During the Bush Administration in 2001, “Democrats and Republicans in Congress became increasingly concerned by the growing achievement gaps that left poor and minority students in failing schools” (Korte 1). These concerns culminated in one of Bush’s most memorable legacies—the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Although NCLB “began its life as a much-revered, bipartisan effort” that established a new precedent for testing and accountability, the bill quickly became overshadowed by countless problems that seemed to do more harm than good (Tooley 1). Shortly after its passing, NCLB sustained waves of disagreement that brought it into the national spotlight. State and county politicians refused to succumb to national standards while teacher unions fought to stop mandatory testing and assessments. According to Cory Turner of NPR, the motivation behind Bush’s strict enforcements and stringent approach rested heavily on the idea that “states weren’t doing enough to fix their low-performing schools” (“No Child Left Behind: What” 2). This meant that more attention needed to be focused on certain under-performing student groups, such as English-language learners, poor and minority students, and students with special educational needs. Even though states could refuse to comply with the new regulations, they risked losing …show more content…
Under the law, “States were required to bring all [100% of its] students to the “proficient level” on state tests by the 2013-14 school year,” a highly unrealistic goal that infuriated teachers and state politicians (“No Child Left Behind: Overview” 3). Schools that fell behind in making “annual yearly progress” (AYP) to reach 100% proficiency of students by 2014 were identified and targeted for school improvement. Such improvements included setting aside funds for teacher professional development, implementation of corrective action and interventions to improve performance, restructuring school faculty and leadership, and undergoing major changes if the school failed to produce AYP increases, such as converting the school to a charter (“No Child - Atlas” 5). The law also required that all teachers be “highly qualified,” generally indicating completion of a bachelor’s degree and passing of state certification exams; it was the state’s job to ensure that only highly qualified teachers were hired under Title I funds. In an effort to bypass the rigid requirements under the NCLB Act, 42 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia were able to request waivers from Congress that “offered states a reprieve from many of the law’s mandates,” in exchange for state agreements to “prepare students for higher education and the workforce” through Common Core State Standards (“No Child