Elementary And Secondary Education Act Of 2001

Before the No Child Left Behind act came into effect there was a report done in 1983 called A Nation At Risk. Within in this report is information and statistics about how academic underachievement had reached national and international scales. In response to this report the National Commission on Excellence in Education came up with 38 recommendations for the schools. The recommendations were divided into five categories: content, Standards and Expectations, Time, Teaching, Leadership and Fiscal Support (A Nation at Risk 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:

When President George W. Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) into law in 2002, the legislation had one goal-- to improve educational equity for all students in the United States by implementing standards for student achievement and school district and teacher performance. Before the No Child Left Behind Act, the program of study for most schools was developed and implemented by individual states and local communities’ school boards. Proponents of the NCLB believed that lax oversight and lack of measurable standards by state and local communities was leading to the failure of the education system and required federal government intervention to correct. At the time, the Act seemed to be what the American educational system

“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).

During President Bush’s term, government became aware that American schooling needed major improvement. There was a need of a law which would improve the system while using scores to evaluate students as well as their teachers. "The fundamental principle of this bill is that every child can learn, we expect every child to learn, and you must show us whether or not every child is learning," (Secretary, 2002) President George W. Bush said on Jan. 8, 2002, signing ceremony of No Child Left Behind Act. However, this one size fits all approach revealed not be resourceful. "The goals of No Child Left Behind, the predecessor of this law, were the right ones: High standards. Accountability. Closing the achievement gap, but in practice, it often fell short. It didn 't always consider the specific needs of each community. It led to too much testing during classroom time. It often forced schools and school districts into

Bush’s No Child Left Behind (NCLB) federal policy. Both Clinton and Bush administrations regulated freedom of choice within their educational policies. Clinton’s Goals 2000 increased standards for student scores within core subjects. Legislation targeting Title I, required States and school districts to “turn-around” low-performing schools, and in 1993, public charter schools increased to over 2, 000 (www.clinton5.nara.gov). Bush’s No Child Left Behind’s structure demanded high-stakes testing and created provision for privatization of public education, as well as “school choice .” No Child Left Behind not only increased the Clinton’s strong accountability disposition, but it also superimposed a new set of accountability rules that would adversely affect public schools (Porter, Linn, & Trimble, 2005). One significant requirement of NCLB is that each state must adopt challenging academic content standards and challenging student achievement standards. Additionally, states must establish Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) goals for each year from 2002 to 2014—that would culminate in the 2014 goal that all American students would be at or above the proficient student academic achievement standard (P.L. 107–110, 2001). When local educational agencies (LEA) failed to meet their state’s AYP goals, in addition to other criteria, they [LEA] faced the inevitability of losing their accredited status and eventually face school

This article in the Times newspaper, points out problems and flaws with the 2002 U.S. No Child Left Behind educational legislation, which was designed to improve education in the U.S. Topics that are discussed include, teachers complaints that No Child Left Behind policy sets impossible standards and forces teachers to teach based on the test material, and how the bill originally came to life by the proposal of former U.S. president George W. Bush. The other topic

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 was a part of the Great Society program which sent funding to primary and secondary schools, this act was enacted to hold schools responsible and to improve equality in education on a national level. This act targeted low-income families, specifically migrant and English limited families. Part of the ESEA was an attempt to close the gap which had been furthered by race and poverty, in order to improve the education of these students and their families. In recent years this has been reauthorized under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) of 2001. (Crawford, 2011)

The no child left behind act is a disciplinary action and an accountability system that places responsibility on schools to maintain a certain score for every child. George W Busch signed this law in 2002. According to this act it is mandatory that all students will be proficient in math and reading by 2014. The student progress is measured at school level and annual reports are publicly announced. It is mandatory for every school to meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) otherwise federal sanctions may be imposed. Linn (2009) described the consequences for schools in case of failure to meet federal standards saying that

Evidence of change is heavily supported by the many change initiatives the United States’ education system has seen in the past few years. There have been programs and initiatives that have been implemented and replaced, due to their ineffectiveness as a whole. Programs such as No Child Left behind (2002) were brought in as an initiative to assist schools with bridging the gap for students who had fell behind or schools who were falling behind; however, this initiative failed due to its one size fits all methodology. The NCLB initiative became too much for schools and school officials to implement effectively. Consequently, in 2015 the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was created to fill the voids that were missing from NCLB. For example, NCLB accountability results were based on test scores alone, while ESSA focuses on multiple progress areas. ESSA provides a well-rounded education program for all students, regardless of their background or home environment. It includes more rigorous college and career readiness standards nationwide. These standards ensure that students nationwide are receiving the same information and skill sets. For example, the college and career readiness standards ensure that students are leaving grade school prepared to think critically, which will allow them to graduate from college or find a career outside of the college realm. NCLB lacked this foundation. The basis for which schools are assessed fall under many components, rather than just

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, President George W. Bush's education reform bill, was signed into law on Jan. 8, 2002. The No Child Left Behind Act says that states will develop and apply challenging academic standards in reading and math. It will also set annual progress objectives to make sure that all groups of students reach proficiency within 12 years. And the act also says that children will be tested annually in grades 3 through 8, in reading and math to measure their progress. The test results will be made public in annual report cards on how schools and states are progressing toward their objectives.

The role of the federal government in setting education policy increased significantly with the passage by Congress of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, a sweeping education reform law that revised the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. "Federal policy has played a major role in supporting standards-based reform since the passage of the Improving America's Schools Act (IASA) of 1994. That law required states to establish challenging content and performance standards, implement assessments…hold school systems accountable…" (Goertz, 2005, pg. 73)

A more detailed breakdown of each layer of the the school system can help analyze which aspects are failing. Starting with the teachers, the nutrients in the soil; the seed is introduced to the first factor affecting student learning and progress. The No Child Left Behind initiative has accumulated some bugs. Rather than improving opportunities so that each child is receiving equal chances to close the achievement gap, the outcomes of sometimes misrepresented data is being monitored and recorded. This means, while the purpose of educational proposals are to close the achievement gap, this act had unexpected opposite effects. This is due in part to the way schools are graded, which is based off results of standardized test scores and similar tracking identifications like attendance (Educators Share, 2015). After the results are reported to the state, a grade is administered to the school district and teachers. If proficiency is not met for two years, changes can be made at

Since the reform of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in 2001 and the introduction of the “No Child Left Behind Act” (NCLB) schools and school districts have faced unprecedented challenges and changes in education. They have struggled to adjust to a new accountability system that weighs heavily on standardized test results. Schools that do not have enough students scoring “proficient” are labeled as needing improvement and are at risk of losing funding or even being closed down. This is especially challenging in districts where there are a large percentage of students that are English Language Learners. According to the law, all students are required to test and all scores must be counted within 3 consecutive years of their enrollment

The No Child Left Behind Act was designed by President George W. Bush in 2001. Although this act seems to be cutting edge and has generated enormous amounts of both controversy and support, this is not the first time American Education has seen such an attempt to improve education. According to the U.S. Department of Education, the purpose of No Child Left Behind is to improve student achievement and change the culture of America's schools. ?The NCLB Act of 2001, the revised Elementary and Secondary Education Act, is a potent blend of new requirements, incentives and resources and it poses significant challenges for states? (?Education Commission of the States,? 2003). No Child Left Behind laws require that every state must develop