The Effects of NCLB on Public Schools in the United States

1. The Effects of NCLB on Public Schools in the United States Jerriann Cochran Inquiry Project

2. Stem Questions 1. Has student achievement on the ACT and NAEP improved? 2. Have there been instances of testing corruption since NCLB? 3. Do students in private schools score higher on the SAT and ACT than those in public schools? 4. How has spending on standardized testing changed since NCLB?

3. History • NCLB (No Child Left Behind act) was signed into law in 2002 by George W Bush. • Considered the largest change in federal education policy since 1965. • Required states to adopt accountability systems based on minimum competency testing in order to have funding. • States must meet AYP (Annual Yearly Progress) or face possible funding sanctions or state takeover. (Reback 1)

4. Testing&Results • The Center for Educational Policy reports that student performance on State Based tests has steadily risen since NCLB. (Jennings 1) However, this does not hold true for national exams such as the ACT, SAT and NAEP. NCLB has resulted in students taking many more tests. In 2002, 19 states had annual testing in Mathematics and Reading. By 2006, every state required annual testing in Mathematics and Reading. In 2008, testing in Science was required. (Jennings 2)

5. NAEPNational Assessment of Educational Progress NAEP scores following three years after NCLB enactment showed: • 4th grade reading scores remained flat with only 31% at or above proficient. • 8th graders at or above proficient fell 2% • Math proficiency for 4th graders climbed but stayed the same in 8th graders. (Fuller 268) • There is no evidence on the NAEP of improvements in literacy since NCLB. (Allan 9)

6. ACT Despite the goal of NCLB to improve educational performance and increase college readiness, the trend in ACT scores is stagnant. The Average ACT composite score for college bound seniors has hovered around 21. The five year trend is stagnant. (Shaeffer 1)

7. Testing and AYP The New York Times reported in December 2012 that nationwide nearly half of all schools did not meet AYP in the 2010-2011 school year. • 81% of Massachusetts schools failed to meet AYP. • 61% failed in Virginia.

8. Private Vs. Public The March 10, 2007 issue of Time magazine reported that data showed that on the SAT ( the most widely used test of developed abilities) private school students outperform public school students. This is attributed to private schools developing more critical-thinking skills rather than the skills required for achievement tests. The data was controlled for socio-economic status.

9. Cost in Time Time is the most lost resource in testing. • A study completed by the Wisconsin Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development found testing required 102 hours of paraprofessionals, 976 by teachers, and 62 hours by administrators. • Guidance counselors spent a greater majority of their time on testing than other professionals. • Some student populations lost as much as 15 days of instructional time. (Frontier 2)

10. Financial Cost • - In 2004-2005 Wisconsin Public Schools spent $14,700,000 on testing. (Frontier 4) • The actual cost of the paper test averages $35 per student nationwide. (Phelps) • NCLB caused an increase of $733 per pupil in states that did not have accountability testing. (Mathews)

11. NCLB and Corruption • High stakes and accountability has caused states to “tweak” numbers. This has caused a discrepancy in state and federal definitions of proficiency. (Cawelti 65) • There have been several instances in the national spotlight of teachers and administrators falsifying tests and changing answers in order to maintain AYP.

12. References Bush's No Child Left Behind Law Leaves Certain Children Behind. (n.d.). Research Schools, Online Courses, Degrees and Careers at Education Portal. Retrieved November 8, 2012, from http://education-portal.com/articles/Bush's_No_Child_Left_Behind_Law_Leaves_Certain_Children_Behind.html Class Struggle - What No Child Left Behind did and didn't do . (n.d.). Blogs & Columns, Blog Directory - The Washington Post. Retrieved November 13, 2012, from http://voices.washingtonpost.com/class-struggle/2010/09/inquest_on_no_child_left_behin.html Cloud, J. (2007, October 10). Are Private Schools Really Better. time, 10. Retrieved December 3, 2012, from http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1670063,00.html DILLON, S. (n.d.). No Child Left Behind Act News - The New York Times. Times Topics - The New York Times. Retrieved November 8, 2012, from http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/n/no_child_left_behind_act/index.html64

13. FairTestPress Release on the 2009 ACT Scores | FairTest. (n.d.). The National Center for Fair & Open Testing | FairTest. Retrieved November 8, 2012, from http://www.fairtest.org/fairtest-press-release-2009-act-scores Fuller, B., Wright, J., Gesicki, K., & Kang, E. (2007). Gauging Growth:How to Judge No Child Left Behind?. Educational Researcher, 36(5), 268-278. Retrieved November 8, 2012, from . http://er.aera.net Cawelti, G. G. (2006). The Side Effects of NCLB. Educational Leadership, 645(03), 64-68. Retrieved November 13, 2012, from the ASCD database. Luke, A., & Woods, A. (2008). Accountability as testing: Are there lessons about assessment and outcomes to be learnt from No Child Left Behind? .. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years , 16(03). Retrieved November 13, 2012, from the QUT Digital Repository database. Phelps, R., & Ph.D.. (n.d.). Estimating the Costs and Benefits of Educational Testing Programs. Education Consumers Clearinghouse. Retrieved November 8, 2012, from http://www.education-consumers.com/briefs/phelps2.shtm Powell, D., Aram, R., Freed, A., & Higgins, H. (2009). Impact of No Child Left Behind on Curriculum and Instruction in Rural Schools. The Rural Educator, 1(1), 19-38. Retrieved November 13, 2012, from http://www.ruraleducator.net/archive/31-1/Powell%20et%20al.%202009.pdf

14. RTI International - News: Study: No Child Left Behind Act Improved Test Scores for Language but Not for Reading, Math in Rural Alabama. (n.d.). RTI International. Retrieved November 8, 2012, from http://www.rti.org/newsroom/news.cfm?obj=37197AC1-5056-B100-31B534B45963EC57 Stagnant, Falling College Admissions Test Scores Reflect NCLB Failure | FairTest. (n.d.). The National Center for Fair & Open Testing | FairTest. Retrieved November 8, 2012, from http://www.fairtest.org/stagnant-falling-college-admissions-scores Reback, R. (Director) (2009, August 12). The Effects of No Child Left Behind on School Services and Student Outcomes. NCLB: Emerging Findings Research Conference. Lecture conducted from National Center for the Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research, Washington, D.C.. Weingarten, R. (n.d.). AFT's Weingarten: No Child Left Behind Was Doomed By Its Flaws - US News and World Report. US News & World Report | News & Rankings | Best Colleges, Best Hospitals, and more. Retrieved November 14, 2012, from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2010/01/12/afts-weingarten-no-child-left-behind-was-doomed-by-its-flaws Zellmer, M., Frontier, A., & Pheifer, D. (2006). What Are NCLB's Instructional Costs?. Educational Leadership, 64(03), 43-46. Retrieved November 13, 2012, from http://www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/template.MAXIMIZE/menuitem.459dee008f99653f