States are establishing high stakes assessments to serve as a measurement tool of students' academic abilities. This study essentially explored and sought to understand some of Maryland's mathematics and science practitioners' perspectives on increase testing, and the No Child left Behind (NCLB) Act. Basically, the study sought to understand and to examine the effects of increase testing on teachers and students. Four Maryland practitioners were interviewed in May 2007 for their perspectives on the NCLB Act and increase testing. Additionally, a critique of past Maryland HSA exams in mathematics and science were also conducted to see what were some of the positives and negatives of the exams from a practitioner's perspective. Results basically indicated that Maryland practitioners do not feel that NCLB is serving the needs of either urban teachers or students. Qualitative results further revealed: seventy-five percent of those practitioners interviewed indicated that constant testing was ineffective, one hundred percent of practitioners interviewed indicated that NCLB's goals were unrealistic and do not take into account the "real" needs of those inadequately prepared students who can not meet the challenges of constant testing, seventy-five percent of those interviewed indicated that there was an increase pressure placed on them to "teach to the test," and twenty-five percent of those interviewed also indicated that despite the negative views they and other practitioners may have of NCLB and increase testing, it is still felt that the federal government and policy makers will continuously advocate for testing and accountability into the future. Quantitative data findings (as revealed from critiquing past Maryland HSA math and science exams and also from reviewing secondary data as reported in Maryland's report card) suggested that there were more positive aspects of the Maryland HSA exams in math and science than negatives. Positives of the Maryland HSA exams were:(a) test design construction--with there being varied test items / questions which seemed to cater to a heterogeneous population of students, (b) validity of the exams, as the exam content seemed in line with the state's curriculum focus, and (c) reliability scores were reported to be greater than 0.80 for all forms of the math and science HSA exams. Interview data results seemed in line with quantitative data reporting by Phi Delta Kappa Gallup Poll conducted in 2007, as 55% of those polled by Phi Delta Kappa indicated that NCLB was ineffective and 69% of those polled also indicated that there was an increase demand placed on teachers to teach to the test. In light of a few limitations of this study and also taking into account the gaps or limitations existing in the literature at the present time, it is recommended that more qualitative studies be conducted that can explore and seek to understand the perspectives of the various states' practitioners, particularly those in math and science assessment areas. (Contains 1 table.)