This is from the May 9, issue of Time Magazine:
"...Utah, the state that backed President George W. Bush more resolutely than any other in last fall's election, became the first to formally defy his proudest domestic achievement. The legislature passed a bill that lets Utah schools ignore the 2002 No Child Left Behind education law if its mandates conflict with state priorities or require state money to meet them...For three years, teachers and politicians have wailed about No Child, which requires rigid reform and testing regimens in exchange for federal money for low-income students. Critics say the policy is underfunded, overbearing and unfair. Now they are taking action. And the law may not survive intact, despite the Administration's vow to fight to the end....the timing of the rebellion is no coincidence. The law's provisions are gradual, so it is only now that many states are beginning to feel its effects. Meanwhile, after three years of dramatically raising education spending, Congress just passed a 2006 budget that cuts funding $2.2 billion. So the Governors are angry...It's true that the No Child law has problems. It prescribes one treatment for schools with wildly different ailments. And it does not reward improvement. While Margaret Spellings, the new Secretary of Education, said last month that she will allow more flexibility, she has yet to clarify what she means..."
But you should really read the whole thing. It is a fairly balanced article that presents all sides, but still leave the impression, in my mind anyway, that NCLB is in real trouble.
And then there is this in Margaret Spellings own words from the May 1, USA Today. She says, ""Growing pains' won't sidetrack No Child Left Behind." You should read it yourself. Me thinks she protests too much. And by the way, did you know she was a mom?