Giovenco 1

Gabby Giovenco
Mary Monsour
Foundations of Education
SED 110 01
November 23, 2014

NCLB
Education functions as a means of establishing a knowledge base in students
through active testing, and observations of students progress. Education laws like, No
Child Left Behind (NCLB), or the reauthorization of Elementary and Secondary
Education act (ESEA) influenced changes in education. As federal laws, these acts are
mandated nation wide in the United States. These laws provide changes to the
educational system, such as testing standards, and regulations with the hopes of
benefiting students across the country that come from different demographics,
disabilities, or students learning English as a second language.
No Child Left Behind was an attempt at making the school system more
proficient and equal between students that come from the stated different demographics
or disabilities (racial backgrounds, economically suffering, English learners etc.). Many
factors went into the development of NCLB such as standardized testing that focused on
math, and reading to demonstrate improvement in schools. The schools improvements
were a reflection of adequate yearly progress (AYP) that illustrated how students were
progressing in these parts of education. AYP did not just measure the progress in testing;

Giovenco 2
it also took into account graduation rates on a yearly basis. The measure of how
standardized testing progressed or did not, affected the students that graduated (New
America). The AYP also determined the standards of the school, whether it was failing or
not. If the school was not progressing, changes were implemented (New America).
NCLB determined that if a school does not succeed in achieving or meeting the AYP for
two years in row, the school gets marked for needing school improvement (New
America). This is a reflection of the school needing to adjust something to succeed and
NCLB requires the school to take action. The school must draft a school improvement
plan identifying the problems and a plan to resolve the problems. Along with the plan,
the school will be required to use a minimum of 10 percent of federal funds that are
provided through the Title I of NCLB towards teacher development as a means of trying
to provide highly qualified teachers and meet standards (New America). There are more
steps after a third consecutive year of the school not meeting the AYP. After the third
year schools are mandated to go through institute interventions and are identified for
needing corrective action. If the school does not succeed again for the fourth year the
school is recognized for needing restructuring. Fifth year of consecutive failure means
corrective action is taken. Schools have to utilize a restructuring and reconstituting plan,
conversion of the school to a charter or changing management over to a private vendor,
other major changes are optional. From here, after many consecutive years the schools
may go through many major changes with hopes of success (New America).
The act created a 95 percent rate of participation for all students, including
subgroups, in assessments. This participation rate is an idea with the hopes of obtaining
a 100 percent population of proficient students by 2014(New America). NCLB focused

Giovenco 3
on creating alternate assessments for students with disabilities to aide these students in
reaching the proficient level academically. The Bush administration regulated this act in
2001. NCLB was also a reflection of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA) created by the Johnson administration and was later replaced by the
reauthorization of ESEA. The educational system became more productive in the sense
that the goal was not to increase test scores, but to increase the knowledge and
competencies of students. The goal came with the idea of creating a level playing field
for everyone; from minorities to the underprivileged seeing as certain subgroups were
testing substantially lower than other groups. NCLB wanted students to meet equal
standards, to improve, and grow. Standardized testing provided data and information on
these students that allowed for curriculum to later be altered and applied to aide in the
next set of standardized testing for these subgroups. The tests provide the information
needed to solve the problem, or identify the problem along with finding a means to bring
the subgroups test scores up to par.
NCLB implemented many ideas into education; another aspect changed the
quality of teachers. NCLB provided many means for teachers to become more equipped
educators. NCLB actually mandated that 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
according to New Americas article No Child Left Behind- Overview with a focus in
background and analysis. Teachers who know their material are crucial to a students
successful education. Educators must be able to produce evidence (credentials) for their
knowledge of the subject they plan to teach (New America). By schools having highly
qualified teachers instead of the bare minimum certified teachers, NCLB provided

Giovenco 4
students with another chance to progress. Teachers to students are a vital resource to
success. Looking back at the progression of education in my own years, I can say that I
learned from personal experience that a qualified teacher makes a world of difference in
the education a student gets. A highly qualified teacher means the students have a
chance of getting a better education. A teacher acts as the tight rope that an acrobat will
walk on. A quality rope can guide the acrobat, lead them to the end, to success. A strong,
qualified teacher can do the same for students, but lead them towards graduation.
The reauthorization of ESEA replaced the NCLB act of 2001 because the act had
expired and certain changes needed to be made. The reauthorization of ESEA changed
this form of education. ESEA improved aspects of the same idea that NCLB
encompasses. It tried to even standards as well, instead of everybody having to meet the
same goal statewide; growth was based on an individuals productivity in a subject, or
on tests. States created individual standards, or common core state standards to measure
growth. Common core creates achievement targets, similar to the idea of AYP. Progress
is monitored through the common core assessments using approved models. Along with
common core state standards, ESEA mandated that schools prepare students for college
and to be career ready. NCLB did not instill these ideas in school curriculum, which
hampered students. Students would take the standardized tests and the school and
students would progress. Students did not have these aspects in school that taught them
how to be prepared for college or life. In a sense the lack of this curriculum in NCLB
may have deconstructed education. There is no sense in having an education and not
being able to apply it efficiently in life. NCLB just did not prepare students for this.
ESEA however aided in this factor. The act incorporated closing social gaps and helping

Giovenco 5
the students who were not excelling but it also did not hold any students back but pushed
them towards college or careers.
NCLB can be defined as the first attempt to advance education
through standardized testing and equality issued by the government, to help the
underprivileged. The reauthorization of ESEA can be defined as the newer act that did a
similar thing, in a better way. It implemented similar mentalities to that of NCLB, but as
stated before ESEA test results were based on an individuals growth instead of a group.
Both mandates wanted to close social gaps among the subgroups but also focus on the
students who were testing lower than proficient levels. Minority groups were testing
much lower than the non-minority groups; this is where the alternate assessments come
in, to create fairness across the board. The two acts are the same in the sense that they
both want to advance students, creating equal standards and observing their progress.
One focuses on over all growth (NCLB) and does not necessarily prepare students with
the mindset of college and career. The other focuses on individual progress (ESEA) and
prepares students for college and career readiness. Both laws support schools in a
sense because NCLB created a means to monitor progress. The progress then affects
whether the school is being proficient or not according to the schools AYP. Based on
this information a school can be helped or provide accommodations/options for the
students. NCLB created many opportunities for all students, in this way the law
supported the school system (New America). NCLB and the reauthorization of ESEA
also, as stated before, influenced the increase in highly qualified teachers. Highly
qualified teachers support a productive school; through this aspect the law supported the
progression of students. The law "deconstructs" schools in the sense that these laws

Giovenco 6
almost restrain students from gaining all they can from a subject because of the pressure
that is created by standardized testing. Not only the pressure but standardized test do
focus on a goal, goals can be met, and goals do not do anything to challenge students
who may be gifted (Stephen & Riggsbee).
Although NCLB is met with many differing opinions, the structure and system
did increase success among the subgroups (New America). These standards also create
mastery skills when implemented with quality teachers, and state support. The goals
may be met and the subgroup gap closes, achieving the goals of NCLB. In this sense
there is deconstruction with the occurrences of the tests and standards, but the same
ideas also support school. The law "supports" schools in another sense though because
the government often funds schools based on their progress. It also prepares students to
go on to college and then careers, at least in the context of the reauthorization of ESEA.
The law also supports the school because as a school its job is to better students
knowledge.
Through the governments creation of ESEA and NCLB the mandates advocate for
pushing students to do better, it is the primary goal. The law has made it so minority
students become priorities, so in a sense the law is supporting students in their efforts to
succeed. Both acts were done to hopefully better the educational system and the
proficiency of students we have today.

Giovenco 7
Works cited

"Background & Analysis." Background & Analysis. N.p., 24 Apr. 2014. Web. 23
Nov. 2014.
Ornstein, Allan C., Daniel U. Levine, and Allan C. Ornstein. "No Child Left
Behind Act." Foundations of Education. 11th ed. CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning,
2011. 383-88. Print.
Ravitch, Diane, and John Chubb. "The Future of No Child Left Behind Education Next." RSS. N.p., 2009. Web. 23 Nov. 2014.
Stephens, Kristen, and Jan Riggsbee. "The Children Neglected by No Child Left
Behind." Duke Today. N.p., 1 Feb. 2007. Web. 25 Nov. 2014.