Has No Child Left Behind Reduced the Achievement Gap? – An Initial Assessment

McNair Scholar: Anette Soto, Indiana University-Bloomington

Faculty Mentor: Dr. Craig L. Johnson, School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University-Bloomington

Arguably, the single most important federal educational reform at the elementary and secondary school level since Brown v. Board is the No Child Left Behind Act that was signed into law by President George W. Bush in January 2002. The law contains several accountability provisions, wherein according to proponents, schools are now to be held accountable for producing higher test scores. This investigation provides an initial analysis of the impact of the No Child Left Behind Act by comparing high stakes test scores before and after implementation.

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Statement of Problem

1.2 Purpose of Research

1.3 Significance

2.0 Literature Review

3.0 Description of Proposed Research Methods

4.0 Description of Relevant Institutional Resources

5.0 List of References

6.0 Timeline

7.0 Personnel

8.0 Budget

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Statement of the Problem

One of the most vexing problems our nation faces is increasing the performance of African-Americans and Latinos on elementary and secondary high-stakes tests. The fact that, as a group, African-Americans and Latinos (along with Native Americans) score lower on high-stakes tests than whites and Asians is often referred to as the achievement gap. Although over 321 billions of federal dollars have been invested within the past forty years a proven solution has yet to be found.

In 2001 the No Child Left Behind Act was ratified as the Bush administration’s attempt to narrow and eventually eliminate the achievement gap and have every child meet a “proficient” level of education by its goal year of 2014. Now three years into the program there have been many opinions formed and published critiquing the program but never really proving whether the program is actually succeeding as intended.

1.2 Purpose of Research

This research is designed to evaluate the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law. NCLB is the latest major public policy initiative intended to reduce the achievement gap. The purpose of this study is to advance our understanding of the impact of NCLB on the achievement gap. Specifically, since the implementation of NCLB throughout the states, has the gap in high stake test scores between groups changed?

1.3 Significance

NCLB is a major educational reform that is as yet untested and unproven. Our study conducts an empirical analysis to understand the impact of NCLB. Empirical research on NCLB is essential to understanding its impact on student achievement. This study will form an important part of the evaluative literature on NCLB in particular, and major educational reforms designed to improve academic achievement in general.

2.0 Literature Review

“These historic reforms will improve our public schools by creating an environment where every child can learn through real unprecedented flexibility for states and school districts, greater local control, more options for parents, and more funding for what works.”

- President George W. Bush

Since the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 1965 the federal government has spent over $321 billion on the improvement of education yet only 32% of fourth-graders can read at grade level and 68% of those that cannot read well are minority children in poverty. (U.S. Department of Education) The United States also has a greater percentage (20.8) of adults scoring in the lowest literacy level (level one) than other countries assessed. (National Center for Education Statistics) Additionally, “significant gaps of performance continue to exist between racial/ethnic subgroups and between male and female students.” (National Center for Education Statistics)

This existing gap, now commonly known as the achievement gap, has become one of the greatest “education policy challenges” for the American education system. (NGA Center for Best Practices) “An achievement gap exists when groups of students with relatively equal ability don’t achieve in school at the same levels- in fact, one group often exceeds the achievement level of the other.” (Summit Education Initiative) Many of these gaps presently exist and are divided by sex, race, socio-economic status, and most predominantly- race. (Summit Education Initiative)

On January 8, 2002 President George Bush and the United States government pledged their dedication to the improvement of the nation’s education system by implementing “a landmark in education reform”: the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. This law focuses on how to improve the performance of public schools while “ensuring that no child is trapped in a failing school.” This policy is built on the four basic ideals of: stronger accountability for results, more freedom for states and communities, encouraging proven education methods, and more choices for the parents. Higher standards for schools were set while using mandatory standardized testing as a means of accountability. Schools and districts that continually fail to meet set requirements become subject to “improvement, corrective action, and restructuring measures aimed at getting them back on course to meet state requirements.” Parents are provided with the options of enrolling their students in a different school or seeking supplemental services if their designated school falls short of set standards. Districts may also have to provide transportation for students to other schools as a consequence for their lack of improvement. An increase of $600 million in federal funding was provided for the President’s Reading First Plan to help alleviate the devastating illiteracy rate of this nation as well as strengthening the bilingual education programs. The NCLB act allows schools and districts unparalleled flexibility in return for strong accountability in results. Improvement is tested and required until 100% of students are meeting the federal definition of proficiency and no child is being left behind. (U.S. Department of Education)

Analyzing the effects of NCLB nationwide and more specifically at Freedom School, a California elementary school, Leslie Rayburn concludes that “No Child Left Behind is actually going to ensure that millions of American children are left behind as (President Bush’s) countdown to perfection ticks away toward the year 2014.” (Rayburn 6) Freedom School, similar to impoverished schools nationwide, met the state standards for significant improvement but was listed as a failing school according to the Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) ratings of the NCLB. This is not simply a California problem. For example, under NCLB guidelines 87% of Florida schools and 17 out of 19 districts in Delaware were considered failing. If these schools do not meet AYP sanctions two years in a row they are placed under a program that includes offering students the option to transfer schools. These failing schools lose students while others become overpopulated due to the restriction of capacity not being a reason to turn a student away. The fate of a school is being decided by a standardized test. Rayburn concludes that “change takes all, and there is no one-size-fits-all strategy.” (Rayburn 15)

In an effort to test the feasibility of the AYP, Jaekyung Lee investigated, through simulation analyses of Maine and Kentucky schools, how these schools would have met the AYP targets using “uniform averaging (rolling averages)” and “safe harbor” options of the NCLB were applied. These options were provided as statistic stabilizers that would give schools some flexibility on meeting the AYP scores. Lee found that even while using the two options provided by the NCLB, “it does not appear feasible for many schools across the nation to meet the current AYP target within its given 12-year timeline” and suggests policymakers make their goals more realistic.

After the first year of the of the implementation of NCLB the Center for Education Policy that the act “has been successful in putting forth and center the goals of raising student achievement in public schools and eliminating achievement gaps,” but in order to be successful “will need more than federal directives and sanctions.” Although schools and districts reported fiscal problems and a lack of capacity as challenges in meeting what they feel as “stringent requirements,” a greater proportion of eligible students are taking advantage of supplemental services. The report also found that the fear of students fleeing the failing schools has not been proven to be true. Out of all the students that were eligible to switch schools, only 1% did so in 2002-2003 followed by 2% in 2003-2004.

3.0 Description of Proposed Research Methods

This study is an empirical before and after analysis of the NCLB act. The null hypothesis is that the NCLB act has had no impact on Latino and African-American high-stake test scores. Data will be gathered on specific elementary (and secondary) state-level high stake tests. Background data will also be gathered and analyzed on other socioeconomic and demographic variables, along with other relevant information on NCLB, such as “adequate yearly progress” figures across states.

States will be chosen randomly after being stratified based on the proportion of Latino and African-American elementary and secondary school children in the state. The data will be maintained in a database such as Microsoft Access, and will be analyzed using descriptive and non-parametric statistics using a commercial statistical software package such as SPSS-X.

4.0 Description of Relevant Institutional Resources.

At Indiana University, I will have access to computers, printers, plotter printers, the Internet, copy machines, work space and remote access to various data bases and library resources. I will also be given access to statistical software that is necessary to complete my study.

5.0 List of References

Closing the Achievement Gap. NGA Center for Best Practices. Retrieved on May 12, 2004 from http://www.subnet.nga.org/educlear/achievement/index.html

Coming Together to Close the Achievement Gap: A summit County community educational program. Summit Education Initiative. Retrieved on May 12, 2004 from http://www.seisummit.org/achievementgap.htm

Lee, J., (2004, April 7). How Feasible is Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)? Simulations of School AYP “Uniform Averaging” and “Safe Harbor” under the No Child Left Behind Act. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(14). Retrieved May 11, 2004 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v12n14/.

Pinkerton, Elizabeth, Caitlin Scott, Barbara Buell, and Nancy Cober. From Capital to the Classroom: Year 2 of the No Child Left Behind Act. Center for Education Policy. Retrieved on May 12, 2004 from http://www.ctredpol.org/pubs/nclby2/cep_nclb_y2_casestudies.pdf

Rayburn, Leslie. (May 2004) No Child Left Behind. World and I, Vol. 19 Issue 5, p266. Retrieved May 12, 2004 from the ERIC/EBSCO database.

U.S. Department of Education. The Condition of Education in 1999. National Center for Education Statistics (1999-002). Retrieved on May 12, 2004 from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=69

6.0 Timeline:

June 1 – August 6

Week 1:

Research and write background section on NCLB.

Week 2:

Research and write background paper on achievement gap and high stakes testing.

Week 3:

Begin collecting state-level data on NCLB implementation, high-stakes test scores, and socioeconomic demographic data.

Week 4:

Finish collecting state-level data on NCLB implementation, high-stakes test scores, and socioeconomic demographic data.

Week 5:

Construct and maintain data base.

Week 6:

Conduct descriptive analysis using statistical software package.

Week 7:

Conduct non-parametric analysis using statistical software package.

Week’s 8-10:

Analyze data and write up findings.

7.0 Personnel

I will be the sole person working on this project.

8.0 Budget and Requested Research Supplies

ITEM	QTY	PRICE*
Legal Pads	5 (1 package)	$5.50
Copy Card Allowance		$50
Printing Allowance	300 pages	unknown
Color Printer Cartridge (to reduce cost of printing color charts and graphs when needed)	1 cartridge	$30
Computer Paper	1 package	$5
Plastic File Container	1	$12
File Folders	25(1 box)	$10
Highlighters	2 packages	$6
3 Ring Binders (2in.)	3(black)	$8
3 Ring Hole Puncher	1	$4
Rewriteable CDs	Pack of 20	$20
TOTAL		$150.50

* prices are estimates and are subject to change