NCLB Research Reports

The Civil Rights Project, Harvard University
Changing NCLB District Accountability Standards: Implications for Racial Equity
June 2005
"This study examines the implication of a shift in accountability under the No Child Left Behind Act from the school level to the district level. Most states are identifying school districts for sanctioning for the first time during the 2004-2005 school year. Large numbers of districts have been labeled under-performing, and these districts face potentially severe sanctions in the years to come. The heightened importance of districts accountability means that is it important to examine both the efficacy of NCLB method for identifying districts for sanctioning its effect on the low-income and minority students."

How Negotiated Changes Transform the Law
February 2006
"This study reports that Department officials have been approving changes in how states implement NCLB by negotiating changes individually with each state. The authors contend that this process of making compromises with individual states has altered the meaning of accountability since no two states are now subject to the same requirements."

Inspiring Vision, Disappointing Results: Four Studies on Implementing the No Child Left Behind Act
The Civil Rights Project 's National Study of the NCLB Act, Year One
February 2004
This report addresses the overall issue of why a civil rights organization is interested in NCLB. As The Civil Rights Project see public education as a civil right, and NCLB as a force changing it, for the better and the worse, they then address why the law is so important today. Taking four different studies as examples of how NCLB is implemented provides evidence of its importance.

Listening to Teachers: Classroom Realities and No Child Left Behind
September 2004
"No Child Left Behind: The Teachers' Voice survey grew out of our national study on the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which is examining many aspects of NCLB implementation in six states and eleven school districts. Since a large portion of NCLB is aimed at teachers, we wanted to know what teachers think about the law and how they, and their schools, are responding to its strategies for changes."
  Teacher Quality: Equalizing Educational Opportunities and Outcomes
May 2005
"This report examines the challenges of implementing the NCLB teacher quality provisions in six states-Arizona, California, Illinois, New York, Georgia, and Virginia-and eleven school districts. We examine how teacher quality varies by school characteristics, how each state's policy context affects teacher policies, and the barriers to implementing the NCLB teacher quality requirements at the state and local level using both qualitative and quantitative data sources"

The Unraveling of No Child Left Behind: How Negotiated Changed Transformed the Law
February 2006
"This report documents the changes states have made to their accountability plans and examines how these policy shifts affect the meaning of accountability and who benefits from the changes. We reviewed decision letters sent to all 50 states that outlined the changes approved by ED through December 2005. The intent of this report is to provide policymakers with information they can use to develop a systemic approach to correcting flaws in NCBL by documenting the requirements that are difficult for states to implement and identifying areas where the law may not be working as intended. The report provides an easy to understand synopsis of the changes allowed by ED and state-by-state summaries of the amendments each state adopted."

Tracking Achievement Gaps and Assessing the Impact of NCLB on the Gaps
June 2006
Tracking Achievement Gaps and Assessing the Impact of NCLB on the Gaps: An In-Depth Look into Nation and State Reading and Math Outcome Trends
Full report | Press release
June 2006
This report looks at the affects of test-driven measures of assessment, comparing data from before NCLB was implemented to recent statistics. The report overall finds that the method in the current NCLB is too simple in its testing, and the goals are not realistic. With the given budget for the program and standards of assessment, the NCLB current goals are very unrealistic. The Harvard institute recommends that Congress be more open to new ideas and advice from reformers and educators who work with this topic on an everyday basis. They also recommend that the law should broaden its ways of assessment to the National Assessment if Educational Progress (NAEP). The national report card has the opportunity to be a validating role for state assessment combined with the results of NCLB assessments. If the law adds new ways for a state school system to be measured, the assessment will have a better representation of what is actually happening in schools and what needs to be changed.