One to Leave Behind

December 1, 2006

This month, the No Child Left Behind act is approaching its five-year anniversary. The bill, which was passed in December of 2001 and signed by President Bush on January 8, 2002, included a twelve-year timeline, meaning that we would now expect to be about halfway toward the law’s goals: 100% proficiency in math and reading, and closure of the academic achievement gaps between whites and minorities and between poor and middle-class grade-school students. An assessment of the law’s effects so far, however, makes it clear that we are nowhere near on track, and calls into question whether it ought not to be scrapped immediately and replaced by a more sensible piece of legislation.

Right from the beginning, No Child Left Behind was met with a cold reception. The National Education Association contends that the law’s mandates are unfunded and impossible for states to implement fairly and uniformly. In 2005, it was discovered that the U.S. Department of Education had been paying journalists to comment on the law in a positive light; but where researchers have not been bribed, their assessment of the law’s effects has been overwhelmingly negative.

Schools which fail to meet NCLB standards for two consecutive years are labeled “in need of improvement,” and if they fail to dig themselves out of that hole then they must allow their students to transfer out, and take corrective action by implementing new curricula, changing their staff, and restructuring. The problem is that this legislation, rather than offering extra help to such struggling schools, often makes them even worse off, so that many are unlikely ever to lose their “in need of improvement” distinction. NCLB should reward high-performing schools, but it shouldn’t neglect those most in need of help.

Negative appraisals of NCLB are only increasing as we near the five-year mark. On Sunday, Paul Tough published a scathing criticism of No Child Left Behind in the New York Times Magazine. He called the law “malignant,” and argued that though the goals it contained were “a national undertaking on the order of a moon landing,” the Education Department was not providing states with the resources to get started; they had “quietly given up” on their lofty promises, after making little to no progress. If education is to be equitable in this country, Tough concluded, we will have to try much, much harder, through sustained research and federal dollars.

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, a coalition of school districts in Michigan, Vermont, and Texas decided to appeal their dismissed lawsuit against the federal government, which, if won, would force the Department of Education either to fully fund its mandates or abandon them. That states are still challenging the law five years into its tenure is a telling sign that something different is required.

The Observer believes that the No Child Left Behind act is just one more regrettable piece of evidence that the current administration is dishonest and backwards. Though the goal of universal, equitable public education is a necessary one, the current law is actually an impediment to that ideal, and should be scrapped or dramatically reformed before its fifth birthday. Unfunded mandates, unscientific approaches, and bribes for journalists are abhorrent and should be left behind.