Federal Education Programs » No Child Left Behind » Annual Reports

Findings from review of first year of implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act at state and federal levels. This also includes the 15-District case study "Implementing the No Child Left Behind Act: A First Look Inside 15 School Districts in 2002-03" which are initial findings on how 15 diverse school districts are initially implementing the No Child Left Behind Act.

This report from the Center on Education Policy describes the implementation and effects of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) during calendar year 2003, the second year of the Act's existence. The report is the first and most comprehensive national examination of all main aspects of NCLB implementation at the federal, state, and local levels, and is the second CEP report to examine the implementation of NCLB. The information in this report is based on a survey of 47 states and the District of Columbia, a nationally representative survey of 274 school districts, in-depth case studies of 33 urban, suburban, and rural school districts, and other research methods.

Among our major findings are that: states and school districts are trying hard to meet the requirements of the Act and agree with its goals; broader and deeper effects of the law were being felt by school districts in 2003, which is resulting in additional help for schools identified for improvement; choosing another public school is rarely used by parents of children in identified schools, while the option of receiving tutoring services is used more frequently; states and school districts are moving slowly to update the qualifications of teachers and paraprofessionals as required by the Act; some of the requirements of the Act are unworkable; and states and school districts face serious funding pressures and a lack of capacity to carry out the Act.

List of School Districts in Case Studies:

Report of findings from the third year of implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act shows progress but problems in federal administration, funding, and capacity.

Research report on the impact of the fourth year of implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act on a geographically diverse list of schools and school districts.

This report describes state efforts to carry out the supplemental educational services requirements. It is the first in a series of CEP publications on the NCLB implementation that will report on the results of our 2006 surveys of officials from 50 state educational agencies and a national sample of school districts, as well as case study research.

The second report in a series of CEP publications on the implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act examines the capacity of state education agencies to carry out the requirements of NCLB. An analysis of survey data from all 50 states and interview data of 15 high-ranking state education officials from 11 states revealed four major capacity challenges: (1) limitations in staffing and infrastructure; (2) inadequate federal and state funding; (3) a lack of sufficient guidance and technical support from the U.S. Department of Education; and (4) barriers in NCLB and within state education agencies.

Supplemental Report on District Perspectives on State Capacity

This report examines the kind of assistance that schools in improvement receive and how effective district and state officials believe that assistance to be. The report's findings are based on CEP's annual survey of 50 state departments of education; our nationally representative annual survey of districts; and 12 case study districts involving interviews with district and school officials.

This report examines the amount of time spent during the school week on core academic subjects and how that allocation of time across subjects has changed since school year 2001-02 when NCLB was enacted. The report finds that approximately 62% of school districts increased the amount of time spent in elementary schools on English language arts and or math, while 44% of districts cut time on science, social studies, art and music, physical education, lunch or recess.

Note: Although the overall findings of this report have not changed, some of the specific numbers have been revised since its original publication to correct initial contractor data tabulation errors. To review the specific changes made, please click on "Report with Specific Revisions in Tracking".

Despite problems with the federal administration of the Reading First program, this CEP report finds that the program is widely credited by state and local officials for lifting the achievement of students who receive Reading First services. Overall, more than three-fourths of states and two-thirds of districts with Reading First grants reported that the program’s assessment and instructional programs were important causes of gains in student achievement. Further, the report finds that Reading First’s impact is felt far beyond the participating schools, with more than half of Reading First districts using elements of Reading First in non-Reading-First schools and in the upper grades. Similarly, states reported that more than 3,000 non-Reading-First districts participated in state-led Reading First professional development.

This report examines the magnitude of changes in instructional time in elementary schools in the years since NCLB took effect in 2002, and is a follow up report to Choices, Changes, and Challenges: Curriculum and Instruction in the NCLB Era that was issued by CEP in July 2007.

Research report on the impact of the fifth year of implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act on a geographically diverse list of schools and school districts.

The following reports comprise the Annual Report for Year 5 (Click to View the individual reports):

This CEP report examines the impact of NCLB on student achievement and teacher quality in some rural districts and the challenges those rural districts face in complying with the Act. The findings in this report are drawn from CEP’s 2006-07 nationally representative survey of school districts and from interviews with administrators in eight rural districts in various parts of the country.