With its overriding emphasis on accountability, testing, sanctions, rewards, and public school choice, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) raises both the hopes and fears of educators concerned with the impact of the legislation on minority groups, on multicultural curricula, and on equity issues within public education. Drawing on evidence from state-level systemic-based accountability initiatives, coupled with a detailed analysis of the legislation itself, this article assesses the potential positive and negative effects of NCLB on diversity, multiculturalism, and equity issues in schooling. After examining the strengths and weaknesses of the legislation, this article concludes that the promise of NCLB to enhance equity and opportunity by reducing the achievement gap will likely remain unfulfilled due to insufficient funding and an overly simplistic definition of the achievement gap.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Almanac Issue 2003-4. (2003, August 29). [Special issue.] The Chronicle of Higher Education, 1(1).
2.
American Federation of Teachers. (2001). Making standards matter 2001. Washington, DC: Author.
3.
Baker, P. (2002, December 15). No Child Left Behind: Implications for the future of Illinois public education. Synopsis of presentation presented at the Illinois Economic Development Conference, Illinois State University, Normal. Retrieved August 22, 2003, from http://coe.ilstu.edu/edpolctr/NCLB.htm
4.
Boyd, W. L. (2003). Public education’s crisis of performance and legitimacy: Introduction and overview of the yearbook. InW. L. Boyd& D. Miretzky (Eds.), American educational governance on trial: Change and challenges (pp. 1-32). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
5.
Buxton, J. B. (2003). Eight lessons from North Carolina. In Implementing the No Child Left Behind Act (pp. 23-26). Washington, DC: Progressive Policy Institute.
6.
Cibulka, J. G., & Derlin, R. L. (1995). State educational performance reporting policies in the U.S.: Accountability’s many faces. International Journal of Educational Research, 23(6), 479-492.
7.
Cohen, D. K., & Spillane, J. P. (1992). Policy and practice: The relations between governance and instruction. Review of Research in Education, 18, 3-49.
8.
Day-Vines, N. L., & Patton, J. M. (2003, February-March). The perils, pitfalls, and promises of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: Implications for the education of African American and other minority learners. T/TAC Link Lines, pp. 1-5.
9.
Deal, T. E. (1985). The symbolism of effective schools. The Elementary School Journal, 85(5), 601-620.
10.
DeBray, E. (2003). The federal role in school accountability: Assessing recent history and the new law. Voices in Urban Education, 1, 56-64.
Fuller, E. J., & Johnson, J. F., Jr. (2001). Can state accountability systems drive improvements in school performance for children of color and children from low-income homes? Education and Urban Society, 33(3), 260-283.
18.
Fulton, D. (2003, August 1). New law shows needs. The News & Observer, pp. N1, N5.
19.
Fusarelli, B. C., & Fusarelli, L. D. (2003). Systemic reform and organizational change. Planning and Changing, 34(3/4), 1-9.
20.
Fusarelli, L. D. (1999). Education is more than numbers: Communitarian leadership of schools for the new millennium. In L. T. Fenwick (Ed.), School leadership: Expanding horizons of the mind and spirit (pp. 97-107). Lancaster, PA: Technomic.
21.
Fusarelli, L. D. (2001). The political construction of accountability: When rhetoric meets reality. Education and Urban Society, 33(2), 157-169.
22.
Fusarelli, L. D. (2002). Tightly coupled policy in loosely coupled systems: Institutional capacity and organizational change. Journal of Educational Administration, 40(6), 561-575.
23.
Fusarelli, L. D. (2003). The political dynamics of school choice. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
24.
Geeway, M. (2003, August 27). Deficit figure more than doubles. The News& Observer, p. A3.
Hamilton, L. S., McCaffrey, D. F., Stecher, B. M., Klein, S. P., Robyn, A., & Bugliari, D. (2003). Studying large-scale reforms of instructional practice: An example from mathematics and science. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(1), 1-29.
27.
Hess, F. M. (2001). Whaddya mean you want to close my school? The politics of regulatory accountability in charter schooling. Education and Urban Society, 33(2), 141-156.
28.
Hickok, E. W. (2003). Changing the terms of our national discussion about education. Basic Education, 47(2), 22-25.
29.
Hui, T. K. (2003, August 1). Wake schools’ABC scores improve. The News& Observer, pp. B1, B6.
30.
Jennings, J. (2003). From the White House to the schoolhouse: Greater demands and new roles. In W. L. Boyd& D. Miretzky (Eds.), American educational governance on trial: Change and challenges (pp. 291-308). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
31.
Jones, M. G., Jones, B. D., & Hargrove, T. Y. (2003). The unintended consequences of highstakes testing. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.
Koschoreck, J. W. (2001). Accountability and educational equity in the transformation of an urban school district. Education and Urban Society, 33(3), 284-304.
Loh, L. (2003, September 4). School guides get a mix of reactions. The Baltimore Sun. Retrieved September 4, 2003, from http://www.sunspot.net/news/education
38.
Macedo, S. (2000). Diversity and distrust: Civic education in a multicultural democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
39.
Manno, B. V., Finn, C. E., Jr., & Vanourek, G. (2000). Charter school accountability: Problems and prospects. Educational Policy, 14(4), 473-493.
40.
Mathis, W. J. (2003). No Child Left Behind: Costs and benefits [Electronic version]. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(9), 679-686.
41.
Minorini, P. A., & Sugarman, S. D. (1999). School finance litigation in the name of educational equity: Its evolution, impact, and future. In H. F. Ladd, R. Chalk, & J. S. Hansen (Eds.), Equity and adequacy in education finance: Issues and perspectives (pp. 34-71). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
42.
Minow, M. (1999). Choice or commonality: Welfare and schooling after the end of welfare as we knew it. Duke Law Journal, 49(2), 493-559.
43.
Mizell, H. (2003, April). The Hayes Mizell reader. Remarks made to the Spring Conference of the Maryland Council of Staff Developers, Columbia, MD. Retrieved August 22, 2003, from http://www.middleweb.com/Hmnclb.html
Olson, L. (2003, August 6). “Approved” is relative term for ed. dept. Education Week, 22(43), 1, 34, 36.
51.
Ravitch, D. (2000). Left back: Acentury of failed school reforms. New York: Simon& Schuster.
52.
Robelen, E. W. (2003, September 3). State reports on progress vary widely. Education Week, 23(1), 1, 37.
53.
Rodriguez v. San Antonio, 411 U.S. 1 (1973).
54.
Scheurich, J. J., Skrla, L., & Johnson, J. F., Jr. (2000). Thinking carefully about equity and accountability. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(4), 293-299.
55.
Scheurich, J. J., Skrla, L., & Johnson, J. F., Jr. (2001, April). State accountability policy systems and educational equity. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
56.
Sclafani, S. (2001). Using an aligned system to make real progress for Texas students. Education and Urban Society, 33(3), 305-312.
57.
Segal, L. (1997). The pitfalls of political decentralization and proposals for reform: The case of New York City public schools. Public Administration Review, 57(2), 141-149.
58.
Spillane, J. P., & Jennings, N. E. (1997). Aligned instructional policy and ambitious pedagogy: Exploring instructional reform from the classroom perspective. Teachers College Record, 98(3), 449-481.
59.
Stecher, B. (2001). The effects of the Washington education reform policies on school and classroom practices, 1999-2000. Politics of Education Bulletin, 25(1), 5-14.
60.
Sunderman, G. L. (2003, April). Federal-state relationships and the implementation of No Child Left Behind: First impressions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
61.
Tyack, D. (1990). “Restructuring” in historical perspective: Tinkering toward utopia. Teachers College Record, 92(2), 170-191.
Vergari, S. (Ed.). (2002). The charter school landscape. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
67.
Walsh, M., & Sack, J. L. (2003, February 5). Suits contend officials fail to obey ESEA. Education Week, 22(21), 1, 13.
68.
Ward, M. (2003, September 5). No child left behind: Charting North Carolina’s course. Address made at the First Friday Forum, College of Education, North Carolina State University, Raleigh.
Wong, K. K. (1995). The politics of education: From political science to interdisciplinary inquiry. In J. D. Scribner& D. H. Layton (Eds.), The study of educational politics (pp. 21-35). Washington, DC: Falmer.
