Building on Results: 

 A Blueprint for Strengthening

The No Child Left Behind Act

Secretary Margaret Spellings

U.S. Department of Education
Building on Results: 

 A Blueprint for Strengthening

The No Child Left Behind Act

U.S. Department of Education
U.S. Department of Education

Margaret Spellings

Secretary

January 2007

This publication is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. 

While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: 

U.S. Department of Education, Building on Results: A Blueprint for Strengthening the No Child Left 

Behind Act, Washington, D.C., 2007.

To receive copies of this publication:

Write to: ED Pubs, Education Publications Center, U.S. Department of Education, P.O. Box 1398, 

Jessup, Md. 20794-1398.

Fax your request to: 301-470-1244.

E-mail your request to: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.

Call in your request toll-free: 1-877-433-7827 (1-877-4-ED-PUBS). If 877 service is not yet available 

in your area, call 1-800-872-5327 (1-800-USA-LEARN). Those who use a telecommunications device 

for the deaf (TDD) or a teletypewriter (TTY) should call 1-877-576-7734.

Order online at: www.edpubs.org.

Download it from the Department’s Web site at: www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/nclb/buildingonresults.html.

On request, this publication is available in alternate formats, such as Braille, large print, computer 

diskette or CD. For more information, contact the Department’s Alternate Format Center 

at 202-260-0852 or 202-260-0818.
 Contents

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

No Child Left Behind Is Working . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Building on Results: A Blueprint for Strengthening the No Child Left Behind Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Building on Results: The Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Building on Results: Policy Summaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Building on Results: Policy Proposals

1. Every Child Performing at or Above Grade Level by 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

 

2. Flexibility for Innovation and Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

 

3. Challenging Our Students and Preparing Them to Succeed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

 

4. Helping Teachers Close the Achievement Gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

5. Strengthening Public Schools and Empowering Parents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

iii
1

Introduction

Five years ago, Americans united behind a revolutionary idea: Every child can learn.

With these words, on Jan. 8, 2002, President Bush signed the landmark No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) 

into law. Passed by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in Congress, it was designed to end the “soft 

bigotry of low expectations” so that, as the president said, “all students will have a better chance to 

learn, to excel, and to live out their dreams.” 

The law, which reauthorized the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, signaled a fundamental 

and common-sense change in American education. Academic standards would be set by states, schools 

would be held accountable for results, and the federal government would support both with increased 

resources and flexibility. And it’s working, with test scores rising and achievement gaps narrowing.

All of these results point to the law’s ultimate goal: steady academic gains until all students can read and 

do math at or above grade level, closing for good the nation’s achievement gap between disadvantaged 

and minority students and their peers. “This law finally puts muscle behind the attempt to close that 

gap,” said New York City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein. “We can no longer mask the deficiencies of 

some students with outsized gains by others.”

The No Child Left Behind Act recognizes what truly makes a difference in providing a quality education. 

It calls for a highly qualified teacher in the core subjects in every classroom; the use of proven, researchbased instructional methods; and timely information and options for parents. Schools that underperform 

are held accountable, providing their students with free tutoring or transfer to a better-performing public 

school. In other words, children’s education needs are placed first—where they belong.

The law has helped revitalize the states’ constitutional leadership role in education. Before NCLB was 

passed, less than half the states fully measured their students against clear academic standards. Today, 

every state and the District of Columbia hold schools accountable for improving academic achievement. 

Every state also participates in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)—the Nation’s 

Report Card—allowing policymakers and parents alike to compare progress. “The premise of NCLB is 

clear and essential,” said former Colorado Gov. Bill Owens. “All children can learn. Not just children 

from homes of privilege, children from suburbia or children from a certain ethnic background.”

Federal resources have been increased to match this enhanced role. Total federal funding for No Child 

Left Behind rose 34 percent between 2001 and 2006. Funding for Title I schools serving low-income 

students rose 45 percent. States and school districts also have unprecedented flexibility in how they use 

federal funds in exchange for greater accountability for results.

“NCLB has helped by setting very clear, very high achievement targets for all students,” said 

Washington, D.C., public schoolteacher Jason Kamras, the 2005 National Teacher of the Year. “I think 

that’s an incredibly positive step in American public education.”
2

No Child Left Behind Is Working

The No Child Left Behind Act is challenging our students to succeed and our schools to improve. Early 

data comparisons suggest that they are responding.

In the 1990s, reading remained stagnant for fourth-graders nationwide, according to NAEP, while 

achievement gaps in math grew larger for African-American and Hispanic nine- and 13-year-olds. By 

contrast, according to several recent NAEP assessments:

• More reading progress has been made by nine-year-olds in five years (1999-2004) than in the 

previous 28 years combined;

• Math scores for fourth- and eighth-graders and nine- and 13-year-olds have reached new 

heights; and

• Achievement gaps in reading and math between African-American and Hispanic nine-year-olds 

and their white peers have fallen to all-time lows.

This progress has occurred as the academic bar has been raised and our schools have become more 

diverse. In fact, some of the largest gains are being made by children once left behind, including many 

in big-city public schools. Under NCLB, fourth-graders in a majority of sampled urban school districts 

made greater gains in reading and math than students nationwide on average, according to the NAEP 

Trial Urban District Assessments. The Council of the Great City Schools also reported double-digit 

gains in large urban districts for fourth-graders in both subjects between 2002 and 2005. 

These positive national results are reflected in state proficiency scores in individual schools:

• North Glen Elementary (Glen Burnie, Md.)—In 2003, just 57 percent of students in this highpoverty school rated proficient in reading, while 46 percent were proficient in math. By 2005, 

those numbers had risen to 82 and 84 percent, respectively. African-American students improved 

their math proficiency by an astounding 47 percentage points. “They’ve taken advantage of all 

the aspects of the No Child Left Behind law and they’ve been able to raise their scores and make 

sure that no child is left behind in their school,” said Mrs. Laura Bush.

They are also reflected in school districts:

• Garden Grove School District (Garden Grove, Calif.)—All but two of the district’s schools 

met or exceeded their adequate yearly progress (AYP) goals in the 2004–05 school year. 

Three-fourths of the district’s students spoke English as a second language, and nearly six in 

10 were from low-income families. “We use the data behind No Child Left Behind to set the 

targets we want to hit. We align all our actions and resources to hit those targets. And our teachers believe the kids can do it,” said Garden Grove Superintendent Laura Schwalm.
3

And the results are reflected throughout states:

• New York—Fourth-grade math achievement rose 11 points between 2002 and 2004, while the 

achievement gap for both African-American and Hispanic students narrowed by 10 points. A 

record 70 percent of New York’s fourth-graders met all state Learning Standards in English in 

2005, 22 points better than in 1999—including, for the first time, a majority of African-American 

and Hispanic students.

• Georgia—More than 70 percent of third-grade English language learners scored proficient or 

better in reading in 2004–05, up 23 percentage points from 2002. Among third-graders with disabilities, 81 percent scored proficient or better in reading, up 26 percentage points.

Of course, test scores do not tell the whole story. Ninety percent of teachers have met NCLB’s highly 

qualified teacher requirements—a bachelor’s degree, state certification and demonstrated expertise in 

the subject matter taught. At-risk students are getting help earlier, while children with disabilities are 

receiving more classroom time and attention, according to the independent Center on Education Policy. 

And students in the groundbreaking Reading First program receive on average 100 extra minutes per 

week of proven, research-based instruction from teachers, tutors and reading coaches.

With the help of No Child Left Behind, and working together as legislators, policymakers and educators, 

we’ve been able to turn the tide. “NCLB called on educators to embrace a new challenge—not just 

access for all, but achievement for all. Thousands upon thousands are answering that call,” said Kati 

Haycock, director of the non-partisan Education Trust. “A culture of achievement is taking hold in our 

schools, and we are better poised to confront the new challenges.”

Building on Results: A Blueprint for Strengthening the No Child Left Behind Act

In five short years, the No Child Left Behind Act has evolved from an idea to a law to a way of life. 

Today, educators, public officials and the media are engaged in a nationwide conversation, debating 

whether academic standards are high enough, assessments are fair enough, and enforcement is tough 

enough. This conversation would not be occurring without No Child Left Behind.

As we approach the law’s reauthorization, the conversation must focus on how to turn around struggling 

schools and improve the academic performance of older students. No Child Left Behind has given us 

the data to see what is working—and what is not. One of the biggest challenges is the performance of 

late middle and high school students. Between 1999 and 2004, reading scores for 17-year-olds fell three 

points, and math scores fell one point, according to NAEP. Achievement gaps between Hispanic and 

white 17-year-olds actually grew wider in both subjects.

Achievement by students requires action by schools. In 1983, the A Nation at Risk report called on high 

school students to take a minimum of three years each of math and science to graduate. A generation 

later, less than half the states have met this goal. A recent survey found that only one in five high school 

graduates in the workforce say they were challenged by their coursework while in school.
4

We also must reward teachers and principals who make the greatest progress in improving student 

performance and closing the achievement gap. This is especially important in high-poverty schools, 

where students are less likely to be taught by a credentialed teacher. To speed up our progress, we must 

work to match the very best teachers with our most challenging schools.

This is critical for America’s competitiveness. Our 15-year-olds ranked 24th out of 29 developed 

nations in math literacy and problem-solving, according to the 2003 Programme for International 

Student Assessment (PISA). The U.S. has fallen to ninth place in the world in high school graduation 

rates among young adults, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Compounding the problem, about 1 million students drop out every year, making the “million-dollar 

mistake”— the difference in lifetime earnings between the average high school dropout and bachelor’s 

degree recipient. Less than half of the students who do graduate are ready for college-level math and 

science coursework, according to ACT, Inc. 

Since the passage of NCLB, research has shown a convergence in the skills and knowledge needed to 

succeed in both college and the global workforce. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, about 90 

percent of the fastest-growing jobs require postsecondary education or training. Math and science have 

become the new currencies of the global economy. Our students must have the knowledge and skills 

needed to succeed in this changed world.

Building on Results: The Policy

To ensure our students’ success, we will build on NCLB’s results in the following ways:

• A stronger effort must be made to close the achievement gap through high state 

standards and accountability.

• Middle and high schools must offer more rigorous coursework that better prepares 

students for postsecondary education or the workforce.

•	 States must be given flexibilities and new tools to restructure chronically underperforming

schools, and families must be given more options.

The Bush administration will continue to work with Congress to give educators, policymakers and 

parents the tools to get the job done, without straying from NCLB’s core principles, including:

• All students reading and doing math at or above grade level by 2014;

• Annual assessments and disaggregation of data to close the achievement gap;

• Qualified teachers in core academic subjects in every classroom; and

• Timely information and options for all parents.

No Child Left Behind is a work in progress: every day, we learn what works so students can make 

greater progress. Five years after the law’s passage, we have collected more data than ever before about 

the academic performance of our students and schools. This information enables us to take action—and 

act we must.
5

Building on Results: Policy Summaries

1. Every Child Performing at or Above Grade Level by 2014. States continue to measure students 

individually and by student group, and participate in the National Assessment of Educational 

Progress (NAEP). Information about the results is made transparent and readily available to 

parents. Schools missing adequate yearly progress goals are held accountable and given assistance to turn around their performance.

2. Flexibility for Innovation and Improvement. States are given additional flexibility to improve 

student achievement. Innovative methods to measure progress are utilized, such as growth 

models. Districts can prioritize support based on a school’s success. Innovative approaches 

are permitted for schools making progress in assessing students with disabilities and teaching 

English to limited English proficient (LEP) students. Essential reforms will support state 

efforts to ensure the safety of students.

3. Challenging Our Students and Preparing Them to Succeed. States must demonstrate real 

progress in accurately reporting and improving high school graduation rates. States implement 

more rigorous standards so that graduates receive a meaningful diploma. Increased and 

dedicated Title I resources are provided to help at-risk older students stay in school and on 

the path to graduation. Expansion of Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate 

programs will improve the availability of rigorous coursework. An Adjunct Teacher Corps 

composed of professionals from the math and science fields will provide expertise and support 

in the classroom.

4. Helping Teachers Close the Achievement Gap. A Teacher Incentive Fund rewards teachers and 

principals whose students make exceptional progress. The President’s Math Now for Elementary and Middle School Students programs promote and implement proven, research-based 

instructional methods. Science assessments are factored into state accountability calculations. 

The effective Reading First program is strengthened to help more children learn to read by 

grade three. The Striving Readers program is expanded to help struggling older students catch 

up academically.

5. Strengthening Public Schools and Empowering Parents. The Title I School Improvement 

Fund is expanded to help schools create better outcomes for students. Students attending 

underperforming schools are given new school choice options. New Promise Scholarships 

are created for low-income students in chronically low-performing schools. Charter school 

options are expanded. Supplemental Educational Services (SES) is strengthened and expanded, 

particularly for students with disabilities, limited English proficient students and students living 

in rural areas.
6

Building on Results: Policy Proposals

1. Every Child Performing at or Above Grade Level by 2014

Overview

We remain committed to ensuring that all students can read and do math at grade level or better by 2014. 

This is the basic purpose and mission of the No Child Left Behind Act. According to the 2006 National 

Assessment of Title I Interim Report, four states are currently on track for meeting the goal—Delaware, 

Kansas, North Carolina, and Oklahoma. With its Starting Strong Initiative, South Dakota has advanced 

the timetable, calling on all third-graders to be proficient in reading and math or on track to proficiency 

by 2010. With high standards, accountability and decisions based on sound data and science, we believe 

students in all states can achieve similar success.

Summary of Proposals

a. Maintain Annual Academic Assessments and Accountability

	 Information is at the core of NCLB. Over the past five years, states have developed the ability to 

provide regular and reliable reporting about student achievement. Through annual assessments, 

parents now receive information about how well their child is doing in school and about how 

well a school is educating all children. To complete the current NCLB requirements, states will 

add science to their assessment systems at three grade levels by 2008.

Two critical components of NCLB—measuring achievement and holding schools accountable for 

results—must continue. First, states will continue to assess students in reading / language arts 

and math in each of grades 3–8. To help states ensure they are reaching towards high standards 

and to provide a comparative benchmark, the National Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP) will continue to be administered in the fourth and eighth grades in reading and math, 

with all states participating. Second, in keeping with current law, states will report student 

assessment results to parents and hold schools accountable for improving the performance of all 

students. The disaggregation of achievement results and the required 95 percent participation 

rate, hallmarks of NCLB, will continue to ensure that students in critical subgroups (race, 

ethnicity, English language proficiency, disability, and socio-economic status) remain the focus 

of attention.

b. Promote High State Academic Standards

The administration will maintain its commitment to local control as states continue to establish 

the required academic standards and assessments for students. To support greater transparency, 

states must report the proficiency rates for state and NAEP assessments on the same public report 

card. Further, the Department of Education will support cross-state comparisons by providing a 

platform for states and the general public to analyze and compare standards across the nation.
7

2. Flexibility for Innovation and Improvement

Overview

The real work of educating America’s students does not happen at the federal level. It happens in the 

states and schools. States and localities have the primary responsibility to direct and manage education. 

They should have the opportunity to innovate and show creativity as they work to meet the fundamental 

goals of No Child Left Behind.

Additional flexibility, options and tools will be offered to help states improve their accountability 

systems and demonstrate gains in student achievement. These include the use of growth models to 

measure progress and the ability to focus interventions and resources on students who have yet to reach 

grade level.

Summary of Proposals

a. Greater Use of Growth Models

One clear benefit from NCLB’s focus on transparency of information—and from increased federal 

resources for that purpose—is improved data systems in the states. Many states can now implement 

more sophisticated accountability systems to measure and follow the progress of individual students. A 

growth-based accountability model is one of those systems.

For those states with well-established assessments and robust data systems, growth models will be 

permitted in their overall accountability systems. Growth models allow states to measure individual 

students’ progress over time, giving schools credit for improvement from year to year and providing 

another way to show whether achievement gaps are closing. They may be particularly useful in charting 

the progress of students whose achievement may follow a different path from that of their peers, such as 

students with disabilities or LEP students. This information can be used to identify not only struggling 

students seeking to master state standards, but also proficient students at risk of stalling and falling behind. 

It is important to point out that a growth model is a tool to achieve proficiency by 2014, not a loophole to 

avoid it.

For a growth model to work under Building on Results, it must follow these core principles:

• Growth Toward Standards—The growth model must ensure that all students are proficient by 

2014 in reading / language arts and math while setting individual student progress measures to 

ensure that achievement gaps are closing for all student groups. The annual goals must be based on 

grade-level proficiency, not on student background or school characteristics.

• Assessments and Data—Schools and districts must be held accountable for the performance of 

each student subgroup in reading / language arts and mathematics in grades 3–8. Student participation rates and one other academic indicator must be included as separate academic indicators in the 

state accountability system.

The use of these principles to design a state’s growth model will ensure that accountability has a 

clear and defined meaning—accelerated growth toward the 2014 goal, not just an arbitrary amount 

of progress.
8

b. Flexibility Through Prioritized Support for Schools

Another result of improved data systems and rigorous accountability mechanisms is the opportunity 

to treat schools appropriately based on their record in meeting accountability targets. Capitalizing 

on improved state data systems, states will be able to prioritize their school improvement activities 

based on the specific needs of the school.

To make the accountability provisions of NCLB more meaningful, states will have more flexibility 

to precisely focus their technical assistance, interventions and direct resources to schools identified 

for improvement, corrective action or restructuring. This flexibility will help states do what is necessary to enable all students to read and do math at grade level or better by 2014 in a more effective 

and efficient manner.

For example, schools will be able to focus their choice options and SES resources on students not 

yet proficient, so long as the “all-students” group meets the state’s proficiency target and the school 

meets the 95 percent participation requirement for assessments. This would apply to schools in 

both school improvement and corrective action status. Schools undergoing restructuring, on the 

other hand, still must offer choice and SES to all currently eligible students. To ensure parents 

are properly informed of their choice and SES options on a timely basis, only school districts that 

notify parents of their choice and SES options no later than 30 days prior to the beginning of the 

school year will be permitted to prioritize their support activities.

c. Provide More Flexibility in Use of Federal Funds

Current state and local flexibility provisions are too limited to provide significant, meaningful flexibility to states and districts. Under Building on Results, states’ ability to efficiently and effectively direct federal resources will be expanded. We will streamline the application process for federal 

support and afford states greater flexibility in allocating federal funds throughout the state.

Transferability, a useful tool that helps states and districts tailor federal programs and funds to meet 

local needs, will also be expanded. The amount of funds that may be transferred will be raised to 

100 percent. Currently, states and local education agencies making adequate yearly progress may 

transfer just 50 percent of applicable funds. Perkins Act funds will be included in the pool of funds 

that could be transferred. Furthermore, the transferability provisions will be revised to make it 

easier for local education agencies (LEAs), in consultation with private schools, to consolidate and 

transfer funds reserved for private school students and teachers. 

The secretary of education will be permitted to respond comprehensively when there is a natural 

disaster or other major emergency (as was the case following the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes). 

Finally, additional rural districts will be given flexibility that is currently available only to the 

smallest rural districts.

d. Improved Assessments and Accountability for Students with Disabilities

NCLB is committed to the academic achievement of students with disabilities. Therefore, students 

with disabilities must participate fully and meaningfully in state assessments. To ensure districts 

receive credit for their work in helping these students make academic progress, states will have 

the option of assessing a small group of students with disabilities based on alternate and modified 

achievement standards. These standards must meet high quality standards and promote challenging 

instruction so students with disabilities can reach the highest possible levels of achievement.
9

e. Accelerate English Language Acquisition for LEP Students

By disaggregating achievement data by student subgroups, NCLB has focused attention on 

the academic achievement of our nation’s more than 5 million-strong and growing population 

of LEP students. Building on Results will maintain a strong commitment to assessment 

and accountability for all LEP students in the content areas as a driving force for improving 

instruction and outcomes. More attention will be focused on English language acquisition as 

the foundation for academic achievement. To acknowledge the close relationship between the 

development of English language proficiency and academic content proficiency, as well as to 

create incentives to accelerate the learning of English, state accountability systems will include 

a provision to recognize schools making significant progress in moving LEP students toward 

English language proficiency.

f. Support Innovation in the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program

Many schools and education agencies have made great strides toward creating safe and drug-free 

learning environments. The 2006 Indicators of School Crime and Safety found declining crime 

rates in our nation’s schools. But we must do more. The Safe and Drug-Free Schools (SDFS) 

grant program was designed to support the creation of positive and safe learning environments 

through education and prevention activities. To ensure this objective is carried out, states will 

be given funds to provide school districts with training, technical assistance and information 

regarding effective models and strategies to create safe, healthy and secure schools. In addition, 

the current SDFS national programs will be consolidated into a single, more flexible discretionary program focused on four areas: Emergency Planning, Preventing Violence and Drug Use, 

School Culture and Climate, and Emerging Needs.

3. Challenging Our Students and Preparing Them to Succeed

Overview

When 90 percent of the fastest-growing jobs require postsecondary education or training, it is 

unacceptable that almost a third of incoming high school students—and about half of African-American 

and Hispanic students—do not make it to graduation day on time. Many are not challenged by 

their coursework; others fall behind in earlier years and do not catch up in the more fast-paced high 

school environment.

Since the National Governors Association held its National Education High School Summit in 2005, 

many states have worked to increase the rigor of high schools. The reauthorization of NCLB must set 

a national expectation of real high school reform. Building on Results establishes the expectation 

that every high school student graduate on time with a diploma that indicates readiness for success in 

postsecondary education and the 21st-century workforce.
10

Summary of Proposals

a. Improve Graduation Rates

There can be no debate about the need to increase the number of high school students who graduate 

with a meaningful diploma and relevant skills. All 50 governors have agreed to use a more accurate graduation rate calculation in the National Governors Association’s Graduation Rate Compact. 

By no later than 2011–12, all states must report school-level, disaggregated results of their fouryear cohort graduation rates in state accountability calculations. In the meantime, all states must 

report district-level disaggregated results of the Average Freshmen Graduation Rate (AFGR) in 

state accountability calculations. 

b. Ensure That Students Graduate Ready to Succeed

In this global economy, it is critical that the K–12 and higher education communities work 

together to build common expectations for high school students so they are fully prepared to 

enter college or the workforce with the skills they need to succeed. Under Building on Results, 

states must develop by 2010–11 course-level academic standards for two years of English and 

math that will prepare high school graduates to succeed in college or the workplace. By 2012–

13, states will administer assessments aligned to these standards and publicly report the extent to 

which all students are on track to enter college or the workplace fully prepared. 

While these college-ready standards and assessments will not be required to be used as part of 

the accountability system, states will continue to use their current NCLB high school assessment 

for accountability decisions. States will receive technical assistance to improve their high school 

content standards and assessments.

c. Promote Rigor in High School Coursework

Rigorous coursework in high schools is critical to ensuring that students are learning the skills 

they need to compete in the global economy. Low-income students who complete a rigorous high 

school course of study are eligible for an Academic Competitiveness Grant (ACG) to help with 

college costs. The ACG program provides additional grant aid to low-income first- and secondyear college students who complete a rigorous program of study in high school. Through Building 

on Results, we can increase academic rigor and simultaneously increase the number of students 

who may receive those grants by making Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate 

classes available to more students and by training teachers to lead them. To promote student 

participation in courses required for success in college, states will report completion rates of these 

college readiness courses by relevant subgroups.

d. Increase Funding for High Schools That Serve Low-Income Students

To ensure that high schools have the resources to help low-income students, there will be a substantial increase in funds for Title I high school students. Currently, Title I funds tend to be primarily allocated toward elementary schools. Districts will have to give their high schools at least 90 

percent of the high schools’ proportionate share of the increased funds. A corresponding funding 

increase will ensure that elementary schools’ Title I programs are not negatively affected.
11

e. Provide Specific Expertise Through a New Adjunct Teacher Corps

Many schools, particularly in low-income areas, suffer from a lack of qualified or expert instructors. The Adjunct Teacher Corps will offer an opportunity for talented and dedicated professionals 

from outside the teaching profession to share their expertise in core academic subjects, especially 

math and science, in middle and high school classrooms. Competitive grants will be provided for 

school districts to engage in partnerships with other public and private organizations and institutions to take advantage of the expertise in their communities.

4. Helping Teachers Close the Achievement Gap

Overview

The academic progress made by states and students in the last five years is testament to the fact that 

the achievement gap is not intractable. However, while we have narrowed the gap, we are a long way 

from closing it. Teachers are instrumental to this effort. They must be equipped with the most current, 

research-based instructional tools to help them do their jobs. We need to find ways to get our best 

teachers into our neediest schools. And we must offer more intensive instruction and tutoring to help 

children catch up and keep pace. 

Summary of Proposals

a. Reward Exceptional Teaching

Bringing every student up to grade level demands high-quality teachers. The Teacher Incentive 

Fund will provide resources to help states and school districts develop compensation systems 

that reward teachers and principals who make progress in raising student achievement and closing achievement gaps. Teachers and principals who choose to work in the neediest schools can 

also be rewarded.

b. Focus On Mathematics Achievement

According to a 2004 Department study, only a small fraction of mathematics coursework in our 

nation’s middle schools has scientific evidence of effectiveness. To strengthen the teaching of 

math in elementary and middle schools, President Bush has proposed the Math Now program, 

which will provide resources to help teachers use scientifically proven practices, including those 

soon to be recommended by the National Math Panel, so that students enter high school ready to 

take challenging and advanced coursework.

Math Now for Elementary School Students will provide competitive grants to improve math 

instruction for elementary school students so that they learn the skills necessary to take and pass 

algebra in middle school.

Math Now for Middle School Students will provide grants to improve the instruction of middle school students who are performing significantly below grade level so that they may learn 

the skills necessary to take and pass algebra and other challenging courses.
12

c. Focus On Science Achievement

In introducing the American Competitiveness Initiative in 2006, President Bush announced his 

commitment to improving student achievement in math and science in order to maintain our 

nation’s competitive advantage. Including science in NCLB accountability determinations will 

encourage a greater focus on this critical subject and ultimately lead to greater science achievement. Beginning in 2008–09, disaggregated results from science assessments at three grade 

levels will factor into state accountability calculations. The reauthorized law will incorporate an 

expectation that all students achieve proficiency in science by the 2019–20 school year.

d. Build Expertise in Reading Instruction Through Reading First

The administration is committed to ensuring that every child can read by the third grade. To 

meet this goal, the administration will continue to invest in and expand Reading First, the largest, 

most focused and most successful early reading initiative ever undertaken in this country. The 

program applies scientifically based reading research and instructional tools and assessments to 

help teachers improve student achievement. To date, more than 5,600 schools in 1,600 districts 

nationwide have participated in Reading First. State programs funded by Reading First have 

served approximately 1.8 million students, and more than 100,000 teachers have benefited from 

its professional development.

The early results are extremely promising. For the 2004–05 school year, students in Reading 

First schools demonstrated increases in reading achievement across all performance measures. 

The percentage of second-grade students who met or exceeded proficiency in reading on Reading First outcome measures of fluency increased from 33 percent in 2003–04 to 39 percent in 

2004–05 for economically disadvantaged students; from 27 to 32 percent for LEP students; from 

34 to 37 percent for African-American students; from 30 to 39 percent for Hispanic students; and 

from 17 to 23 percent for students with disabilities.

e. Offer Teachers Tools to Reach Older Struggling Readers

The Striving Readers program, which serves students in grades 6–12, will fund school-level instructional strategies designed to increase reading achievement through targeted, intensive intervention and quality literacy instruction throughout the curriculum. The program will measure its 

impact and success through a rigorous experimental research evaluation process. On the strength 

of the program’s success, Striving Readers will expand its reach to serve a greater number of 

struggling readers.
13

5. Strengthening Public Schools and Empowering Parents

Overview

Before the No Child Left Behind Act was passed, parents—especially those of modest means—were 

often relegated to the education sidelines. When their child’s school did not improve, they were given 

few alternatives. NCLB has empowered families with new options, including the choice to attend a 

better-performing public school or a public charter school. The law also provides free tutoring and 

after-school help, called Supplemental Educational Services (SES), to qualified low-income students. 

Hundreds of thousands have taken advantage of this opportunity. Finally, NCLB enables teachers, 

parents and community leaders to work together to turn around chronically underperforming schools. 

Together, these policies provide an incentive to public schools to improve or lose their customers.

We remain committed to restructuring and fixing troubled public schools. But we must also provide 

more parents the opportunity to make appropriate choices for their children. To that end, we support the 

spread of charter schools and new Promise Scholarships to meet the growing demand.

Summary of Proposals

a. Invest in the School Improvement Fund

Funds will be targeted to ensure improvement in some of the nation’s most challenging schools. 

School Improvement Grants will support implementation of the schools’ improvement plans and 

will assist states’ efforts to closely monitor and review those plans for each school while providing technical assistance to turn around low-performing schools.

b. Strengthen School Restructuring

Some schools that are subject to restructuring for chronic underperformance are simply not 

pursuing the quality and depth of reform that will lead to adequate yearly progress. Current law 

permits these schools to implement only minor reforms as corrective actions even when they are 

in the fifth year of program improvement. Under Building on Results, the menu of actions authorized under restructuring will commit these schools either to make substantial changes in staff 

or to reconstitute the schools’ governance structure, except in special circumstances (e.g., when a 

school is in restructuring status only because of the performance of one subgroup).

Additionally, consistent with state law, the reauthorized law would permit operation of a school 

in restructuring status to be turned over to an elected official such as a city mayor, in addition to a 

state education agency as allowed under current law.

c. Enhance Choice Through Public and Private School Scholarships

The administration strongly believes in public education. We also believe that private schools 

are an important and effective alternative for many parents, especially those whose children attend chronically underperforming schools. Parents deserve the opportunity to have their child 

attend a quality school. Public schools that go into restructuring status will offer Promise Scholarships, which would allow low-income students in grades 3–12 to attend a private school or an 
14

out-of-district public school, or receive intensive tutoring. Federal funds will follow the child to 

his or her new school. This money will be supplemented by a federal scholarship of $2,500, for 

an average total scholarship of approximately $4,000. Students attending a private school under 

these provisions would take their state’s assessment or a standard national assessment in the same 

grades and subjects assessed in their original school. Students selecting intensive tutoring would 

receive scholarships of up to $3,000.

The need to offer low-income parents the option of private schools for their children is intensified 

by a lack of real public school choices in some districts. Nationally, only around 1 percent of 

eligible students have exercised NCLB’s public school choice option and transferred to a higherperforming public school. This low participation rate is often due to districts’ inability to accommodate parents’ transfer requests because high-quality local public school options are lacking. 

For communities that want to expand local options for parents, the administration will provide 

additional resources through a competitive grant program known as Opportunity Scholarships, 

with preference given to areas with large numbers of schools in improvement status. Modeled 

after the Washington D.C., choice program that the federal government has funded since 2004, 

this program would enable students to attend a private school through a locally designed scholarship program. Families could also seek additional tutoring for their children. The scholarship 

amount provided to a student would be the sum of the tuition, fees and costs, including any necessary transportation expenses, for the school they would attend, or an amount equivalent to the 

average per-pupil expenditure in public schools in the state in which the recipient resides, whichever is less. To be eligible for Opportunity Scholarships, students must be from low-income 

families and be assigned to schools identified for improvement, corrective action or restructuring.

d. Provide Additional Staffing Freedom at the Most Troubled Schools

Schools that are required to be restructured will be authorized by Title I law to remove limitations 

on teacher transfers from their collective bargaining agreements, similar to contract revisions 

permitted under bankruptcy law. Removal of these provisions will provide these schools with 

greater freedom to pursue aggressive reform by ensuring that the school leadership has the right 

staff in place. This provision will apply only to schools in restructuring, not to all schools in 

the district.

e. Augment Charter School Options

In order to enhance charter school availability and performance, the federal charter school program will now support all viable charter applications that can improve outcomes for students. 

Charters will also have a greater degree of flexibility to use their grants in executing planning 

and startup activities. Similarly, we will support local decisions to reopen schools identified for 

restructuring as charter schools, even if state law limits the number of possible charter schools 

within that state.
15

The development of new charter schools would help states and school districts address the 

primary challenge many districts face in implementing public school choice: insufficient seats 

at schools where students could transfer. Additional public charter schools could resolve capacity problems in both urban school districts, where quality schools are often over-enrolled, and in 

rural school districts, where the establishment of virtual charter schools would provide a practical new option for families living in isolated areas. 

f. Enhanced Supplemental Educational Services (SES)

The SES provisions of NCLB are designed to help students achieve or exceed grade-level standards by providing extra support such as tutoring. Larger SES per-child amounts for students 

who live in rural areas or who have disabilities or limited English proficiency will be permitted. 

As the cost of tutoring these students is on average higher than for other students, SES funding 

will increase by an appropriate amount or proportion. This change should also increase the pool 

of SES providers with the capacity to serve these students.

Additionally, greater flexibility in the use of Title I funds to implement SES programs will be 

allowed. To provide further opportunity to students, SES will be offered to all low-income 

students who attend a school in program improvement status from the first year forward, a year 

earlier than before and concurrent with the offer of public school choice as an option. School 

districts will be allowed to set aside funding to conduct quality parent outreach campaigns.

We will also remove the disincentive to support SES and choice programs by requiring that districts spend all of their SES and choice funds each year or risk forfeiting the balance of their 20 

percent set-aside for these activities. Enforcement mechanisms will be strengthened to further 

ensure that parents and students are given proper and timely notice of their SES and choice options, and that high-quality SES services are provided.

g. Provide Equitable Services to Private School Students and Teachers

“At-risk” students should have access to academic services regardless of where they attend 

school. We propose extending the longstanding requirements for equitable participation by 

private school students and teachers to new programs and initiatives where appropriate, as well 

as to existing programs such as Striving Readers and Troops-to-Teachers. Service providers affiliated with a religious organization should not be restricted from providing services so long as 

those services are secular, neutral and non-ideological, as required under NCLB. Additionally, 

we support greater private school flexibility in the use of federal funds and improved communication between private and public schools.
Our mission is to ensure equal access to education and to 

promote educational excellence throughout the nation.

www.ed.gov