Annotated Bibliography

Anderson, P. M., Butcher, K. F., & Schanzenbach, D. W. (2017). ADEQUATE (OR

ADIPOSE?) YEARLY PROGRESS: ASSESSING THE EFFECT OF “NO CHILD
LEFT BEHIND” ON CHILDREN’S OBESITY. Education Finance and Policy, 12(1),
54–76. https://www.jstor.org/stable/educfinapoli.12.1.54

In this article the author focuses on the effect of NCLB and how it has impacted

allocation of time and materials to classrooms. The author discusses how AYP as

a state accountability program has also documented the changes of how schools

have chosen to operate in order to meet such requirements. Because of the

different levels of pressure upon schools there has been a drive towards dropping

time for classes such as physical education, recess, arts, and other

extracurriculars. The author then chooses to focus purely on the potential rise in

obesity from students before NCLB and after.

This article poses a strong argument in the allocation of time and materials

preceding NCLB being established but doesn’t follow with other examples of

struggling programs being left behind such as Art and Music. This article decides

to focus purely on Physical education which follows with the obesity study being

shown but could have a stronger meaning with just the argument over the

allocation being taken away from extracurriculars.

Dee, Thomas S., and Brian Jacob. “The Impact of No Child Left Behind on Student
Achievement.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, vol. 30, no. 3, 2011, pp.
418–46. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23018959. Accessed 1 Feb. 2024.
This source gives plenty of general information about the NO Child Left Behind

act, such as sanctions/punishments for not fulfilling requirements. It also gives

plenty of terms that are important for understanding the act. It also contributes to
 the History section, as it highlights the presidential administrations behind

commencement of the act, as well as additions new organizations made to it.

Grissom, J. A., Nicholson-Crotty, S., & Harrington, J. R. (2014). Estimating the Effects of No
Child Left Behind on Teachers’ Work Environments and Job Attitudes. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36(4), 417–436. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43773476

This article focuses on the way that consequential pressure has impacted teachers

in their lesson planning and general attitudes towards working. It furthers on the

work environment and how teacher burnout was become much more frequent as

well as teacher’s stress increasing. Finally, it also discusses teacher’s developing

preferential treatment towards students that can more likely impact the AYP.

This article functions well in discussing the stress and demands that NCLB has

left on teacher. It covers everything from wages, hierarchical pressure, and

emotional well-being, as well as other forms of variables that have added on to

this growing pressure on teacher. Let alone the higher demands of education upon

teachers as well as testing requirements for them.

Krieg, J. M. (2011a). Which students are left behind? the racial impacts of the No Child Left
Behind Act. Economics of Education Review, 30(4), 654–664.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.02.004

This source was used for the History section of this website. This article provided

the facts needed to give an accurate representation of the history of the NCLB

Act, and also provided us with specific dates, names, and actions that took place

throughout this era of American education history. The author also examined in

this article how the NCLB impacted minorities and the underprivileged in the
 education system. Krieg does this by pulling in test data from the state of

Washington, about whether the status of their AYP is known or not.

The article does a great job in providing us with key information about the NCLB

Act, while also speaking to the flaws and weaknesses of the program. The data

that the author collected was only from the state of Washington, so it would have

been more backed up if Krieg was able to collect similar data from other states.

Lavery, Leslie E.. “What Parents Still Do Not Know about No Child Left Behind and Why it

Matters.” Journal of Education Policy, 31, 3, 2015, 343-361.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2015.1094576

This article focuses on the parents’ knowledge of the curriculum and policies that

were implemented in NCLB. The article explores how an overarching lack of

knowledge among parents contributed to the lack of organized political action that

could have defended against NCLB downfalls. It provided a good framework for

creating a guide for both parents and teachers, in which the downfalls of NCLB

that could have been addressed were brought to the forefront, and it offered ways

for both administration and parents to fix these downfalls, which were

transferable to the helpful guide.

This article did a good job at addressing the downfalls of NCLB and how they

could be fixed to ensure future education reforms to operate more effectively. The

research was also backed up by other research that brought similar statistics and

there was no conflict of interest. The research was also funded by the US

Department of Education, which proved the validity and ability of the research.
Whitney, C. R., & Candelaria, C. A. (2017). The Effects of No Child Left Behind on Children’s
Socioemotional Outcomes. AERA Open, 3(3).
https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417726324

This article focuses on how students have been placed into a highly competitive

atmosphere that has stressed high test scores over autonomy and creativity. The

author states how this has led to students finding less desire to learn and

external/internal behaviors towards these frustrations. The article also mentions

how students have potentially faced either extra attention, or lack thereof, because

of where they place on the AYP. Students with more leverage to change the AYP

in favor of the school “Bubble Kids” have been shown to receive more

individualized attention from teachers while other students performing either far

below or above the AYP receive far less recognition and time with teachers.

This article is strong in the number of resources it presents especially with its

research towards possible effects on children. However, as the author states, there

is a gap of what is a possible effect vs is a direct effect. There is too many

variables. Due to this the author is only able to make mainly vague hypothesis,

which makes for a good resource, but isn’t firm enough to take data from.