Measuring Academic Proficiency Under the No Child Left Behind Act: Implications for Educational Equity

The No Child Left Behind (NCLB ) Act was designed to close the achievement gap between high and low performing children , especially the achievement gap between minority and non-minority students and between disadvantaged children and their more advantaged peers (NCLB , 2001 . The key components of the act are the adequate yearly programs (AYP , and the annual measurable objectives (AMO . The AYP is the working principle of the act and it is seen as the mechanism for which all schools and all students meet the same academic standards in reading and mathematics by school

year 2013-2014 . The AMO indicates the performance of the school in terms of proficiency in reading and mathematics tests . Moreover , the law identifies student subgroups like economically disadvantaged students , students form major racial and ethnic groups , students with disabilities and students with limited English proficiency . The law also specifically requires that 95 of the school and 95 of each subgroup to take the reading and math standardized tests , while the state is tasked to determine its own AMO targets and the minimum number of students in each subgroup who are required to meet or surpass the AMO targets (NCLB , 2001 . The AYP requirements apply to Title 1 and non-title 1 school that receive federal funding . Schools that do not reach AYP for two or more years will be labeled as in need of improvement and are sanctioned . The NCLB employs a conjunctive accountability system wherein each subgroup of students are required to reach the minimum levels of proficiency in math and reading regardless of their previous proficiency levels , thus within 12 years , all students should reach 100 proficiency

NCLB is based on the idea that high expectations for achievement would result to higher actual achievement levels . By requiring each school to reach a uniform level of proficiency

would mean that in a given period , all schools and all students would have mastered the same skills and learned the same knowledge in reading and mathematics . The NCLB measures progress through a single mean proficiency score across levels and subgroup . However , this frame of mind does not consider the diversity of American students and their backgrounds . For example , requiring each subgroup to meet the minimum mean proficiency score would ensure that the school would not reach the AYP . Using a single mean proficiency score to measure performance is not a true measure of school improvement nor student performance . Although NCLB have positive visions , its method of attaining its objectives undermines what it is supposed to do . The law treats each school and each student as a single and uniform entity when our society is composed of different races and backgrounds , not even taking into account the difference between the rich and the poor . Even if the law identified the subgroup of students , it still however assess each group in terms of the single mean proficiency score which is the same as implementing a one size fits all policy

The problem with NCLB is that it asks schools to be assessed...