Genral concerns
While most legislators, educators, teachers and parents agree with the concept of “no child left behind”, many have concerns with the details of the Act and the attempt to apply a single standard to all children in all school districts.

Among the concerns expressed in states across the country:

• Some educators will argue 100% proficiency is an impossible challenge under NCLB.  NCLB places an inordinate emphasis upon high stakes testing in core subject areas.  One hundred percent proficiency, defined by test results that are translated into adequate yearly progress (AYP), assumes all children can and will learn at the same rate. In a 2003 address to the American Educational Research Association in Chicago, R.L. Linn said, “If improvement in mathematics continues at the same pace as the last decade, we can expect to attain 100% proficiency in the fourth grade by 2056, in the eighth grade by 2060, and in the 12th grade by 2166. Just getting 100% of the students to the basic level would be an enormous challenge.”
• Inclusion of all special education students as a subgroup having to meet standards that are age appropriate, not ability appropriate.  By definition special education students are identified because they do not perform well and have special needs.
• English Language Learners (ELL) as a subgroup for AYP is troublesome for districts with large ELL populations.  By definition, once ELL students become proficient they are removed from the subgroup which automatically causes this subgroup to fail.
• No Child Left Behind assumes that all students are equally motivated and interested in taking and scoring well on standardized tests. There is no scientifically based research to support this assumption. A more valid assumption would address high school students and adults as test takers.  Students who are most motivated to take and to do well on high stakes tests are college bound, high school students who take college entrance examinations and high school age students or adults who take the GED Exam.
• No Child Left Behind assumes all children arrive at the school house door equally prepared, motivated, and supported to learn. The tragedy in No Child Left Behind lies in the fact that if this assumption is not true, then No Child Left Behind punishes and discriminates against targeted schools, teachers, students, parents, and communities.

Rural concerns
As increasingly strict provisions and penalties of the law have taken place, protests against NCLB have grown nation-wide. In addition to the overall concerns regarding the Act, specific concerns in rural states like North Dakota include:

• Inadequate funds to address issues
• More time is needed to plan, implement, evaluate, refine, re-evaluate to generate desired results
• Loss of longtime teachers
• Teachers in rural schools are required to teach many different subjects in the curriculum, particularly science and social studies teachers.
• Teachers must return to college and take more courses in subjects they have taught for many years. NCLB assumes all teachers and all paraprofessionals in rural areas have the same, convenient access to educational opportunities and training resources as do their urban and suburban cousins.
• ND student test scores are higher than the national average, which should adequately demonstrate the ND teachers are “highly qualified”.
• Replacement of local administrators with consultants
• Withholding of up to 20% of federal funds
• A number of the recommendations are simply not practical in a rural area. For example, in a school of 100 students to hire a science teacher for each of the content areas or find one person who is highly qualified in– biology AND earth science AND physical science – is unreasonable