For Release: Revising NCLB's School Choice Provision

New report offers lawmakers a number of steps they can take to improve NCLB's school choice provision.

Published on November 14, 2008 in K-12 Education
Kristen Amundson

Washington, D.C.—In April 2004, 175,000 Chicago public school students were eligible to transfer to a higher-performing school within the district as part of the federal No Child Left Behind Act's "public school choice" provision. The provision is designed to provide an escape valve for students in chronically under-performing schools, but less than 1 percent of these students were able to take advantage of the transfer option, partly because they couldn't find a seat in a better quality school in their district. Nationwide, only a tiny fraction of eligible students have utilized NCLB's choice provision.

 In a new Education Sector Idea at Work, In Need of Improvement: Revising NCLB’s School Choice Provision, Policy Analyst Erin Dillon offers Congress and the Obama administration a number of steps they can take to improve the effectiveness of NCLB's choice provision. Using NCLB school performance information from Chicago and California as examples, Dillon shows that revising NCLB's choice provision to target the lowest-performing schools and students will substantially increase the percent of eligible students with a viable option to transfer schools. Dillon also urges lawmakers to offer incentives to higher-performing schools to accept transfer students and to ensure these students receive the academic support they need when they enter a new school.

Read In Need of Improvement: Revising NCLB’s School Choice Provision.

This publication was made possible by a grant from Carnegie Corporation of New York. The statements made and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the author.

Education Sector is an independent think tank that challenges conventional thinking in education policy. We are a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization committed to achieving real, measurable impact in education, both by improving existing reform initiatives and by developing new, innovative solutions to our nation’s most pressing education problems.

###