Tuesday, President Bush announced that all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico now have federally approved accountability plans in place and thus are in formal compliance with the No Child Left Behind Act. (These are the plans that outline how each state will meet adequate yearly progress requirements toward the ultimate goal of bringing all children to proficiency by 2012.) The Bush Administration is heralding this achievement as a milestone for education reform. It's certainly a procedural milestone, considering how dilatory were state responses to Clinton-era federal education laws. The issue is whether these new plans are for real, whether they will actually guide changes in education practice (as opposed to promises on paper), and whether they suitably walk the line between rigorous and flexible. Consider Iowa, whose newly approved NCLB plan includes the same old off-the-shelf norm-referenced tests that Iowa districts have always used and does not include any statewide academic standards or benchmarks. Supposedly Iowa will be able to show adequate yearly progress without demonstrating content-area mastery in reading, math, or science. Seems odd. Is this praiseworthy flexibility in action or is it an evasion of NCLB's (admittedly onerous) requirements?.
"Approval of Iowa plan sets bar for federal flexibility," Education Daily, June 10, 2003 (subscription required)
"President Bush, Secretary Paige celebrate approval of every state accountability plan under NCLB," U.S. Department of Education press release, June 10, 2003