IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/edfpol/v1y2006i2p266-277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Devil in the Details: Making Sensible Modifications to No Child Left Behind

Author

Listed:
  • Gary W. Ritter

    (University of Arkansas, College of Education and Health Professions, Department of Education Reform)

  • Christopher J. Lucas

    (University of Arkansas, College of Education and Health Professions, Department of Education Reform)

Abstract

Achieving full compliance with the accountability provisions of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) federal legislation poses major challenges for most of the nation's states. Structured, open-ended interviews were conducted with ranking representatives from a number of so-called high-readiness states: California, Florida, New York, South Carolina, and Texas. (Collectively, these states enroll over 16 million children, or approximately 35 percent of the nation's total school-attending population.) Most policy makers are reportedly confident their respective state school systems are able to meet NCLB standards. Yet while each state's situation is unique, limited resources coupled with dramatically increased expectations for public schools may spell trouble ahead. Lessons learned so far by several states as they engage the NCLB mandate are discussed and analyzed. Ultimately, patience and flexibility on the part of federal officials, it is argued, will be critical to the long-term success of the No Child Left Behind reform initiative. © 2006 American Education Finance Association

Suggested Citation

  • Gary W. Ritter & Christopher J. Lucas, 2006. "Devil in the Details: Making Sensible Modifications to No Child Left Behind," Education Finance and Policy, MIT Press, vol. 1(2), pages 266-277, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:edfpol:v:1:y:2006:i:2:p:266-277
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/edfp.2006.1.2.266
    Download Restriction: Access to PDF is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    No Child Left Behind Act;

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I22 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Educational Finance; Financial Aid
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:edfpol:v:1:y:2006:i:2:p:266-277. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kelly McDougall (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.