Opinion
Federal Opinion

Time to Kill ‘No Child Left Behind’

By Diane Ravitch — June 08, 2009 6 min read
BRIC ARCHIVE
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

The latest release of scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress provides no evidence for the effectiveness of the federal No Child Left Behind Act. The scores announced on April 28 reflect long-term trends, measuring progress on the same skills since the early 1970s, as opposed to scores achieved on NAEP’s regular, every-other-year tests.

In long-term trends, the achievement gap between white and minority students has hardly budged over the past decade. Although average scores are up for 9-year-olds and 13-year-olds in reading and mathematics between 2004 and 2008, the rate of improvement is actually smaller than it was in the previous period measured, from 1999 to 2004.

See Also

Read “Let’s Not ‘Kill Off’ NCLB,” a response to this commentary from B. Alexander Kress, the senior adviser on education to President George W. Bush during the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act.

It is time to ask whether NCLB should be renewed. I argue that it should not. What will President Barack Obama and his administration do with the law?

During the presidential campaign, candidate Obama hinted at sweeping changes in the No Child Left Behind law. He promised that teachers would no longer be “forced to spend the academic year preparing students to fill in bubbles on standardized tests.” He recognized that subjects like history and the arts had been pushed aside, and that children were not getting a well-rounded education. He pledged to fix the accountability system “so that we are supporting schools that need improvement” instead of punishing them.

To date, the Obama administration has been silent about its plans for reforming No Child Left Behind. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan appears ready to propose a few nips and tucks in the program, but leave it fundamentally unaltered. But it is too late to tweak NCLB. Seven years after it was signed into law, it is clear that the program deserves to be buried.

It is too late to tweak NCLB. Seven years after it was signed into law, it is clear that the program deserves to be buried."

In 2001, the “No Child” legislation was endorsed by large bipartisan majorities in Congress, who agreed that students were not keeping pace with their high-performing peers in other nations. The law requires public schools to test all students annually in grades 3-8 in reading and mathematics, and to disaggregate the test scores by race, socioeconomic status, disability, and English proficiency. The law mandates that all students must be “proficient” in both reading and math by the end of the 2013-14 school year. In a bow to federalism, Congress permitted the states to devise their own standards, their own tests, and their own definitions of proficiency.

Schools that do not make progress toward the goal of 100 percent proficiency for every group are subject to increasingly stringent sanctions. In their second year of failing to make what is called “adequate yearly progress” for any group, failing schools have their students given the choice of leaving to enroll in a better public school. In the third year of a school’s failure, students are entitled to free tutoring after school. In subsequent years, the failing school may be converted to private management, turned into a charter school, have its entire staff dismissed, or be handed over to the state.

Results from this multibillion-dollar undertaking have been disappointing. Gains in achievement have been meager, as we have seen not only on NAEP’s long-term-trend report, but also on the NAEP tests that are administered every other year. In national assessments since the No Child Left Behind legislation was passed, 4th grade reading scores went up by 3 points, about the same as in the years preceding the law’s enactment. In 8th grade reading, there have been no gains since 1998. In mathematics, the gains were larger before NCLB in both 4th grade and 8th grade.

In the latest international assessment of mathematics and science, released this past December, U.S. students again scored well behind students in Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, and Taipei. Our 4th grade and 8th grade students recorded small improvements in mathematics, but not in science, where those in both grades scored lower than in years predating No Child Left Behind.

The decline of 8th grade test scores in science from 2003 to 2007 demonstrates the consequences of ignoring everything but reading and mathematics. Because NCLB counts only those basic skills, it has necessarily reduced attention to such non-tested subjects as science, history, civics, the arts, and geography.

The law’s remedies for failing students—school choice and tutoring—have also been a bust. Fewer than 5 percent of eligible students choose to leave their schools, and sometimes those who leave are the ones who are doing well, not the ones who are failing. In many districts, there is often only one school, so choice is meaningless. In some urban districts, there is no better school that is accessible. Many students don’t want to leave their schools, even when a better one is nearby.

Similarly, fewer than 20 percent of eligible students sign up to be tutored, even when the extra help is free and convenient. Most apparently don’t want another hour of schooling, which would mean giving up their after-school jobs and sports. Some studies show that tutored students are not learning any more than those who refused tutoring.

The law’s sanctions don’t work. Few schools have converted to charter status or private or state management. Most prefer “restructuring,” in which the school gets a thorough shaking-up, in some cases with the entire staff dismissed. This has not made much difference either. Contrary to popular mythology, most failing schools continue to struggle, even after everyone has been fired and replaced.

The worst part of the law is its unrealistic demand that all students must be proficient by 2014. No other nation and no state has ever reached this unrealistic goal. Every educator knows that it is impossible. While the goal remains in place, the number of failing schools grows each year. In the past year, nearly 30,000 public schools—35 percent nationwide—were identified as failing. In Massachusetts, which has the highest-scoring students in the United States, nearly half the state’s public schools were rated “in need of improvement.” And an article in Science magazine this past September predicted that nearly 100 percent of all elementary schools in California would be considered failing schools under the law by 2014.

In trying to prove that they are moving closer to the impossible target required by NCLB, most states have adopted very low definitions of “proficiency.” Tennessee, for example, says that 90 percent of its 4th graders are proficient in reading, but the federal testing by NAEP says that only 27 percent are. Most states have endorsed low standards and inflated their scores to meet the law’s nonsensical requirements.

Congress should get rid of No Child Left Behind because it is a failed law. It is dumbing down our children by focusing solely on reading and mathematics. By ignoring everything but basic skills, it is not preparing students to compete with their peers in the high-performing nations of Asia and Europe, nor is it preparing them for citizenship in our complex society. It has usurped state and local control of education. Washington has neither the knowledge nor the capacity to micromanage the nation’s schools.

No amount of tinkering can repair this poorly designed law. The time has come for fresh thinking about the best way for Washington to help improve the nation’s schools.

A version of this article appeared in the June 10, 2009 edition of Education Week as Time to Kill ‘No Child Left Behind’

Events

Reading & Literacy K-12 Essentials Forum Supporting Struggling Readers in Middle and High School
Join this free virtual event to learn more about policy, data, research, and experiences around supporting older students who struggle to read.
School & District Management Webinar Squeeze More Learning Time Out of the School Day
Learn how to increase learning time for your students by identifying and minimizing classroom disruptions.
Recruitment & Retention Webinar EdRecruiter 2026 Survey Results: How School Districts are Finding and Keeping Talent
Discover the latest K-12 hiring trends from EdWeek’s nationwide survey of job seekers and district HR professionals.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Federal From Our Research Center Trump Shifted CTE to the Labor Dept. What Has That Meant for Schools?
What educators think of shifting CTE to another federal agency could preview how they'll view a bigger shuffle.
3 min read
Collage style illustration showing a large hand pointing to the right, while a small male pulls up an arrow filled with money and pushes with both hands to reverse it toward the right side of the frame.
DigitalVision Vectors + Getty
Federal Video Here’s What the Ed. Dept. Upheaval Will Mean for Schools
The Trump administration took significant steps this week toward eliminating the U.S. Department of Education.
1 min read
The U.S. Department of Education building is pictured in a double exposure on Oct. 24, 2025, in Washington, D.C.
The U.S. Department of Education building is pictured in a double exposure on Oct. 24, 2025, in Washington, D.C.
Maansi Srivastava for Education Week
Federal What State Education Chiefs Think as Trump Moves Programs Out of the Ed. Dept.
The department's announcement this week represents a consequential structural change for states.
6 min read
The U.S. Department of Education building is seen behind the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial on Oct. 24, 2025 in Washington, D.C.
The U.S. Department of Education building is seen behind the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial on Oct. 24, 2025 in Washington, D.C. The department is shifting many of its functions to four other federal agencies as the Trump administration tries to downsize it. State education chiefs stand to be most directly affected.
Maansi Srivastava for Education Week
Federal See Where the Ed. Dept.'s Programs Will Move as the Trump Admin. Downsizes
Programs overseen by the Ed. Dept. will move to agencies including the Department of Labor.
President Donald Trump signs an executive order regarding education in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, April 23, 2025, in Washington, as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, and Education Secretary Linda McMahon watch.
President Donald Trump signs an executive order regarding education in the Oval Office of the White House on April 23, 2025, as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, and Education Secretary Linda McMahon watch. The Trump administration on Tuesday announced that it's sending many of the Department of Education's K-12 and higher education programs to other federal agencies.
Alex Brandon/AP