no child left behind act research paper

• Follow us on Facebook
• Follow us on Twitter
• Criminal Justice
• Environment
• Politics & Government
• Race & Gender

Expert Commentary

No Child Left Behind and education outcomes: Research roundup

Studies analyzing the impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on student and school performance.

Republish this article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

by Margaret Weigel, The Journalist's Resource August 25, 2011

This <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org/politics-and-government/nclb-no-child-left-behind-research/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org">The Journalist's Resource</a> and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.<img src="https://journalistsresource.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/cropped-jr-favicon-150x150.png" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act was intended to promote higher levels of performance in U.S. public education by tying a school’s federal funding directly to student achievement as measured by standardized test scores. Ten years after its implementation, however, research on NCLB suggests that the achievement levels of the nation’s students, teachers and school districts remain significantly below established benchmarks. In August 2011, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, describing the Act as “a slow-motion train wreck,” suspended the requirement that all students be proficient in math and reading by 2014, and invited states to apply for a waiver of NCLB’s proficiency requirements.

The following studies analyze issues related to NCLB, and look at the law’s effects on student and school performance.

“The Impact of No Child Left Behind on Student Achievement”

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management , 2011

Findings: “Our results indicate that NCLB generated statistically significant increases in the average math performance of fourth graders … as well as improvements at the lower and top percentiles. There is also evidence of improvements in eighth-grade math achievement, particularly among traditionally low-achieving groups and at the lower percentiles. However, we find no evidence that NCLB increased fourth-grade reading achievement.”

“Incentives and Test-Based Accountability in Education”

U.S. National Research Council, 2011

Findings: “Test-based incentive programs, as designed and implemented in the programs that have been carefully studied, have not increased student achievement enough to bring the United States close to the levels of the highest achieving countries. When evaluated using relevant low-stakes tests, which are less likely to be inflated by the incentives themselves, the overall effects on achievement tend to be small and are effectively zero for a number of programs. Even when evaluated using the tests attached to the incentives, a number of programs show only small effects.”

“Performance Effects of Failure to Make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Framework”

Economics of Education Review , 2011

Findings: “Using panel data on Maryland elementary and middle schools from 2003 through 2009, I find that the scope of failure matters: Academic performance suffers in the short run in response to school-wide failure. However, schools that meet achievement targets for the aggregate student group, yet fail to meet at least one demographic subgroup’s target see between 3 and 6 percent more students in the failing subgroup score proficiently in the following year, compared to if no accountability pressure were in place.”

“Exacerbating Inequality: The Failed Promise of the No Child Left Behind Act” (PDF)

Race Ethnicity and Education, 2007

Findings: “ NCLB received and continues to receive support, in part because it promises to improve student learning and to close the achievement gap between White students and students of color. However, NCLB has failed to live up to its promises and may exacerbate inequality. Furthermore, by focusing on education as the solution to social and economic inequality, it diverts the public’s attention away from the issues such as poverty, lack of decent paying jobs and health care, that need to be confronted if inequality is to be reduced.”

“The No Child Left Behind Act: Have Federal Funds Been Left Behind? ” (PDF)

Public Finance Review, 2008

Findings: “We find that new federal funding is sufficient to support very low standards for student performance, but cannot come close to funding high standards without implausibly large increases in school-district efficiency… [S]tates have a strong incentive to keep their standards low.”

“Gauging Growth: How to Judge No Child Left Behind?” (PDF)

Educational Researcher , 2007

Findings: “Focusing on the performance of fourth graders, where gains have been strongest since the early 1970s, the authors find that earlier test score growth has largely faded since enactment of NCLB in 2002. Gains in math achievement have persisted in the post-NCLB period, albeit at a slower rate of growth. Performance in many states continues to apparently climb. But the bar defining proficiency is set much lower in most states, compared with the NAEP [National Assessment of Educational Progress] definition, and the disparity between state and federal results has grown since 2001. Progress seen in the 1990s in narrowing achievement gaps has largely disappeared in the post-NCLB era.”

Tags: children, schools, research roundup, campaign issue, youth

About The Author

Margaret Weigel

No Child Left Behind Act

• Reference work entry
• First Online: 01 January 2018
• pp 2537–2540
• Cite this reference work entry

• Roger J. R. Levesque 2  

64 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Barrett, B. D. (2009). No Child Left Behind and the assault on teachers’ professional practices and identities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25 , 1018–1025.

Article   Google Scholar  

Beck, J., & Young, M. F. D. (2005). The assault on the professions and the restructuring of academic and professional identities: A Bernsteinian analysis. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26 , 183–197.

Davidson, E., Reback, R., Rockoff, J., & Schwartz, H. L. (2015). Fifty ways to leave a child behind: Idiosyncrasies and discrepancies in states’ implementation of NCLB. Educational Researcher, 44 (6), 347–358.

Duffy, M., Giordano, V. A., Farrell, J. B., Paneque, O. M., & Crump, G. B. (2008). No child left behind: Values and research issues in high-stakes assessments. Counseling and Values, 53 , 53–66.

Hayes, M. (2015). The differential effect of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) on states’ contributions to education funding in states with binding school district tax and expenditure limitations. Public Budgeting and Finance, 35 (1), 49–72.

Lavery, L. (2016). What parents still do not know about No Child Left Behind and why it matters. Journal of Education Policy, 31 (3), 343–361.

National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: A report to the nation and the secretary of education . Washington, DC: US Department of Education.

Google Scholar  

Neely, S. (2015). No Child Left Behind and administrative costs: A resource dependence study of local school districts. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23 (26), 1–25.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. (2001). P.L.107-110, 115 stat. 1425.

Pool, R. & Vander Putten, J. (2015). The no child left behind generation goes to college: A longitudinal comparative analysis of the impact of NCLB on the culture of college readiness. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2593924 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2593924

Schroeder, M. (2009). No Child Left Behind transfer option: Impact on school site demographics and student achievement. Masters thesis, California State University.

Ward, S. (2015). No Child Left Behind goes to college. Academe, 101 (5), 12–15.

Wong, K. K. (2008). Federalism revised: The promise and challenge of the No Child Left Behind Act . Public Administration Review, 68 , S175–S185.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Indiana University, 302 Sycamore Hall, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA

Roger J. R. Levesque

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roger J. R. Levesque .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Levesque, R.J.R. (2018). No Child Left Behind Act. In: Levesque, R.J.R. (eds) Encyclopedia of Adolescence. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33228-4_738

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33228-4_738

Published : 28 February 2018

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-33227-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-33228-4

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

The Impact of No Child Left Behind on Students, Teachers, and Schools

• Download Brookings paper

The controversial No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) brought test-based school accountability to scale across the United States. This study draws together results from multiple data sources to identify how the new accountability systems developed in response to NCLB have influenced student achievement, school-district finances, and measures of school and teacher practices. Our results indicate that NCLB brought about targeted gains in the mathematics achievement of younger students, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds. However, we find no evidence that NCLB improved student achievement in reading. School-district expenditure increased significantly in response to NCLB, and these increases were not matched by federal revenue. Our results suggest that NCLB led to increases in teacher compensation and the share of teachers with graduate degrees. We find evidence that NCLB shifted the allocation of instructional time toward math and reading, the subjects targeted by the new accountability systems.

We would like to thank Rob Garlick, Elias Walsh, Nathaniel Schwartz, and Erica Johnson for their research assistance. We would also like to thank Kerwin Charles, Robert Kaestner, Ioana Marinescu, and seminar participants at the Brookings Panel conference, a conference at the Harris School of Public Policy Studies at the University of Chicago, and at the NCLB: Emerging Findings Research Conference at the CALDER Center of the Urban Institute for helpful comments. An earlier version of this work was presented by Brian Jacob as the David N. Kershaw Lecture at the annual meeting of the Association of Public Policy Analysis and Management, November 2008. All errors are our own. The authors report no relevant conflicts of interest.

Download the paper →

• Brian Jacob
• No Child Left Behind
• school accountability
• adequate yearly progress
• teacher compensation
• Student Achievement
• disadvantaged students
• federal role in education

• < Previous

Home > Honors Program > Honors Program Capstone Projects > SU Honors Capstone Projects > 694

Honors Capstone Projects - All

The impact of the no child left behind act on american education.

Eva Downing Rippeteau

Degree Type

Honors Capstone Project

Date of Submission

Spring 5-1-2005

Capstone Advisor

Keith Bybee

Honors Reader

Gavan Duffy

Capstone Major

Political Science

Capstone College

Citizenship and Public Affairs

Audio/Visual Component

Capstone prize winner, won capstone funding, honors categories.

Social Sciences

Subject Categories

American Politics | Political Science

This paper explores the role and impact that the federal No Child Left Behind Act has had on public education since its legalization in 2002.

It begins with a history on the evolution of federal involvement in public education. Over time, mounting pressure for theUnited Statesto compete academically on an international level has created a need for all areas of education to become “accountable” for reaching high achievement standards, arriving at the overwhelming reliance on standardized tests we see in public education today. Next, this paper presents four areas of contention surrounding the debate over No Child Left Behind. The issues concern the NCLB standardized testing requirements, the disaggregating of minority students into subgroups to separately measure test scores, the debate over whether Congress is adequately funding states to implement NCLB, and finally how actors in the debate view NCLB’s effect on the balance of federalism. The opinions presented in this paper are largely bipolar and dichotomous, representing politicians and policy-makers in favor of the Act, and teachers and educators against it.

In addition to exploring these dichotomies in a Literature Review, I have conducted several interviews with teachers and educators fromSyracusepublic schools to expand the scope of the controversy. This new information will support my thesis statement, which argues that No Child Left Behind and its focus on how annual standardized testing is not conducive for closing the majority/minority achievement gap. It will also elucidate how teachers, our closest connection to students, feel the Act is working.

This paper will provide a unique discussion of NCLB’s core provisions and who supports/opposes it and contribute new information to the study of public education.

Recommended Citation

Downing Rippeteau, Eva, "The Impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on American Education" (2005). Honors Capstone Projects - All . 694. https://surface.syr.edu/honors_capstone/694

Creative Commons License

Since June 19, 2014

Included in

American Politics Commons

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately, you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.

• Academic Units
• Disciplines
• Dissertations and Theses

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS

Author Resources

• Open Access at Syracuse
• Contribute Material
• Suggest a New Collection
• Renée Crown University Honors Program

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright SU Privacy Policy

The No Child Left Behind Act Review Research Paper

Complexities, institution improvement, problems with standardized tests, recommendations.

The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was conceived in 2001 by the Act if Congress that was initially suggested by president bush immediately he ascended to power. The presidents proposed blue print was what the congress slanted the legislation. Ideally the edict reauthorized numerous federal proposals that leaned towards enhancing the performance of U.S. elementary as well as secondary institutions by heightening the specifications of responsibility for nations, school boroughs, as well as institutions in addition to presenting parents more elastic in selecting the schools in which the children’s will focus.

More so, the edict propped up an accelerated focus on reading and reauthorizing the basic as well as derivative erudition edict of 1965. NCLB is the most modern centralized legislation that enacts the hypothesis of specifications-centered schooling transformation, previously known as result-oriented education, which is anchored on the belief that setting elevated standards and instituting measurable objectives can more probably enhance student’s results in education. The decree contents that the states is needed to construct analysis in elementary expertise to be afforded to all learners in various echelons, in the event that the states had to get centralized bursary for discipline. In this case the NCLB has no obligation to emphasize a state achievement specification; specifications are lay down by independent state, in tandem with the theory of remote administration of institutions, Holland, R (2002).

The attractiveness of NCLB’s dealings is fervently discussed. It is more intricate to analyze the proficiency of the edict per view, since it was employed in all countries hence making it intricate to infer what would have occurred minus the edict. Nevertheless, state evaluation on responsible structures subsisted before NCLB underscore that answerability for results brought about quicker progression for countries that entrenched these structures. Undeviating evaluation of state test achievement prior and after entrenching of NCLB suggests it promising effect. However, fundamental criticism asserts that NCLB could curtail effective instruction and student learning since it may cause states to subordinate success objectives and trigger off educators in teaching the test. A basic supportive claim contents that systematic testing presents statistics that highlights on institutions that are not educating skills proficiently, so that intercession can be made to enhance results for all learners while minimizing the accomplishment fissure for deprived and impaired learners. In the end, the NCLB has not been as promising as it may have been taught. With respect to the report published by reviewers on impacts, suggests that the performance of learners in 12 states proved ineffective. In this paper we evaluate the problems facing NCLB with reference to Florida, Holland, R (2002).

Whereas the effect of the (NCLB) edict continues to unfold across the country, educators as well as child advocates face the intricate task of amplifying how NCLB hurts institution instead of assisting them. Most education reformers, content that NCLB is an elementary punitive edict that hinges on flawed specification exams to label institutions as flops and castigate them with counter productive endorsements, Beghetto, R. (2002). It then must be altered into a supportive law that really triggers off institutional improvement making good on the promise that leaves no child behind. The edict need to re-evaluated and re-authored, especially in regions of analysis and answerability, Eric A H & Margaret E. Raymond (2004).

Teachers and lawmakers associated with this edict require doing basic things. There’s need in sharpening and making popular the critique of the law’s mistake, create a replica that is undeviating for a modern law, and construct a powerful grassroots movement that will convince Congress to refurbish ESEA.

Less funding; NCLB’s less funded endorsement to eradicate all exam-score fissures in 12 years contents that institutions by themselves are more likely to surmount the institutional outcomes of paucity and bigotry. Much as the central leadership has failed to meet the communal, economic, and health-associated requirements of most learners, the NCLB does not mandate practically adequate funding to meet its new necessities. The present day edification appropriation schedule before senate would fund less in respect to the previously insufficient spending echelons by $ 8 billion. However, states are moaning their nastiest predicament as from the epoch of WWII as well as curtailing erudition in addition to communal curriculums required by stumpy revenue learners, Eric A H & Margaret E. Raymond (2004).

The one-size fits-holistic evaluation needs-annual testing in reading and math and intermittent taxing in knowledge and answerability provisions attached to them are unyielding, detrimental, and eventually impractical. They will encourage bad educational practices and deform curricula in elementary forms. As a result, they will subordinate standards for most learners. For instance the analysis demands will bring about subsequent devaluing of non-tried themes like communal studies, music and art. NCLB is centered on all-encompassing erudition. The provisions of the decree are turning large numbers of schools, especially those helping low-income learners, into test-prep schemes, Eric A H & Margaret E. Raymond (2004). The testing administration castigates the educators that desire to get employment in states most impoverished reserved institutions as well as nurturing erroneous observation that nearly all of the countries unrestricted institutions are failing. In the end, NCLB will put into effect lower standards, not elevated eminence scholarship, Beghetto, R. (2002).

Review findings of clusters as the state convention of country law makers imply that three quarters of the state institutions confirmed to be in need of perfection prior to the end of the 1 st decade in the 21 st century, and the result will be subject to increasing permits. In Florida for instance, it has been documented that close to 90 percent of institutions as well as collective regions failed to realize substantive development. NCLB’s punitive test as well as label approach to accountability is the basis for an equally ineffective line of attack to institutional improvement, Crawford J (2005).

The initial stages toward enhancing institutions, regarding NCLB, are by allowing parents to transfer their children to institutions with higher test achievements. Yet this alone cannot warrant the fact that seats will be accessible in classrooms. Florida has registered over 240, 000 students that require radical improvement, while the district asserts it can only accommodate less than 2000 spaces. Partially, this is so since most of Florida institutions don’t make AYP. In regions where particular institutions are touted and some are not, modern edicts might strengthen enhanced course group sizes by moving learners without creating new-fangled competence. The Bush leadership held the axiom of thinking that over crowding didn’t matter a great deal. NCLB does not invest in constructing novel institutions in deteriorating districts, nor does it make prosperous districts unfasten their doors to learners from poor regions.

The convey restrictions are considered to manufacture a requirement that substitute institutional placements and ultimately to transmit funds and learners to money-making restricted institutional corporations through receipts, Eric A H & Margaret E. Raymond (2004).

Building a Reform Campaign

The NCLB edict should be altered in a few years by constructing a powerful alliance among institutional erudition as well as civil rights entities and strengthen our communal rendezvous. Law makers can begin acknowledging the fact that there is a wide public outcry surrounding imperative elements of NCLB: Various state erudition structures are already, focusing on these issues. For instance, the American Association of institutional management opposed NCLB in congress and enhances to work for changes. The yearly delegate convention of the National Education Association (NEA) endorsed a series of resolutions opposing elevated stakes trying and business for alteration in NCLB. The organization has passed decrees that would minimize some of NCLB’s more harmful effects. The NEA has at the same been proposing a lawsuit NCLB since it is an unsponsored directive. Educators can assist to marshal the society in support of change. Teachers fastidiously require reaching out to parents that are more probable to turn to educators for information. Guardians can articulate convincingly in public.

There have existed divergent opinions regarding regulated testing as yardstick for analyzing enhances educators to educate a marginal cluster of expertise that will enhance test performance unlike focusing on deeper comprehension that is readily channeled to similar anomalies. For instance, if the educator knows that all the queries concerning math exams are undemanding adding up calculations (e.g., 3+5 = 8), then educators may not put in any class time on the practical functionalities of adding together, in the sense more time will be accessible for the material that is analyzed on the test, Crawford J (2005). Nevertheless, many educators that perform ‘educating to the exams’ relatively misrepresenting the erudition results the exams are inclined to determine. Regarding two state exams Florida and Michigan) as well as the State Analysis of Erudition Progress (NAEP) nearly 60 percent of 8 th graders missed math word complexities that needed an application of the Pythagorean theorem to subtract the remoteness flanking two points, National Education Association (2003).

Various scholars have blamed low achievements tempo on educators who fittingly expect the content of the exams, although incorrectly assumed each exam would present rote information expertise items unlike well- developed, higher-order items, Crawford J (2005). The culture of assigning all learners similar exams, under similar circumstance, has been blamed for intrinsic ethnic partiality since divergent cultures may value diverse skills. This might also clash with the individuals with Deformities Erudition Act (IDEA) that underpins that institutions must lodge impaired learners. For instance, it is conventional for disabled learners to read exam substances vocally. Nevertheless, regarding the NCLB- authorization exams, a cluster of blind learners had their scores invalidated since the trying procedure did not exclusively make for exam readers to articulate, National Education Association (2003).

The ultimate objective of the No Child Left Behind demands that all learners should be able to achieve proficient status by 2014. Because most teachers mull over that objective impracticable, they expect it to be abolished, this would subsequently curtail the stipend to get concern about the subordinate achievers. In essence the decree ensures that more shortcoming learners will be left auxiliary behind, National Education Association (2003). No Child Left Behind rebuffs the imperative of all communal policy except institution improvement. The edict insists that institutions modifications alone can acquire widespread adeptness. Although insufficient institutions are only some of the reasons that disadvantaged learners perform inadequately, Lynch, Robert L. (2006).

They also have superior health anomalies. With respect to their backgrounds that border top crime neighborhoods as well as more inexpensively secure family circle. Change institutions more likely owing to deficiency shelter as well as rent quicker than their parent’s earnings. Research shows that there exist better as well as worse institutions and superior educators. It is also true that deprived children pass in exams more than those who emerge from affluent backdrops. Yet the NCLB has brought about these apparent realities into delusion that educators can eradicate socioeconomic disparities flanking children essentially by trying harder, Crawford J (2005).

The NCLB has brought about institutions as the chief cause of American dissimilarity—in erudition accomplishment, thus in the labor market and collectively in life—creating disparagement between educators who are anticipated to function on the hypothesis that is explicitly counterfeit. Due to this rationale, many enthusiastic and talented educators are departing the line of work, Eric A H & Margaret E. Raymond (2004). In conclusion the central government will demonstrate incapable of micro running that nations 100,000 unrestricted institutions. In a nutshell the collapsing of the NCLB should trigger president Obama to re-affirm what erudition functions stay put for a contemporary management.

The comeback to the corrective nature of the NCLB must leverage by the acknowledgment that a grave need is required for helpful institutions, especially for those institutions that hand out societies of color and inexpensively disenfranchised relatives. Resistance to NCLB does not imply opposing responsibility. The implicit is that the edict should be employed to champion for a channel that will advance reliable liability that assists improved learners and institutions, Lynch, Robert L. (2006).

Law makers need to work on various echelons to push responsibility beyond castigatory tests and toward authentic shapes of analysis that support teaching and erudition practices that authentically connect beginners. Achieving this can be realized at institutions echelons by integrating students and educators with parents and societies to implement portfolios, exhibitions, student-led conferences in addition to other assessment approaches that augment authentic improvements in humanizing and erudition. Most prominently, educators must employ powerful formative evaluations that present precise, useful feedback to educate learners.

Whereas this will be an intricate affair in the façade of elevated-stakes exams, there exist institutions and regions around nation working in this route, Cohen, L.G. & Spenciner, L.J. (2008). For the efforts employed at the local as well as nationwide echelon to make the best out of an ugly scenario to succeed, the congress is under obligation to overhaul the centralized proclamation. Schooling must work to make corrections on ESEA or stipulate a latest law that essentially supports high tech eminence erudition to all. What should be demanded therefore is the fact that the centralized as well as the state leadership should present equitable funding to all learners. What is also needed is the law that does not punish institutions, teachers, or learners for anomalies they have no capacity to correct, Cohen, L.G. & Spenciner, L.J. (2008).

The edict should be transformed from that which relies elementarily on standardized tests to that which encourages quality analysis and promotes better instructional ethnicity in classrooms. The congress is therefore required to curtail the quantity of obligatory examinations, disallow the employment of elevated stakes taxing for commencement or grade endorsement, and persuades institutions to center on the use of multiple forms of analysis. To help educators enhance their classroom analysis procedures, money should be appropriated to cater for this. Collective democracy- rural parents, teachers, learners as well as other residents working collectively to make policy decisions regarding institutions should be at the nucleus of public institutions answerable system, National Education Association (2003). Superlatively, in rank regarding learners accomplishment would come elementarily from learners classroom work. This statistics would be pooled with other imperative academic as well as non academic information that concern schools to make decisions about discipline programs and apprentice development. Educators as well as parents would collaborate to determine the regions on which to center enhanced efforts. Wiggins, G & McTighe, J (2004)

Correspondingly, the sanctions exhibited by NCLB demands monumental variations and educational enhancement approaches. Motivating parents as well as learners to flee institutions and also by halting most of these institutions will not improve erudition. It should be acknowledged that institutions with adequate reserves and are not doing nice work in addition to supplementary support should not be enhanced to continue misinforming learners. Maintaining weight on low-abiding institutions will unquestionably augment a huge collection of thorny matters, Eric A H & Margaret E. Raymond (2004).

Wiggins, G & McTighe, J (2004) Comprehend by Design, version two.

Eric A H & Margaret E. Raymond (2004). Does institutional answerability lead to enhanced learners functionalities? Periodical of Policy evaluation and administration.

Cohen, L.G. & Spenciner, L.J. (2008) Analysis of learners & teenagers with Special requirements.

Ryan, J (2002) The Perverse incentives of NCLB edict.

Crawford J (2005) NCLB: Misconstrued line of attack to institutions Answerability for English Language Students. State Association for Dual Erudition.

Trickey, H (2007) No Child Left on the precincts of Dodgeball game? CNN.com.

Lynch, Robert L. (2006) NCLB Edict wrongly left the arts behind.

National Education Association (2003) Cuts Leave More and More Public School Children Behind.

Beghetto, R. (2002) Scientifically Oriented Review. ERIC Clearinghouse on Erudition Administration.

Holland, R (2002) Critics are numberless, although edict has concrete societal support. Institution.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, March 13). The No Child Left Behind Act Review. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-no-child-left-behind-act-review/

"The No Child Left Behind Act Review." IvyPanda , 13 Mar. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/the-no-child-left-behind-act-review/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'The No Child Left Behind Act Review'. 13 March.

IvyPanda . 2024. "The No Child Left Behind Act Review." March 13, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-no-child-left-behind-act-review/.

1. IvyPanda . "The No Child Left Behind Act Review." March 13, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-no-child-left-behind-act-review/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The No Child Left Behind Act Review." March 13, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-no-child-left-behind-act-review/.

• Edict of Nantes 1589
• The Age of the Gods in Japan and the Reform Edict of Taika
• Economic Situation of the Later Roman Empire
• Early Childhood Philosophy of Learning
• Federal/State Policy Influences: NCLB Act
• Teachers’ Perceptions on the Effects of NCLB
• NCLB Improves Student’s Performance
• "Patriotism" by Yukio Mishima Literature Analysis
• Edicts From the Qianlong Emperor
• No Child Left Behind Act Review
• US Political Science: Constitution
• Political Culture Theory and Classification
• Michael Mann’s Genocide Argument and Rothschild’s Security Analysis
• Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms. American “Civil Religion”
• Change in American Foreign Policy