You asked several questions about implementing the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. We provide answers to each question individually below.

NCLB establishes an accountability system requiring schools to make annual progress toward having every student achieve academic standards established by the state and closing performance gaps between all students and certain specified subgroups of students by 2014. The subgroups are (1) economically disadvantaged students, (2) students from major racial and ethnic groups, (3) students with disabilities, and (4) students with limited English proficiency. Student performance is measured by mandatory annual tests in grades 3 to 8 and grade 10. NCLB also requires states to identify schools and school districts that do not make adequate yearly progress (AYP), designate them as “needing improvement,” and follow a step-by-step process for either improving or closing them. (OLR Report 2002-R-0168 describes these requirements in more detail. )

What actions could the federal or state government take against a district that declines to implement the additional testing required by NCLB?

The NCLB makes its academic standards and assessment requirements a condition of receiving a federal Title I grant. Thus, any state or district that fails to implement the act’s requirements would forego Title I aid. Title I grants go through states to local school districts to help educate disadvantaged children. Title I is the largest federal education grant to states and local school districts. In FY 2002-03, Connecticut received over $ 121 million in federal Title I grants, according to the State Department of Education.

Although a school district could choose to reject a federal Title I grant or may not be eligible for one, it cannot avoid implementing the additional testing. The reason is that, in 2003, the General Assembly incorporated the NCLB’s additional testing and accountability requirements into state law.

Beginning in the 2005-06 school year, PA 03-168 requires each public school student to take statewide mastery tests in grades 3, 5, and 7 in addition to those they already must take in grades 4, 6, 8, and 10. Starting in 2005-06, the act requires tests in grades 3 to 8 to cover reading, writing, and math. Starting in 2007-08, tests in grades 5, 8, and 10 must also cover science. The State Board of Education must provide and supervise administration of the new tests, as it already does the current ones.

PA 03-168 requires the new testing to be implemented in accordance with P. L. 107-110, the NCLB.

School districts that fail to implement state education laws are subject to sanctions under CGS § 10-4b. Under this law, the State Board of Education may order a district to take remedial action and obtain court orders to compel districts to comply. (OLR report 98-R-0926 contains a summary of the §10-4b process. )

Which other states have taken formal actions or positions against the NCLB and what are those actions?

The National Conference of State Legislatures reports that nine states (Arizona, Connecticut, Idaho, Indiana, New Mexico, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin) have passed or are considering legislation requesting changes to, or waivers from, NCLB provisions or urging additional funding for mandated activities. Connecticut is considering SJR 4, which asks Congress to grant NCLB waivers to states, such as Connecticut, that already had effective school accountability systems and programs and whose student perform well on national tests.

Both Connecticut and Vermont have enacted legislation prohibiting the expenditure of state or local funds for costs not paid for under NCLB. Maine and New Hampshire have introduced similar legislation. Arizona, Hawaii, New Mexico, Utah have introduced legislation that would have the state opt out of NCLB. And several states (Hawaii, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Dakota, Ohio, Vermont and Virginia) have conducted or are conducting studies attempting to assess the “real” costs of implementing NCLB (Capitol to Capitol, 2/13/04).

What entity approves the required improvement plans for schools and school districts that fail to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) under NCLB?

According to the state’s NCLB accountability plan, which has been approved by the U. S. secretary of education, improvement plans for schools that fail to make AYP must be approved by both the local board of education and the State Department of Education. This is the same requirement that applied to improvement plans required under the Connecticut school accountability law in effect before the NCLB passed. A 2002 state law eliminated the former law and instead aligned the state’s school accountability and school improvement plan requirements to NCLB.

According to the State Department of Education (SDE), the NCLB requires only the local or regional board of education to approve an improvement plan for an entire district designated as “in need of improvement. ” Once the board approves the plan, it must send it to the SDE, which must provide technical assistance to the district in implementing its plan.

Is there any requirement that students in all states be held to equal standards and, if so, how is this determined?

Under NCLB, each state must set its own proficiency standards and implement statewide tests aligned to those standards. Although there is no requirement for a national proficiency standard, NCLB requires all states and school districts to participate in the biennial reading and math assessments administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Because NAEP assessments are national tests, its results will serve as a guide to how rigorous each state’s standards and testing are.

State testing and standards are also subject to the secretary of education’s approval.

What particular concerns have been raised about the effects of NCLB on small rural schools and are there any proposals to address the special problems of such schools under the act?

Two major concerns have been raised about NCLB’s effect on rural schools.

One is that the application of the law’s AYP formula to the small cohorts of students attending rural schools may cause statistical anomalies, since test data become much less reliable when applied to a small number of students. This could result in over-identification of rural schools as “needing improvement” under the act. Connecticut’s NCLB accountability plan addresses this problem by requiring that before test results may be reported by subgroup, there must be at least 20 students in the subgroup and that, before the results for a subgroup may be included in the AYP calculation, it must include at least 40 students.

Another concern is that small rural schools will be unable to ensure that all their teachers are “highly qualified” according to the NCLB, which requires that teachers have content-specific qualifications for each subject taught. With relatively small numbers of students, many rural districts require their teachers to teach more than one subject or grade. In addition, many rural districts have trouble staffing their schools.

We enclose two publications that address these and other special concerns of rural schools. One is from the Rural School and Community Trust. It lists six special problems rural schools and districts have with NCLB and provides suggestions for addressing them (Lorna Jimerson, Ed. D. , Special Challenges of the No Child Left Behind Act for Rural Schools and Districts). The other is an NCLB implementation guide for small and rural districts from the American Association of School Administrators and the National Association of State Boards of Education.

The U. S. Education Department has formed a Rural Education Task Force to identify challenges and recommend ways that rural schools and their communities can address special problems. The task force is seeking input on the problems rural districts have with the act.

How is the NCLB funded?

The federal government provides grants that can be used to pay for NCLB mandates. In FY 2002-03, according to the State Department of Education, the state received $ 291,890,640 in federal education grants of all types. NCLB grants totaled $ 175,715,698 in FY 2002-03, a figure that is projected to increase to $ 180,030,474 in FY 2003-04.

Starting July 1, 2003, PA 03-168 requires that any state and local costs for aligning state mastery tests with the federal requirements be paid exclusively from federal NCLB Act funds the state and local school districts receive.

JL: nf