Opposition by the States: How Negative Responses to the No Child Left Behind Act has Impacted the Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act

Abstract

The initial passage of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2002 was seen as a bipartisan victory towards education reform that would close the achievement gap. Since the passage of the NCLB, 38 states have shown opposition to the legislation through a variety of responses including producing legislation in attempts to opt-out of provisions, turning to the judicial system for recourse when funding is withheld, and passing symbolic resolutions. This paper completes a cross-state analysis to determine why so much opposition exists to NCLB and how states’ responses have influenced Congress’s inability to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 2007, under which NCLB was created. States showing opposition vary tremendously, including by size, average family income, political ideology, and academic achievement prior to passage. By analyzing policy feedbacks due to implementation concerns of states, this paper adds to current scholars’ theories about the implementation process. By recognizing how excluded actors from the adoption of NCLB have influenced previously supportive actors of the law this paper combines elements of both top-down and bottom-up implementation approaches discussed in the literature to provide a richer and more accurate understanding of the implementation process. The starting point for such a study comes from understanding the response of those who have struggled with implementing NCLB.