91直播

Cathy Grimes has become something of an expert on the No Child Left Behind Act. She keeps a copy of the hefty federal law at her desk鈥攁nd has actually read it.

Ms. Grimes isn鈥檛 a school administrator or state education official. She doesn鈥檛 work at a think tank, either. She鈥檚 the education reporter for the Walla Walla Union-Bulletin in southeastern Washington state.

As with a lot of other reporters in the mainstream media, understanding the complex law has become part of her job.

Last September, her newspaper ran a five-part, 18-story series explaining the ins and outs of the bipartisan legislation and putting it in context. The series also connected the law with the schools and people in her community, such as Gail Callahan, a 1st grade teacher at Walla Walla鈥檚 Blue Ridge Elementary School.

鈥淢y readers didn鈥檛 seem to have an idea of what it was,鈥� said Ms. Grimes, a 10-year veteran of education reporting. 鈥淭here was a feeling that somebody had to explain the law, explain its significance.鈥�

Some longtime observers of federal policy say the sheer volume of No Child Left Behind stories being published or aired is unprecedented for an education law.

Across the country, from The News & Observer of Raleigh, N.C., to the Albuquerque Tribune and the Los Angeles Times, the 2陆-year-old law has increasingly become a magnet for press attention. It is also getting airtime on radio and, to a lesser extent, television news.

The news media have been a rich source of information and, critics say, misinformation at times.

What the reporters and commentators say in their news stories and opinion pieces matters a lot. After all, the media are the main source for helping millions of Americans understand the law and watch it unfold. The coverage is closely monitored by the U.S. Department of Education, teachers鈥� unions, and others with a big stake in how the public perceives the law, and they鈥檝e worked hard to influence how the media depict it.

If there鈥檚 one thing many supporters and critics of the No Child Left Behind Act seem to agree on, it鈥檚 that the coverage is getting more sophisticated. They say journalists have developed expertise on the subject and are increasingly digging below the surface to give the public a more nuanced perspective.

鈥淥n the whole, journalists have put an enormous amount of energy into getting it right,鈥� said Richard Lee Colvin, a former education reporter for the Los Angeles Times who now directs the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media, based at Teachers College, Columbia University. 鈥淭hey鈥檙e getting better at it.鈥�

鈥楢mazed鈥� at Attention

There are some clear reasons for the media鈥檚 interest. For starters, the No Child Left Behind Act touches virtually every public school and district in the nation with its tough requirements for improving student achievement overall and ending the achievement gaps between various categories of students.

The legislation, a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, has been a central part of President Bush鈥檚 domestic agenda, and his administration has touted the measure almost nonstop since Mr. Bush signed it into law in January 2002.

It鈥檚 also controversial, a big selling point to the press. The law has faced widespread complaints from educators and teachers鈥� unions, local and state officials, and Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, who voted for it but has been criticizing it on the campaign trail.

Even so, some experts find the abundance of stories, well after the law was signed, striking.

鈥淎mazed is probably a more apt term,鈥� said Christopher T. Cross, an education consultant and former assistant U.S. secretary of education under President George H.W. Bush. 鈥淚t has been on television, in regional and local newspapers, just all around the country where I go.鈥�

鈥淚t is remarkable,鈥� agreed Mr. Colvin. The law, he said, hands reporters a 鈥渟teady stream of news hooks.鈥�

For one, each year it singles out schools by name that have not made what is deemed adequate yearly progress. Schools receiving federal Title I aid that repeatedly fall short of a state鈥檚 performance targets for such progress face federally driven consequences, such as allowing parents to choose another public school for their children. And a lot of schools are falling short.

In many states, the law is generating far more publicly available student achievement data than ever before. It also calls for 鈥渉ighly qualified鈥� teachers in every classroom, and requires Title I schools to notify parents if their child鈥檚 teacher falls short.

It all amounts to a gold mine of story ideas for reporters. And they鈥檝e delivered. The No Child Left Behind Act has generated thousands of stories; new ones appear practically every day.

A sample of headlines this year includes:

• 鈥淐ritics Calling for Overhaul of No Child Left Behind鈥� in the March 21 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette;

• 鈥淔loodgate Could Open On School Transfers鈥� in the June 13 Orlando Sentinel;

• 鈥淧aige Sees School That Works; Secretary Praises Amistad Academy鈥� in the April 30 Hartford Courant; and

• 鈥淔ifth-grade Band Could Be 鈥楴o Child鈥� Casualty鈥� in the Feb. 21 Kansas City Star.

In Raleigh, The News & Observer has run a long list of No Child Left Behind stories over the past year.

Last summer, reporter Todd Silberman wrote a front-page article headlined 鈥淏raced for Bad Marks,鈥� to help prepare readers for the state鈥檚 pending announcement of how schools had fared under the federal law. In October, he took readers to Raleigh鈥檚 Millbrook Elementary School to illustrate how the law was snagging some schools solely because students with disabilities fell short of testing goals.

Just last month he wrote: 鈥淲ithout a single improved test score, more than 300 additional North Carolina schools could meet hard-to-reach goals this year under the federal No Child Left Behind law. The state wants to make it easier by taking advantage of exceptions, exemptions, and other technical allowances the federal government is permitting.鈥�

Mr. Silberman says the complicated law can make it tough going as a subject for his paper.

鈥淭he biggest challenge that I鈥檝e faced in covering No Child Left Behind is making it understandable for readers,鈥� he said in an interview. 鈥淭he potential for confusion is pretty great. 鈥� At a recent meeting, it made me think of the federal tax code.鈥�

鈥榃e Have a Role Here鈥�

The Lexington Herald-Leader in Kentucky ran a front-page spread on the law in November, headlined 鈥淪chools Get U.S. Report Cards,鈥� plus a 12-page special supplement with disaggregated test-score data for all public schools in the newspaper鈥檚 coverage area.

鈥淓ssentially, we wanted to help put [the law] in perspective,鈥� said Deedra R. Lawhead, the paper鈥檚 health and education editor. 鈥淲hat does it mean to you and your family?鈥�

A month earlier, a front-page Herald-Leader story examined a statistical tool Kentucky and other states are using that would lower the number of schools identified as not making adequate progress.

鈥淲e鈥檙e trying to still assess what readers want and need,鈥� said Ms. Lawhead. 鈥淲e have a role here, and it鈥檚 a little fuzzy.鈥�

A popular news angle involves two of the early consequences for Title I schools that don鈥檛 make adequate progress: the mandate to offer students transfers to other public schools or a choice of supplemental services, such as private tutoring.

The Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times have closely covered how the 434,000-student Chicago school system has handled the new options.

鈥淢ore than 100,000 Chicago schoolchildren stuck in failing schools will not get the extra tutoring they are eligible for under federal law,鈥� begins a Tribune story from last Sept. 13. A headline from a few weeks earlier proclaimed: 鈥�19,000 Kids Seek New Schools: Chicago system has spaces for only 1,035 transfers.鈥�

Some stories last year quoted federal officials as taking issue with the district鈥檚 approach.

鈥淭here were a number of articles early on that wanted to portray this arm-wrestling match between the district and the [U.S.] Department [of Education],鈥� said Xavier E. Botana, the director of No Child Left Behind accountability for the Chicago system. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 sort of faded out as we鈥檝e learned what the department wanted and we鈥檝e been able to articulate what we鈥檙e doing to the department in advance.鈥�

Jack Jennings, the director of the Washington-based Center on Education Policy, said the press has done a lot to monitor state and district behavior, playing its watchdog role.

鈥淩eporters in a way are enforcing the law as much as the U.S. Department of Education just through the stories they鈥檙e running,鈥� said Mr. Jennings, a former aide on education issues to Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Some education analysts say the coverage of the law tilts toward the negative.

鈥淭here鈥檚 been an intense and almost ceaseless attention to glitches, problems, and shortcomings 鈥� rather than the good it might be doing,鈥� said Chester E. Finn Jr., the president of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation in Washington and an assistant education secretary under President Reagan.

His colleague Justin Torres, the research director at the Fordham Foundation, recently delivered a scathing critique of media coverage that homes in on a May series in the Dayton Daily News in Ohio.

鈥淭he 鈥� articles exhibit all the standard symptoms of self-righteous hyperbole that characterize much of NCLB reporting,鈥� he wrote in The Education Gadfly, an electronic newsletter from the Fordham Foundation. Among such symptoms he ticked off were to 鈥渟tart with a tearjerker"鈥攊n this case, a 9-year-old honor student nervous about taking standardized tests; 鈥減resent a smattering of episodes as a nationwide trend"; 鈥渟tack the deck with experts鈥� to bash testing; and 鈥渄emolish distinctions, reduce complexities, and conflate facts.鈥�

Mr. Torres complains that the press often depicts the law鈥檚 consequences, such as the school-transfer provision, as a punishment for schools鈥攁s many educators have suggested鈥攔ather than a way to help students. Others note that the law also calls for directing technical assistance to low-performing schools.

鈥淢isconceptions about the law are rife, and newspapers have vied to bash it鈥攚ith the willing help of educators opposed to testing and to all attempts to hold schools and those who work in them [accountable],鈥� Mr. Torres wrote.

David L. Shreve, the education committee director for the Washington-based National Conference of State Legislatures, said he sees a lot of coverage as skeptical of the law, but suggests that approach is appropriate.

鈥淚 think the way the law was portrayed in its initial stages was skewed the other way,鈥� he said, by presenting it as the 鈥渂est thing that ever happened to public education.鈥�

He argues that many tough questions about the federal measure weren鈥檛 adequately explored when it was being crafted, and that the press is now reflecting the vociferous debate across the country.

鈥淚t鈥檚 the nature of the media to do critical analysis,鈥� said Paul G. Vallas, the chief executive officer of the 200,000-student Philadelphia public schools, though he believes the Philadelphia media have been fair to the law and his district. 鈥淐ertainly they鈥檝e written about the challenges we鈥檙e facing in implementing the reforms, but I tend to think that the media has been pretty balanced.鈥�

An analysis of newspaper and wire stories from April to December 2003 by KSA-Plus Communications, an Arlington, Va.-based public relations firm, said: 鈥淲hile NCLB backers may not consider recent news coverage of the law as 鈥榩ositive,鈥� it has brought unprecedented focus to what school performance data show about achievement gaps 鈥� and in some cases has illuminated promising strategies for closing them.鈥�

鈥楩ailing鈥� Schools

Representatives for several state education agencies鈥攊ncluding those in Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, Rhode Island, and Virginia鈥攈ad generally positive feedback on how the press has covered the implementation of the law.

鈥淏y and large, the major newspapers in the state have done a good job,鈥� said Charles Pyle, a spokesman for the Virginia Department of Education.

High-quality media coverage, he argues, is vital. 鈥淚t helps shape the perceptions of parents and other constituents of the public schools,鈥� he said.

His main gripe, echoed by others, is the relentless use by some news outlets of the phrase 鈥渇ailing schools.鈥�

鈥淥ur biggest challenge is the way the media refers to schools that don鈥檛 make [adequate progress] as failing schools,鈥� said Eugene W. Hickok, the deputy U.S. secretary of education. 鈥淚t鈥檚 unfair; the law doesn鈥檛 say that, we don鈥檛 say that.鈥�

The Business Roundtable, a Washington-based business lobby that has long been active in education policy, sent journalists a flier in the spring of 2003 headlined, 鈥淧lease don鈥檛 call a school a 鈥榝ailure鈥� if it isn鈥檛.鈥� It explained the law鈥檚 designation of some schools as 鈥渋n need of improvement.鈥� Schools get the label even if for two consecutive years just one subgroup of studentssuch as Hispanics or children from low-income familiesnarrowly misses the state鈥檚 performance target, or if not enough students from one subgroup take the tests.

Susan Traiman, the group鈥檚 education and workforce policy director, said such outreach has helped reduce the blanket use of 鈥渇ailing,鈥� but it hasn鈥檛 ended the practice.

鈥淲hat we found鈥攁nd this is not scientific鈥攊s that most of the education writers got it straight, but the headline writers didn鈥檛,鈥� she said.

Beyond the news desk, editorial pages have hosted a lively debate about the law, whether it鈥檚 in their own editorials, guest opinion essays, or letters to the editor.

The Education Department often responds to stories and editorials it deems inaccurate. Recent letters from Secretary of Education Rod Paige have appeared in The Sun of Baltimore, The Indianapolis Star, and the Anchorage Daily News, among others.

The law also has attracted attention in newsmagazines and on radio and television. National Public Radio has offered fairly extensive coverage, and the TV networks have weighed in from time to time.

On Jan. 8, the law鈥檚 second anniversary, NBC News and ABC News ran segments on their evening telecasts, and the Cable News Network offered interviews and analysis.

鈥淓ven as President Bush trumpets the two- year anniversary of the No Child Left Behind Act, a growing number of school districts are denouncing it,鈥� reported ABC News鈥� Judy Muller that day.

Some wonder how much longer the law will remain in the limelight.

鈥淚 suspect we鈥檒l eventually get bored with this story and go on to other things,鈥� Jay Mathews, an education reporter for The Washington Post, said of the media. Mr. Mathews, who is also a member of the board of 91直播 in Education, which publishes 91直播, makes the analogy to how the Post has covered Virginia鈥檚 state assessment program.

鈥淭he first year, stories were on the front page,鈥� he said, but gradually those shifted to the front of the Metro section, and then inside the Metro section.

But others expect the heavy volume of coverage to continue.

鈥淚t touched nerves,鈥� said Bruce Hunter, the chief lobbyist for the Arlington, Va.-based American Association of School Administrators. 鈥淚f local people had been overwhelmingly positive about this, the story would have been over in a week. 鈥� I don鈥檛 think this is going to go away.鈥�

In any case, the law seems likely to make big news in the coming weeks and months, as states roll out their latest results for schools under the federal mandates. With President Bush citing the law in his re-election bid as one of his major domestic accomplishments, the political angle, already salient, may sharpen.

鈥淭he schoolpeople aren鈥檛 bored with it,鈥� Mr. Hunter said, 鈥渟o when [reporters] do their back-to-school stories this year, it鈥檚 going to be all No Child Left Behind, all the time.鈥�