When WASL test scores for 2003 came out this August, they showed a marked gap in achievement between white students and black students across the state. This set a fire under public educationʼs efforts to make the federal No Child Left Behind Act live up to its name.

While a number of students statewide did make substantial gains in nearly all subjects, meeting state goals for the test, Washington state, the Seattle School District, and Garfield High School itself failed to satisfy tough criteria set by the new law. All three have now been designated as “needing improvement,” according to federal guidelines, with increasing consequences for further inability to meet standards.

The complex federal act, unlike previous educational laws, requires every state to set and meet standards not just in the overall student population, but also within every single substantial demographic group the state, school, or district represents. The law, aimed at closing the achievement gap between white and minority, rich and poor, prevents high-achieving groups from covering for the low performance of others.

Although such improvement sounds like an unlikely goal, Seattle Schools Chief Academic Officer June Rimmer thinks it can be done. “Itʼs a challenge, but itʼs not impossible,” she said. “Itʼs going to require the hard work and support of teachers and students…we need to provide additional help to those who need it.”

The No Child Left Behind Act, signed by President Bush in 2001, mandates that each state develop a plan to have every student meeting federal standards in reading and math by 2014. Schools that fail to demonstrate, through testing, “Adequate Yearly Progress” (AYP) toward this goal will face consequences from instituting supplementary tutoring programs, to forced restructuring or transfer to private management.

Garfield Assistant Principal Barbara Casey is optimistic that this wonʼt be the case at GHS. “Iʼm going to say that we turn [test scores] around, not even five years from now, but this year. We canʼt afford to let one year pass without meeting standards.”

However, though nearly all educational groups agree in principle with the goals of NCLB, the law has drawn protest for its heavy reliance on standardized tests. “The problem in practical application is that it relies on too much testing,” said Seattle School Board member Steve Brown. “For instance, it stigmatizes schools with bad test scores, which get labeled as ʻfailingʼ because of the characteristics of the student population.” If a school fails to meet AYP two years in a row, the district is required to allow parents to transfer their children to a school that did.

This has not proved a problem to the district so far. According to Rimmer, when 600 families were offered the chance to move to better-performing schools, only 20 actually took advantage of the opportunity. “Most parents are very satisfied with the schools they are at,” she said.

Other groups, such as the National Education Association, point to how the measures required by the new law are not adequately funded by the federal government. According to a General Accounting Office study, $1.9 to $5.3 billion will have to come out of the statesʼ pockets to implement NCLB from 2002 to 2008. The teachersʼ union will challenge the law in court this fall on the grounds of a clause stating that states are not required to comply with any provision not fully funded by the federal government.

Most money from Washington, D.C. for education comes under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1964, of which NCLB is a revision of. About half of Seattle Schools receive Title I funds, which are allocated on the basis of student income. Should schools continue to not meet AYP, these funds could be restricted.

“There are some people who say we should not enforce the regulations, and do without the federal money,” said Brown. “But things fiscally being how they are, it adds up to a lot, and I donʼt think we can afford to do that.”

But Rimmer and Casey arenʼt complaining. Both emphasize that the high standards are important.

“We canʼt settle for anything less than that kind of equity,” said Casey. “It wonʼt require more funding, but it is going to take extra work.”