"No Child Left Behind" in the Crosshairs

Washington Post Editorial:

Nor can some of his arguments about the unintended consequences of No Child Left Behind be denied. For example, the law's requirement that states test students annually and show progress toward proficiency has caused some states to lower standards and water down assessments. It's difficult, though, to see how giving states even more flexibility will solve this problem. Wasn't the trouble caused by letting states decide what's good enough?

We've been unequivocal in our support of standards that have rigor and meaning. It's encouraging that Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), a proponent of No Child Left Behind who chairs the education committee, has identified this as one of his priorities. Some promising ideas come from the nonprofit advocacy group Education Trust. One is to encourage states to raise their standards to a "college-and-career-ready level" with the trade-off of getting more time to reach more realistic goals of proficiency. The law's original goal of 100 percent proficiency by 2014, while laudatory, may be unrealistic.

Posted by Jim Zellmer at July 3, 2007 12:00 AM
Subscribe to this site via RSS/Atom: Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas