Key Aspects of a Study-Participants, Annotated Bibliography Example
Words: 2736Annotated Bibliography
Anderson PM, Butcher KF, Schanzenbach DW. (2011). Adequate (or Adipose?) Yearly Progress: Assessing the Effect of “No Child Left Behind” on Children’s Obesity. National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w16873.pdf
The authors propose that schools are focusing on achieving high test scores which shifts their focus away from the health of the children in terms of physical education time and the meals that they are being provided with for breakfast and lunch. While this study is not complete due to the need to follow up with schools, the authors believe that schools that are currently considered failing according to NCLB will have a more significantly obese population due to the need for these schools to be accountable for test scores. As a consequence, they believe that administration will require students to spend more time in classes that will prepare them for the state exams instead of providing them with a well-rounded education.
Blank RK. (2011). Closing the Achievement Gap for Economically Disadvantaged Students? Analyzing Change since No Child Left Behind Using State Assessments and the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED518986.pdf
This article provides educators with knowledge of the standards that are used to measure the success of schools in addition to proposing ways that administrators can ensure that children from economically disadvantaged backgrounds can be made to achieve the same level success as their classmates. Currently, states measure achievement based on state student assessments and the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) standards. The author indicates that there is not a clear answer regarding NCLB’s success and it is important to consider that these standards can be hurting individuals that come from a low income household. The author proposes that we must track this education data over a long period of time before these questions could be answered. However, this information could be used immediately to determine how to help children from financially disadvantaged backgrounds.
Chakrabarti R. (2014). Incentives and responses under No Child Left Behind: Credible threats and the role of competition. Journal of Public Economics, 110: 124-146.
This study indicated that schools that are failing according to NCLB standards are not necessarily failing in terms of all academic subjects. However, the computed score does not account for individual successes and failures. Using data from Wisconsin schools, the author demonstrated that many schools that were failing due to math actually showed significant increases in performance, but were not able to meet the rigorous standards put forth by NCLB. The case was the same for many of the schools that failed due to reading scores. The author therefore proposes that a different measure need to be used to determine whether schools are successful or failing. It is important to consider that different schools have different baseline scores to work with and that these institutions should be considered differently from those that have consistently passed.
Dee TS, Jacob B. (2011). The impact of no Child Left Behind on student achievement. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(3): 418–446.
This study aimed to determine whether the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was able to increase the achievement levels of students in fourth grade. To do so, state-level panel data on student test scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) were used. The results of the study indicated that NCLB was responsible for allowing an increase in math scores for fourth graders. However, there was no indication that NCLB helped these students improve in reading. This study indicates the need to conduct similar analyses at a variety of levels to determine whether NCLB is effective or whether it should be removed or altered.
Domina T. (2014). An Education in Politics: The Origins and Evolution of No Child Left Behind. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 43(2): 253-255.
This article focuses on the history of events that led to the implementation of NCLB. Many studies have indicated that the NCLB Act is ineffective, and modern politics are evolving in a manner that supports this understanding. George Bush’s signing of NCLB was done to build upon the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) proposed by Lyndon Johnson. However, modern politicians, such as President Barack Obama, are working to remove the testing requirements established by NCLB. Currently, 34 states and the District of Columbia are exempt and it is possible that this number will continue to grow in the future.
Duckworth AL, Quinn PD, Tsukayama E. (2012). What No Child Left Behind leaves behind: The roles of IQ and self-control in predicting standardized achievement test scores and report card grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2): 439-451.
This article argues that testing is a better indicator of intelligence than report cards, as report cards merely demonstrate a students’ ability to exert self-control. To prove their hypothesis, the authors conduct a review of two longitudinal prospective education studies that follow middle school students. The study ultimately found that standardized tests are better measures of IQ than grades. The study also found that individuals with good report card grades are generally compliant and hand in their assignments, but this does not always correlate with ability. The authors therefore support the use of standardized testing as a measure of students’ IQ.
Dunn L. (2012). No Child Will Be Left Behind in My Classroom!: NCLB’s Effects and Elementary Teachers’ Strategies to Beat the Test. The College of Wooster. Retrieved from http://openworks.wooster.edu/independentstudy/1006/?show=full
This study focuses on the techniques that could be implemented by third grade teachers in Ohio to help their students prepare for the state test. The author found that successfully preparing children for the test requires collaboration between teachers, the use of outside resources, and that NCLB is enhancing classroom instruction. However, despite the fact that classroom instruction has improved, it is clear that teachers spend more time teaching to the test. Therefore, it is possible that this improvement is due to biased results rather than reality. The author proposes that many of the issues that are currently occurring in education could be resolved by enhancing the number of professional development sessions that teachers attend so that they can build and reinforce skills.
Grissom JA, Nicholson-Crotty, Harrington JR. (2014). Estimating the Effects of No Child Left Behind on Teachers’ Work Environments and Job Attitudes. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 36(4): 417-436.
This study was conducted in order to gain an understanding of how NCLB alters teachers’ perceptions of their jobs. The authors proposed that these laws impact the desire of teachers to remain active in the field. Despite their initial belief, the authors of the study found that NCLB positively correlated with worker satisfaction. In particular, teachers believed that this act helped them gain a greater control of their classroom in addition to receiving more support from administration. However, there is no evidence that the act helped enhance accountability, which is a major flaw. Teacher job satisfaction as a whole has remained unaltered as a consequence of NCLB implementation.
Havnes T, Mogstad M. (2011). No Child Left Behind: Subsidized Child Care and Children’s Long-Run Outcomes. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 3: 97-129.
Studies have shown that providing families with subsidized child care enhances their ability to achieve an effective education. While child care is not currently being considered a component of the NCLB Act, many politicians and parents believe that it should. The article demonstrates that a child’s education truly begins before they enter kindergarten, and children that come from families that do not have time to facilitate early skills begin their school years behind the other students. Therefore, the authors propose that this knowledge gap could be reasonably bridged by providing families in need with subsidized child care in order to ensure that their children are well-prepared to enter their first year of school.
Hewitt DT. (2011). Reauthorize, Revise, and Remember: Refocusing the No Child Left Behind Act To Fulfill Brown’s Promise. Yale Law & Policy Review, 30(1): 169-194.
The author proposes that while NCLB was meant to provide educational opportunities for the poor in addition to people of color, the act has not been successful in doing so. Therefore, the author calls for a need to revise or amend NCLB so that it is able to achieve the purpose for which it was established. Ultimately, the author believes that the NCLB Act counters the precedent that was reached by Brown v. Board of Education, which provides that black and white children should receive an equal education. The author argues that mostly black schools are not successful because under NCLB, they are marked as failing and closed down before any great changes can be made to help these students.
House J. (2013). NCLB Waivers: Good News and Bad News: Waivers from the Onerous No Child Left Behind Requirements Offer States and Districts Much-Needed Financial Flexibility, but They Can Also Lead to Confusion. T H E Journal (Technological Horizons In Education), 40(2).
The author summarizes the various advantages and disadvantages of NLCB. While many states were initially onboard with this education plan due to the amount of funds it would allocate to schools, it had very strict requirements that were challenging to meet and many educators felt that these regulations would not necessarily enhance the value of their students’ education. President Barack Obama is addressing these concerns by providing interested states with waivers. However, states that receive waivers must then take the education standards of students into their own hands, which is complicated due to the provisions of the waiver agreement. States are asked to create their own specific standards to measure teacher efficacy, determine how to improve low-performing schools, and set college readiness standards. While some educators prefer this to NCLB, others preferred a federally regulated system.
Jaiani V, Whitford AB. (2011). Policy windows, public opinion, and policy ideas: the evolution of No Child Left Behind. Quality Assurance in Education, 19(1): 8 – 27.
This article provides a context of the policy process that preceded Bush’s desire to implement the No Child Left Behind Act. Archives and historical texts were used to document this process. Ultimately, NCLB was passed due to Bush’s ability to build coalitions and that public opinion positively influenced his ability to pass this plan into law. Holding schools and teachers accountable was the hallmark of this process. The author argues that accountability is an essential component of the quality assurance process and a potential reason that NCLB was so considered to be widely popular before it was voted into law.
Maleyko G, Gawlik MA. (2011). No Child Left Behind: What We Know and What We Need to Know. Education, 131(3).
This article provides a historical context of NCLB in addition to a discussion of how the act relates to the AYP formula that is currently used to measure school effectiveness. The authors argue that schools prioritize different aspects of AYP which contributes to whether or not they will be marked as effective or ineffective. This is detrimental because some schools need to focus on more basic education needs than standardized testing in order to ensure that their students are learning. For those that are below grade level, the priority is to scaffold the material until they are able to reach the grade level mark. As a consequence, students at disadvantaged schools will not perform well on standardized tests, but this does not mean that they are not learning. Therefore, it is necessary to reassess how schools are being rated.
Munoz MA, Chang F, Ross SM. (2012). No Child Left Behind and Tutoring in Reading and Mathematics: Impact of Supplemental Educational Services on Large Scale Assessment, Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 17(3).
This study aimed to determine whether Supplemental Educational Services (SES) were impacted as a consequence of NCLB. Under this program, free tutoring is provided to children in Title I schools that have consecutive failures in terms of report card grade or to those who have repeatedly failed standardized tests. Data was retrieved from a large urban school based on the fifth year of the SES program. The results demonstrated that NCLB had a slightly negative impact on the ability for SES to operate regularly, although the data was not statistically significant.
Newell B. (2014). A quantitative research study on effects and perceptions of the No Child Left Behind legislation. University of Phoenix. Retrieved from http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3583259
The author of the article proposes that there is a relationship between the success of the NCLB Act and the methodology that teachers employ in the classroom. While the NCLB Act was put in place to enhance teaching practices and to ensure a higher degree of accountability, it appears that this system is not successful because teachers were not consulted prior to the creation of this program. As a consequence, longer hours are being spent by teachers in the classroom to enforce test taking strategies, which is detrimental to the overall education of the child because it takes away from their ability to learn more practically useful skills. The study concluded that since teacher effectiveness is now tied into their students’ ability to achieve high test scores, this is now the main focus of education.
Ringwalt C, Hanley S, Ennett ST, Vincus AA, Bowling M, Haws SW, Rohrbach LA. (2011). The Effects of No Child Left Behind on the Prevalence of Evidence-Based Drug Prevention Curricula in the Nation’s Middle Schools. Journal of School Health, 81(5): 265-272.
This study was conducted to address the concern that subjects that are not traditionally tested on are being less emphasized as a result of NCLB. A study of demographics showed that a majority of schools that were reaching AYP standards were small, located in rural and suburban areas, and serve mostly white students. No definitive correlation was demonstrated between NCLB testing success and the provision of evidence-based drug prevention curricula, but the authors believe that it will be necessary to generate more evidence on this topic in the future in order to gain a greater understanding of the interaction between NCLB and a drug free education.
Shelly B. (2011). Flexible Response: Executive Federalism and the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Educational Policy, 26(1): 117-135.
Waivers for NCLB had been promised by the federal government since the plan’s implementation. Through these waivers, states were able to gain a lot of flexibility in terms of the accountability that they had for their students’ performance. This ultimately contradicted the education plan in a manner that had clear political benefit. Generally, more Republican states applied for these waivers compared to Democrat states. As a consequence, Republican states were granted a greater degree of freedom with regards to the education that could be provided to their children. In turn, Republican states were expected to implement more rigorous standardized testing in exchange for a higher degree of federal funding. Much of this policy still remains in place today and is a potential cause for inequality in education in the United States.
Singh JM. (2011). Long-Term Effects of Native Hawaiian Students’ Early Academic Achievement under the No Child Left Behind Legislation: A Multilevel Cohort Analysis. University of Hawai’i at Manoa. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/892027445
This study reflected upon education data from Hawaiian schools and found that members of the native Hawaiian population are the most likely to perform poorly in school as a consequence of discrimination and low socioeconomic status. The study indicated that because these children are far behind their classmates in third grade when standardized testing begins, the achievement gap widens as they enter the higher grade levels because they were never able to build the skills that they needed to learn at the same rate as other students. The article therefore proposes that interventions are needed to help students early before academic success becomes too challenging for them to achieve.
Whitney S. (2014). Transforming African American students’ lives: A study of the effect of No Child Left Behind Act on grade promotion. Capella University. Retrieved from http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3670653
This study focuses on the impact of NCLB on African American males, as there is an increasing concern that these individuals are dropping out of school due to a growing struggle with middle school education. The results indicated that a major concern of African American middle school students in their teachers is the fact that they are not able to pass the standardized tests required by NCLB. As a consequence, they feel that they cannot be successful in the school setting and are therefore encouraged to leave. The study proposes that certain aspects of NCLB should be reversed in order to be fair to minority students in addition to those from low socioeconomic backgrounds.
Time is precious
don’t waste it!