|
Cambridge, MA—June 14, 2006— The Civil Rights Project
at Harvard University (CRP) released today a new study that reports
the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) hasn't improved
reading and mathematical achievement or reduced achievement gaps.
The study also revealed that the NCLB won't meet its goals
of 100 percent student proficiency by 2014 if the trends of the
first several years continue.
The report, Tracking
Achievement Gaps and Assessing the Impact of NCLB on the Gaps: An
In-depth Look into National and State Reading and Math Outcome,
compares the findings from the National Assessment of Education
Progress (NAEP) to state assessment results and concludes that that
high stakes testing and sanctions required by NCLB are not working
as planned under the NCLB. The findings contradict claims of the
Bush Administration and some previous studies that showed positive
results under NCLB.
Under the NCLB, states can decide which tests to use for accountability
and proficiency. In turn, states are required to look at their results
and sanction low-performing schools. NCLB requires yearly progress
of all groups of students toward the state proficiency levels. The
report demonstrates how over the past few years since the NCLB's
inception, state assessment results show improvements in math and
reading, but students aren't showing similar gains on the
NAEP—the only independent national test that randomly samples
students across the country.
"Students should perform well on both tests because they
cover the same subjects," said the study's author Jaekyung
Lee, professor at the State University of New York at Buffalo. "What
we are seeing is, the higher the stakes of the assessment, the higher
the discrepancies in the results. Based on the NAEP, there are no
systemic indications of improving the average achievement and narrowing
the gap after NCLB."
The report also shows that federal accountability rules have little
to no impact on racial and poverty gaps. The NCLB act ends up leaving
many minority and poor students, even with additional educational
support, far behind with little opportunity to meet the 2014 target.
"This report is depressing given the tremendous amount of
pressure schools have been under and the damage that a lot of high
poverty racial schools have undergone by being declared as failing
schools," said Gary Orfield, director of the Civil Rights
Project at Harvard University and professor of education and social
policy at Harvard Graduate School of Education. "We have not
focused on the kinds of serious long-term reforms that can actually
produce gains and narrow the huge gaps in opportunity and achievement
for minority students."
The report compares the NAEP results with state assessment results
during the pre-NCLB period (1990-2001) with the post-NCLB period
(2002-2005). It compares post-NCLB trends in reading and math achievement
with pre-NCLB trends among different racial and socioeconomic groups
of fourth and eighth graders from across the nation and states.
- NCLB did not have a significant impact on improving reading
and math achievement across the nation and states. Based on the
NAEP results, the national average achievement remains flat in
reading and grows at the same pace in math after NCLB than before.
In grade 4 math, there was a temporary improvement right after
NCLB, but it was followed by a return to the pre-reform growth
rate. Consequently, continuation of the current trend will leave
the nation far behind the NCLB target of 100 percent proficiency
by 2014. Only 24 to 34 percent of students will meet the proficiency
target in reading and 29 to 64 percent meeting that math proficiency
target by 2014.
- NCLB has not helped the nation and states significantly narrow
the achievement gap. The racial and socioeconomic achievement
gap in the NAEP reading and math achievement persists after NCLB.
If the current trend continues, the proficiency gap between advantaged
White and disadvantaged minority students will hardly close by
2014. The study predicts that by 2014, less than 25 percent of
Poor and Black students will achieve NAEP proficiency in reading,
and less than 50 percent will achieve proficiency in math.
- NCLB's attempt to scale up the alleged success of states
that adopted test-driven accountability policy prior to NCLB,
so-called first generation accountability states (e.g., Florida,
North Carolina, Texas) did not work. It neither enhanced the first
generation states earlier academic improvement nor transferred
the effects of a test-driven accountability system to states that
adopted test-based accountability under NCLB, the second generation
accountability states. Moreover, both first and second generation
states failed to narrow NAEP reading and math achievement gaps
after NCLB.
- NCLB's reliance on state assessment as the basis of school
accountability is misleading since state-administered tests tend
to significantly inflate proficiency levels and proficiency gains
as well as deflate racial and social achievement gaps in the states.
The higher the stakes of state assessments, the greater the discrepancies
between NAEP and state assessment results. These discrepancies
were particularly large for poor, Black and Hispanic students.
The report was conducted by Jaekyung Lee, an associate professor
for the Graduate School of Education at State University of New
York at Buffalo and commissioned by the Civil Rights Project at
Harvard University.
Research on the report began one year ago and uses a growth curve
model with longitudinal analyses of both national and state assessment
data to explore the effects of NCLB accountability policy on student
achievement outcomes.
This report is part of the Civil Rights Project's long-term
study of the implementation of NCLB, which has produced a series
of studies and the book, NCLB Meets School Realities.
Jaekyung Lee is an associate professor for the Graduate School
of Education at SUNY at Buffalo. His research focuses on educational
accountability and equity. His publications include "The Impact
of Accountability on Racial and Socioeconomic Equity" in American
Educational Research Journal, 2004, and "Racial and Ethnic
Achievement Gap Trends" in Educational Researcher, 2002. He
has served on the State of Maine Technical Advisory Committee of
Comprehensive Student Assessment System, the Academic Advisory Board
of Harvard University Civil Rights Project on No Child Left Behind
Act, the Expert Panel of Smart Library on Closing the Achievement
Gap, and the Guest Editor of KEDI Journal of Educational Policy.
The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University (CRP), founded in
1996, is a leading organization devoted to civil rights research
and a leading resource for information on racial justice based at
the Harvard Graduate School of Education. CRP strives to improve
the channels through which research findings are translated and
communicated to policymakers and the broader public by publishing
reports and books on critical civil rights issues. It has found
eager collaborators among researchers nationwide, and wide open
doors among advocacy organizations, policymakers, and journalists.
Focusing initially on education reform, it has convened dozens of
national conferences and roundtables; commissioned over 400 new
research and policy studies; produced major reports on desegregation,
student diversity, school discipline, special education, dropouts,
and Title I programs; and published ten books, with four more in
the editing stage.
Contact:
Jaekyung Lee
Professor at the State University of New York at Buffalo
716-645-2484 (ext. 1257)
jl224@acsu.buffalo.edu
Gary Orfield
Director of the Civil Rights Project at Harvard University
Professor of education and social policy at Harvard Graduate School
of Education
617-359-2892 (mobile) or 916-924-8645 or 617-495-1898
orfield@gmail.com
Jill Anderson
Harvard Graduate School of Education Media Relations
617-496-1884
jill_anderson@gse.harvard.edu
|