Resolved: That NCLB is a negative policy and should be terminated.

I do not believe that NCLB is a negative policy. In my case I will analyze what NCLB has done for learning Americans, and why it has succeeded. First off, the No Child Left Behind Act was put in place to make standardized test scores increase. It has done this in three ways. First, it has set strict requirements that schools must reach. Second, it has made schools without previous motivation, become motivated. Lastly, it has recruited better teachers, and therefore has helped students. Due to the fact that NCLB has done what it was made to do, I believe that it is not been a negative policy and should not be terminated. Point 1: NCLB has significantly improved opportunities for low-income and minority students. The NCLB has allowed all public schools, not just the affluent or well funded districts to be competitive. This has allowed lower income districts to even the playing field with higher class schools on standardized tests. The Center for Education Policy report shows almost all states with necessary data showed evidence of gaps decreasing in the African-American subgroup, while no state showed an increase of the gap. The results went across the table to include Hispanic families, and low income families. This shows that NCLB has helped lower-income and minority students' academic achievement since it was passed thus being a positive effect due to it. Point 2: Not only has NCLB shown a decrease in the gap between white and subgroups, but it has also shown that overall, achievement has been increasing. The Center of Educational Policy found that the number of instances of gains on NAEP(national standardized tests that have been used since 1978) far outnumbered declines. In reading, the number of states with sufficient data showed much larger gains in the reading levels. Only in math, were there smaller, yet still gains in proficiency. This shows that achievement on all levels of education, with all types of ethnicities has increased since NCLB. Urban school officials credit NCLB with helping teachers and school officials raise student achievement. Also if we want to look at a bigger time line, we can look at NAEP scores since 1978. By looking at the math and reading performance levels, we can see that the are higher than ever, and have grown more quickly since NCLB's passing than any other time in history. This shows how NCLB is doing what it was made for. Point 3: NCLB supports learning at early years. This has been proven to prevent difficulties as they arise later. A study done by Catherine Snow, head of Graduate School of Education at Harvard, Susan burns, and peg griffin, showed that children taught to read at a young age are more likely to succeed in their adolescent schooling years. NCLB targets early childhood education in reading so that these children can get on the right track. Currently, NCLB provides more than $1billion to help children learn how to read. It does this "to ensure that every student can read at grade level or above. . . (by) the end of grade 3." Point 4: The NCLB has lead to more qualified teachers, allowing for better education of students, leading to better students with higher academic achievement. The number of public school teachers has risen since the rise of NCLB. IN the fall of 2007k, there were a projected 15.4 pupils per teacher. This is a decrease from the 16.8 pupils from before NCLB. This has lead to more individualized education which leads to better students. Sub point A: In recent years, more teachers have been teaching in their respective major. Currently, at least 70% of teachers have a major in their field of teaching, with over 90% of core teachers being highly qualified. This is a drastic increase from the years before NCLB. In the 13 years before NCLB, some none core classes had nearly 70% of teachers which were unqualified by today's standards. In the core classes, only 78% were highly qualified. This shows that NCLB's new teacher regulations have led to more highly qualified teachers who have produced better students. Sub point B: NCLB has allowed for more qualified teachers in poverty stricken districts. Linda Darling-Hammond, Charles E. Ducommon Professors of Education at Stanford University, said that NCLB has stimulated recruitment in low income and minority districts. And these students are no longer have to put up with a "revolving door of inexperienced, unqualified teachers." This shows that NCLB has done what is was supposed to, and therefore is not a negative policy and should not be terminated.