Education Reform For The Elementary And Secondary Education Act

Tensions during the Cold War sparked many changes in American legislation, altering the way many lived their lives. One of the most obvious areas of change is education, with the fear of Soviet dominance causing transformations across the nation. The severe adjustment of government education changed the way students learned, the information taught in the classroom, and the allocation of funds, but it still failed to significantly improve American students’ international standing. As highlighted by the 1983 report “A Nation at Risk,” the reformed schools were unsuccessful in creating students at the level expected of them, or even at mediocrity.

“The NCLB law­—which grew out of concern that the American education system was no longer internationally competitive­­—significantly increased the federal role in holding schools responsible for the academic progress of all students. And it put a special focus on ensuring that states and schools boost the performance of certain groups of students, such as English-language learners, students in special education, and poor and minority children, whose achievement, on average, trails their peers.” (Klein). In 1965, ESEA (Elementary and Secondary Education Act) was introduced by President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society Program to create a clear understanding of the Federal Government in K-12 school policy, which provided more that $1 billion

The national government has been helping to improve and regulate education since 1965 when they passed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). The main purpose of this act was to help America's disadvantaged students that lived in poverty. The ESEA helped improve education from grades k-12 across the United States for thirty six years. When Congress approached the same program in 2001 it was reauthorized and

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), brain child of President Johnson, was passed in 1965. ESEA was intended to mitigate disparities in access to quality academic services and learning outcomes endured by underprivileged and minority students by federally funding schools serving their communities. ESEA, later revised as No Child Left Behind, was to be one element in a larger reform agenda focused on urban redevelopment, vocational training and “EDUCATION AND HEALTH” (Thomas & Brady, 2005). In his 1965 State of the Union, Johnson proclaimed, “No longer will we tolerate widespread involuntary idleness, unnecessary human hardship and misery, the impoverishment of whole areas… ” Nevertheless, this intractable problem remains, as illustrated by recent National Assessment of Educational Progress findings:

Their eyes met from across the room, and any student paying close enough attention could see the loathing in the teacher’s eyes as the principal walks into the room for the bi-semester teacher evaluation. In the blink of an eye the teacher returns her focus back on the students, but the obvious exchange between the two individuals makes those of us in the classroom that understand the source of the icy gaze extremely uncomfortable. My teacher hates the principal with a passion. Ever since the principal assumed control of the school three years prior to this particular evaluation, she terrorized my band director. Through micromanaging, criticizing relentlessly, organizing meetings incessantly, and sabotaging schedules, my principal fostered a hate from not only my band director, but also from the majority of teachers in my high school. The attitude and leadership techniques utilized by my former principal directly contradicts current theories of the scholarly community on how to effectively lead a school.

The Ultimate goal of Education system is one of the most frequently asked questions from all stakeholders and their answer mainly depends on their different prospective. David Labree (1997) in his article “Public Goods, Private Goods: The American Struggle Over Educational Goal” shows how the three main purposes, which interact and interfere sometimes, have shaped the American education goals, throughout out its practices and policies, democratic equality, social efficiency and Social mobility. On the same track, Nickols and Cuenca (2014) found in their work “Two Roadmaps, One Destination: The Economic Progress Paradigm in Teacher Education Accountability in Georgia and Missouri” That teacher preparation programs influence by what they called “the economic progress paradigm” (p. 457), which is the social efficiency that Labree (1997) had pointed out. Considering the fact that, which of the three schooling purposes is the most important, I believe the social mobility to be given number one priority, and to be considered among the other two that can benefit, both individuals and public.

Diane Ravitch, an “educational historian”, answers four questions in her book, Reign of Error. Is American education in crisis? Is American education failing or declining? What is the evidence for reform being promoted by the government and adopted by many states? What should we do to improve our schools and the lives of our children? According to Ravitch, the “crisis” concerning American education is actually a myth. In this book, she addresses myth after myth providing adequate clarity and information. She looks deep into the facts and brings to light what is actually happening in education in America in the following areas: test scores, achievement gaps, graduation rates, teachers and test scores, merit pay, charter schools, virtual school, government involvement of failing schools. In the latter chapters she offers specific solutions with detailed plans and recommendations to preserve and improve American education. Ravitch’s thesis is that American public education must be protected against government privatization and that we must work together to improve our schools. I couldn’t agree more with Ravitch. Government involvement in education has negatively impacted education since the passing of NCLB. Our focus has changed from being innovative teachers to cookie cutter teachers. Government officials should not make decisions without advice from educational professionals. We must all work together to make education work.

Over the last 25 years many policies have been introduced in education. Some critic’s say that an education market has been created but others disagree and say that the policies have helped create equality of opportunity.

“Shrinking state and local education budgets matched with the added pressure of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which sets rigid standards in reading and math that schools must achieve in order to receive federal funding, have created a new challenge for districts” (Van Harken).

“Unintended Educational and Social Consequences of the No Child Left Behind Act” Journal of Gender, Race and Justice, no. 2, Winter 2009, pp. 311. EBSCOhost. In this peer-reviewed academic journal article, Liz Hollingworth, an associate professor in the College of Education at the University of Iowa, explores the history of school reform in the United States, and the unintended consequences of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Hollingworth states that the great promise of NCLB is that schools will focus on the education of low-achieving students, reducing the gap in student academic achievement between White students and African-American, Hispanic, and Native American student populations. Hollingworth states that an unintended consequence of NCLB was that teachers and school administrators had to shift curriculum focus in an effort to raise test scores, but in some cases, they had to also abandoned thoughtful, research-based classroom practices in exchange for test preparation. NCLB also affected teachers, highly qualified teachers left high-poverty schools, with low performance rates especially those schools where teacher salaries are tied to student academic performance. Hollingworth concludes her article by stating “we need to be wary of policy innovations that amount to simply rearranging the deck chairs on the

In 1630, John Winthrop dreamt that America was a “City on the Hill”, predestined for preeminence. In 1776, the American Colonies proclaimed independence with the affirmation that all men are equal, free, and blessed with the sacred rights to life, liberty, and happiness. These uniquely American ideals ideals characterized the young democracy in contrast to the oppressive monarchies of Europe. European citizens saw the correlation between America’s greatness and its democratic principles. The liberties that America furnished to all men, regardless of status, gave citizens pride in their nation and drew envy from constituents of tyrannical monarchies. The notions of equality and freedom, however, did not extend to all of America’s population;

The ESEA Act of 1965 was enacted to offer equal educational opportunities to children from low income students with the help of Title 1 being the largest source of funding. With the help of Title 1 the schools would be able to provide supplemental services to these children. In Contrast, The NCLB Act requires states to use standardized test to test students in reading, math and science to see if academic progress is made and the students are proficient in grade level of these subjects. The NCLB Act also focused on eliminating socioeconomic and racial differences providing quality education to all students of America regardless of ethnic, socioeconomic and racial background. Whereas the ESEA Act only focused on low income family students, the NCLB Act included low- income students, students with disabilities, major racial and ethnic groups and English language learners by providing test results to show improvement and that each student reach the appropriate grade level performance. (Thomas & Brady, 2005, p. 51-56). Furthermore, A blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the ESEA differed by focusing on “moving from a punishment based system to a system that rewarded students and teachers for excellent teaching and student growth” (Woolfork, 2014, p.X). In Comparison, all of these educational policies have the same goal which is to improve the educational experience of students in all areas and populations. These policies help with the effectiveness of teaching learning

Since 1983 public education has been an issue in America. The system has been constantly changing every year with reforms. This constant change has been driven by the American people’s perception that education has declined and something should be done about it. First there was an increased emphasis on basic skills, making school years longer and more graduation requirements. Second, many began focusing on increasing teachers professionalism. Third, they began restructuring many things such as how the schools were organized and how the school day was structured etc. Now today the most of the American people believe that not enough money is given to public schooling. They associate academic improvement with the money the school is funded.

Public education in the United States is perhaps one of the most critical issues we face as a nation. Once pronouncing the United States as a “nation at risk”, the educational institution began to implement one reform strategy after another. In efforts to improve schooling for K-12 students, education reform has fiddled with class size, revised graduation requirements, and created standardized testing just to name a few. Unfortunately, traditional public schools are still failing to provide students with a quality education. This is disheartening as we learn that the United States lags behind in math and science compared to our international counterparts. It is safe to say that educational reform has spent billions of dollars over the

Education reform is a topic that every student, parent and teacher should be interested in because it effects everyone in the community. Many different approaches to education reform have been tried, and even though they seem to work for the time being, there are always more improvements that need to be made. One of the best ideas that has been discussed in the most recent years is getting the parents and students more involved in the actual reform process. Many school administrators see a problem with involving students, even though they are the ones most affected by the changes within schools. Student’s opinions should be taken into consideration because they are the ones who see what happens inside the school and within the classroom, and are the most affected by it. Involving parents and students in the reform of their schools will improve the quality of education, improve parent and teacher relationships and reduce parent and student complaints.