need of Assistance, DIANE Publishing.
Brown, R., & Hunter, R. (2011). No Child Left Behind and Other Federal Programs for Urban School Districts, Emerald Group Publishing.
Carlson, J., & Levin, J. (2009). The No Child Left Behind Legislation: Educational Research and Federal Funding, IAP.
Olivert, D. (2007). No Child Left Behind Act: Text, Interpretation and Changes, Nova Publishers.