No Child Left Behind: A National Study of Its Impact on Special Education in Rural Schools

Abstract

Under the most recent national mandates, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) and the newly reauthorized Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA), schools must bring virtually all students to the proficient level on state content tests within the next decade. Schools are expected to meet this challenge by employing only highly qualified teachers who are well trained to use evidence-based practices beginning next year. Serious concerns have been voiced by a variety of stakeholders about the impact of these mandates on rural schools as well as about their implications for special education services. Various stakeholders in rural areas across the country were surveyed to examine the perceived impact of the NCLBA mandates for highly qualified teachers and annual yearly progress and inform the debate on policies and practices associated with their implementation in rural schools. Results indicated that a majority of participants believed that NCLBA would have a negative impact on rural schools and that rural schools would have difficulty meeting the accountability and quality provisions of the Act in the area of special education.

Using Immediate Feedback to Increase Opportunities to Respond in a General Education Classroom

“…As previously mentioned, rural schools have difficulty hiring and retaining highly qualified teachers (Boe & Cook, 2006); greater diversity of abilities and disabilities in their classrooms (Berry et al, 2011); and limited funding for special education services (Kossar et al, 2005). Because of these issues, they may find it more educationally and financially feasible to place students with disabilities in an already established general education environment instead of funding a separate setting that would need additional staffing (Downing & Peckham-Hardin, 2007).…”

Special Education Policy Change

“…Additional factors, such as the type of instruction provided to ELL students (e.g., bilingual education, full immersion, dual-language instruction) and the socioeconomic status of the student and school, have provided a possible explanation to this disproportionality (De Valenzuela et al, 2006; Vaughn et al, 2005). All schools and districts in rural communities must address unique challenges of providing effective specialized instruction and supports and services to a CLD population, including ELLs as well as children from tribal communities and low-income schools with limited resources and finances (Ashbaker & Wilder, 2006; Faircloth, 2006; Klingner, Blanchett, & Harry, 2007; Kossar, Mitchem, & Ludlow, 2005).…”

Rural Schools Positioned to Promote the High Achievement of Students with Disabilities

“…Not long after the reauthorizations of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (known as "No Child Left Behind" or NCLB in its 2001 reauthorization) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (known as the "Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act" or IDEIA in its 2004 reauthorization), rural educators and researchers with an interest in rural schools began to express concern about the combined effects of these pieces of legislation (e.g., Bowen & Rude, 2006;Kossar, Mitchem, & Ludlow, 2005). Among the provisions of these reauthorizations, rural educators were most troubled, according to Kossar et al's survey research, by the need to close achievement gaps and the requirement to staff classrooms with "Highly Qualified Teachers."…”