NCLB and Low-Performing Schools

1. NCLB and Low-Performing Schools The Negative Effects of the Law on Minority Students in “Failing” Schools

2. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Test results from each school must meet the requirements of AYP as determined by NCLB Schools unable to make AYP are labeled as “failing” and “in need of improvement” Failure to meet requirements for 5 consecutive years can result in closure of a school

3. AYP and Mean Proficiency Mean proficiency is the primary indicator for measuring performance Schools labeled as “in need of improvement” begin with lower test scores Prevents schools from showing improvements over time because they have not yet reached AYP

4. AYP and Subgroups • Schools with high-poverty levels and multiple subgroups are more likely to fail AYP (Kim & Sunderman 2005) • Schools can choose which students need to belong to a subgroup • LEP (Limited English Proficiency) subgroup • Inconsistent classification, sparse population, lack of stability, measurement quality, baseline scores

5. Characteristics of Low-Performing Schools • Balfanz, Legters, Weber, and West (2007) – • 3 distinct characteristics: • 1. High schools that made AYP appear to be better resourced • 2. Size, those that make AYP tend to be smaller • 3. Location, those that make AYP tend to be in rural areas rather than central city high schools • Schools that face less pressure from NCLB are more likely to achieve AYP

6. School Choice “Failing” schools are required to provide school choice or supplemental services Zhang and Cowen (2009) argue there are geographical inequalities that effect distribution of these services Rural schools struggle because of geographical isolation

7. Teacher Preparation • NCLB states that every student will be provided with “highly-qualified” teachers • Failure to make AYP is largely blamed on teachers • Teachers resort to “teaching to the test”

8. Funding for Teacher Preparation Gray (2005) states, “the Bush administration contends that the extra costs of meeting NCLB’s requirements are a state and local responsibility. Yet, the federal government is demanding 100% accountability in elementary and secondary education, while paying 10% of the bill” (96).

9. Teachers and Achievement • When teachers focus on making connections with students and teaching what is culturally relevant, achievement occurs • NCLB causes teachers to feel pressured to focus their curriculum around the test because of the high-stakes

10. Administrators and Teachers • Administrators • Anderson, Canfield-Davis, and Gardiner (2008) studied the effects of NCLB on six principals from urban schools • 3 out of 6 avoided extracurricular activities because they had to meet NCLB expectations • Feel pressure to focus school goals on raising test scores and narrowing the curriculum • Teachers • Afolayan, Byrd-Blake, Fabunmi, Leander, and Pryor (2010) conducted qualitative and quantitative study on responses of teachers from an urban school district in Illinois • Elementary school teachers felt more pressure from NCLB than secondary teachers