NCLB represents the federal government's commitment to educating disadvantaged children and seeks to close the achievement gap that currently exists.  Since the bill's passage in 2002, the AFT and its state and local affiliates have worked with the Department of Education, state and local education authorities, and others in the civil rights and education communities to help achieve the positive goals of NCLB. However, the AFT recognizes that the goals of the legislation cannot be met without changes in the law, proper implementation and the necessary funding.  For example:

• Currently, NCLB only allows a school to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) if a certain percentage of students overall, and a certain percentage of students in each subgroup, achieve an arbitrary level of proficiency. In practice, this means that even schools progressing significantly can be labeled as failing.

·         The AYP formula is a highly inaccurate and arbitrary yardstick for measuring progress.  The law sets predetermined benchmarks for students' proficiency without taking into account schools' starting points. Further, its testing of students with disabilities and English language learners is neither valid nor reliable.

·         The "highly qualified" teacher requirements, as currently implemented, are unworkable for some teachers and do not apply to all individuals, such as supplemental service providers and charter school teachers, who teach public school students. Paraprofessionals are not being provided with the range of options necessary to demonstrate that they are qualified nor with the financial support necessary to meet the requirements.

·         The AFT supports targeting resources to disadvantaged students who are struggling to reach state standards, but the narrow set of school improvement interventions are not research-based and may be punitive rather than helpful to the schools and children they serve. Further, requiring schools to funnel scarce Title I resources to support public school choice and supplemental services diverts already limited classroom resources to these unproven interventions.

·         These problems with the structure and implementation of the law have been exacerbated by a lack of adequate federal funding. It is clear that the increases in funding recommended by the administration for the upcoming fiscal year fall far short of (1) what is necessary to get the job done and (2) what the Congress anticipated would be required to meet the mandates of the law.

Problems with NCLB and its implementation must be corrected to continue progress toward improving school performance and closing the academic achievement gap.