Listening to Teachers: Classroom Realities and No Child Left Behind
Executive Summary
No Child Left Behind: The Teachers’ Voice survey grew out of our national study on the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), which is examining many aspects of NCLB implementation in six states and eleven school districts. Since there is much in NCLB that is aimed at teachers, we wanted to know what teachers think about the law and how they, and their schools, are responding to its strategies for change.
Thanks to the cooperation of two urban school districts in Fresno, California and Richmond, Virginia, we obtained survey responses from two groups of teachers on opposite ends of the country. These two school districts serve many low-income and minority students, with one serving mostly Latino students and the other mostly African- American students, and each operates within a very different state policy and reform context. The response rate of the teachers to our survey was 77.4%. The survey was administered in May-June 2004.
Key Findings:
- Teachers have a thoughtful and nuanced view of reform that is quite consistent across districts and across teachers in both schools that are doing well and those that have been identified as in need of improvement under NCLB.
- Teachers believed their schools have high standards and that the curriculum in their school was of high quality and linked to academic standards. They believed teachers in their schools were working hard to provide quality instruction, were dedicated to improving student achievement, and were accepting of accountability if it was based on a system that fairly measured instructional performance. They think their schools can improve more.
- They did not believe that identifying schools that had not made adequate yearly progress would lead to school improvement. They viewed the transfer option quite negatively but were somewhat more positive about the potential of supplemental educational services to improve schools. Teachers strongly believed that the NCLB sanctions would unfairly reward and punish teachers.
- Many of the teachers in schools that were identified as needing improvement do not plan to be teaching in them five years in the future. Teachers also believed that the NCLB sanctions would cause teachers to transfer out of schools not making adequate progress. These results suggest that there is a very serious problem in getting teachers to make a long-term commitment to teach in poorly performing schools and that designating schools as “in need of improvement” under NCLB may make things worse.
- Teachers confirm that the NCLB accountability system is influencing the instructional and curricular practices of teachers, but it is producing unintended and possibly negative consequences. They reported that, in response to NCLB accountability, they ignored important aspects of the curriculum, de-emphasized or neglected untested topics, and focused instruction on the tested subjects, probably excessively. Teachers rejected the idea that the NCLB testing requirements would focus teacher’s instruction or improve the curriculum.
- Teachers reported that reform was underway prior to NCLB, and in some cases NCLB disrupted these reform efforts. There is evidence from the survey to support the idea of “policy churn,” that is, schools in high-poverty districts, and particularly low-performing schools, are continually changing their educational programs in response to calls for reform.
- Teachers provide some insightful thoughts about what they need to meet high standards and improve student performance:
- They need more resources, and they had highly nuanced views of what resources matter. In particular, teachers desired more money for curricular and instructional materials aligned with state standards.
- They favored additional time to collaborate with other teachers more than increased professional development.
- They voiced support for the importance of small classes.
- They want experienced administrators in their schools, to work with experienced teachers, and more involvement of parents. They were not opposed to removing ineffective teachers.
- They believed public recognition and rewards for improving student
performance were more effective than sanctions for poor performance.
In compliance with the UC Open Access Policy, this report has been made available on eScholarship:
