LOS ANGELES - AS THE director of high schools in the gang-infested neighbourhoods of Los Angeles' east side, Ms Guadalupe Paramo struggles every day with educational dysfunction.

For the past six years, not even one in five students at her district's high schools has been able to do grade-level maths or English. At Abraham Lincoln High School this year, only seven in 100 students could, while at Woodrow Wilson High only four in 100 could.

For chronically failing schools like these, the 'No Child Left Behind' law, now up for renewal in Congress, prescribes drastic measures: firing teachers and principals; shutting schools and turning them over to private firms, a charter operator or the state itself: or a major overhaul in governance.

But more than 1,000 of California's 9,500 schools are branded chronic failures, and the numbers are growing. State officials predict that all 6,063 public schools serving poor students will be declared in need of restructuring by 2014, when the law requires universal proficiency in maths and reading.

The aim of the 'No Child Left Behind' law is to ensure that every child gets educated to his full potential.

Under the law, a school declared low-performing for three years in a row must offer students free tutoring and the option to transfer. After five years, such schools are essentially treated as irredeemable, with the law prescribing starting over with a new structure, new leadership or new teachers. But it also gives schools the option of less sweeping changes, like reducing their size or changing who is in charge of hiring.

With the law in its fifth year, many states are overwhelmed by growing numbers of schools that cannot satisfy its demands.

In Florida, 441 schools could be candidates for closing. In Maryland, some 49 schools in Baltimore city alone have fallen short of achievement targets for five years or more. In New York state, 77 schools were up for restructuring as of last year.

Some districts, like those in New York City, have moved forcefully to shut large failing high schools and break them into small schools. Los Angeles, too, is trying small schools, along with other innovations, and Mr David Brewer, its schools superintendent, has just announced plans to create a 'high-priority district' under his control comprising 40 problem schools.

Yet so far, education experts say they are unaware of a single state that has taken over a failing school in response to the law. Instead, most allow school districts to seek other ways to improve.

As a result, the law is branding numerous schools as failing but not producing radical change - leaving angry parents demanding redress. California citizens' groups have sued the state and federal government for failing to deliver on the law's promises.

Mr Ray Simon, the deputy federal secretary of education, said states that ignored the law's demands risked losing federal money or facing restrictions on grants.

A federal survey last year showed that in 87 per cent of the cases of persistently failing schools, states and school districts avoided wholesale changes in staff or leadership.

In California, state superintendent of schools Jack O'Connell called the law's demands unreasonable. A state takeover of schools, he said, would be the last option.

NEW YORK TIMES