NCLB Research Reports

Center on Education Policy
Ensuring Academic Rigor or Inducing Rigor Mortis? Issues to Watch in Reading First
June 2005
The Center on Education Policy takes an in-depth look into the Reading First program. The program takes a ".more extensive evaluation" of how the funds are used the purpose of the program itself. This report analyzes this program as a predecessor of the Reading Excellence program and the potential for new positive impacts.

From the Capital to the Classroom: Year Two of the No Child Left Behind Act
PDF, January 2004
"This report... describes the implementation and effects of the No Child Left Behind Act during calendar year 2003, the second year of the Act's existence. The report is the first and most comprehensive national examination of all the main aspects of NCLB implementation at the federal, state, and local levels. As explained below, the information in this report is based on a survey of 47 states and the District of Columbia, a nationally representative survey of 274 school districts, in-depth case studies of 33 urban, suburban, and rural school districts, and other research methods."

Hope but No Miracle Cures: Michigan's Early Restructuring Lessons
November, 2005
"'Restructuring' is the controversial last consequence under No Child Left Behind Act for schools that fail to make APY toward their state's student achievement targets for five or more years. The sanctions associated with restructuring, from replacing the school's staff to implementing a new curriculum, are intended to revive ailing schools and result in dramatic increases in student achievement. Does NCLB provide the framework and resources needed to truly change schools? If not, what can be done to help schools in restructuring meet AYP targets and improve as intended?"

Rule Changes Could Help More Schools Meet Test Score Targets for the No Child Left Behind Act
October 2004
Even though the AYP scores for No Child Left Behind have been slowly going up, this does not mean that student achievement has gone up. This report looks at what children are accountable on the AYP tests and if it is really a measurement of achievement. States accountability plans are also addressed to see what states believe is the best way to assess a child.

States Test Limits of Federal AYP Flexibility
PDF, November 2005
"States are continuing to find new ways to calculate adequate yearly progress under the No Child Left Behind Act, in order to raise the number of schools and districts that meet the law's student achievement targets. Over the past few years, the U.S. Department of Education has allowed states to make many changes in the way they determine AYP." Since Margaret Spelling was appointed Education Secretary there have been some changes to the flexibility given to states. This report breaks down those changes.

Title I Funds: Who's Gaining and Who's Losing: School Year 2005-06 Update
July 2005
"The Center on Education Policy has analyzed the fiscal year 2005 allocations released by the U.S. Department of Education for the deferral Title I program. These funds are available to states and school districts in school year 2005-06 to educate disadvantaged children. This report summarizes our findings about gains and losses for school districts and states. It updates a similar report the Center published in June 2004, entitled Title I Funds- Who's Gaining and Who's Losing and Why. The 2004 report contains detailed information on the formulas used to distribute Title I funds, which may be helpful in understanding this updated report."