The last century in American history has yielded educational reforms, federal legislations, school improvement plans and interventions, which consistently influence best practices in school systems. After the report, A Nation at Risk (1983), the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 was reauthorized in 2001 as the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2001). This reauthorization was a call to attain educational equality for all American students and to lessen the achievement gaps between and among ethnicity groups, children of poverty, and disabled populations (U.S. Department of Education, 2001). Additionally, because of this increased scrutiny of student performance, other classification categories emerged such as gender.
Investigating college-readiness by looking at the data for particular groups pinpoints definite achievement gaps. The profile of a college student in the United States reveals that about 60% of recent graduate are “not college-ready” (Kirst, 2007). High school graduation data broken down by ethnicity indicates that 97% of African Americans and 90% of Hispanics are not college-ready upon high school completion (Collins, 2009). This percentage compares to 33% of Caucasian and 25% of Asian students being college-ready at high school completion (Bettinger & Long, 2007). Further, an investigation of gender disparities reveal that males and females tend to perform similarly on college readiness
(Leon-Guerrero, 2014) Education reform scholars argue that racial segregation, funding, inequity and educational inequality go hand in hand. In the 1990s courts began to examine whether the achievement gap between minorities’ and whites was a vestige also known as the former segregated school system. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) Today education analyst contributes this to the achievement gap. Although state courts have held that the quality of education should be fair, the struggle to close the achievement gap still continues. For instance, children coming from a household making over $90,000 have a better chance graduating from college by the age of twenty-four. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) Children coming from families making less than $35,000 have a one in seventeen chance from graduating from college. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) The No Child left behind Act (NCLB), was intended to be the revalidation of the ESEA in 2001. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) The purpose of the NCLB was to close the achievement gap within the races, but ended up failing to drive the educational improvement where it was needed most. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) The NCLB mandated higher scores, but failed to provide low-income schools with resources to make the achievement possible. (Leon-Guerrero, 2014) As a result wealthier
The No Child Left Behind Act was based on the Elementary & Secondary Education Act of 1965. The act was established based on the promise of Thomas Jefferson to create a free public education system in Virginia (Hammond, Kohn, Meier, Sizer & Wood, 2004). The act is now reauthorized as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The purpose of the No Child Left Behind Act was to make sure that children were given a fair, quality education. The act set out to close the achievement gaps in education, which were caused by children living in poverty, living with disabilities, children who were of different ethnic backgrounds and English learners. The proposed methods of the act targeted all children and provided an equal opportunity to meet
With the NCLB’s focused emphasis on English and math standards, other educational areas such as the arts and sciences have been overlooked. The No Child Left Behind Act also focuses on bringing the lower scores up and not helping in raising the scores of those students who are already at higher levels leaving these higher achieving students behind in a push for equality. Although test scores have risen and the achievement gap between minority and white students has decreased, the No Child Left Behind Act has damaged the United States educational system by not addressing the needs of all students, forcing curricula to exclude arts, civics, foreign language and sciences, and emphasizing testing and not learning. It is time for a change.
In 1965, Lyndon B Johnson signed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in an attempt to achieve more equity among minority groups within the education system. Along with the numerous attempts to close the achievement gap came America’s first federally funded state assessments, created with the intention of holding the nation’s schools accountable for providing a quality education for every student. This legislation was revisited in 2001 by the Bush administration with the No Child Left Behind Act, which saw the achievement gap that still existed among ethnic minority groups, but also recognised a prominent gap within poverty- stricken communities. With this came state tests that were more difficult and more frequent in an attempt to further
“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
The NCLB Act has become the largest intervention by the federal government. This act promises to improve student learning and to close the achievement gap between the white students and students of color. The law is aimed at having standardized test to measure student performance and quality of teacher. The Standardized exams are fully focused on reading and mathematics. This law characterizes an unequalled extension of the federal role into the realm of local educational accountability. High school graduation rates are also a requirement as an indicator of performance at secondary level. In low performing schools they get punished by receiving less funds and students have the choice to move to high performing school. The quality of our
The Education Amendment Act is for the people of Ontario, and their goverment. All student's deserve a strong education system that prepares them for a successful future. Its providing a set of standards for the student's.
Summary: The 1983 report, A Nation at Risk, issued by the National Commission on Excellence in Education and the Goals 2000 report of 1991 by the National Governors Association created calls for education reform in the United States. They resulted in stricter standards for teaching certification, changes in standardized testing, and a raise in teachers salaries especially in the South. President Bush passed the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002 to also try to boost education performance especially for racial minorities and urban centers. NCLB required schools to give mandatory tests to determine student aptitude in core subject courses. Schools are rated according to the Adequate Yearly Progress scale which determines how much a school's testing
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
The Civil Rights era of the 1950’s and 1960’s ushered in copious federal spending directed towards the desegregation of American Society. Moreover, the ultimate goal was the creation of a leveled playing field that would allow minorities opportunities to gain access and reap benefits that had not been traditionally extended to them, thereby resulting in large disparities in wealth, resource, and education between races and cultures. In a courageous attempt to amend these woes, Congress passed a series of legislation designed to achieve these ends. One of the most notable pieces of legislation passed during this era was the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Created with all-deliberate intention of desegregating schools
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)
As stated by the U.S Department of Education the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) is the most recent iteration of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), the major federal law authorizing federal spending on programs to support K-12 schooling. The act requires states to implement statewide accountability systems covering all public schools and students (Clarke 2003). These systems must be based on challenging state A former teacher, President Johnson believed that equal access to education was vital to a child’s ability to lead a productive life. This piece of legislation constituted the most important educational component of the “War on Poverty” launched by President Lyndon B. Johnson. Through a special source of funding (Title I), the law allocated large resources to meet the needs of educationally deprived children, especially through compensatory programs for the poor. As Alyson Klein states, a writer for Education Week, the law’s original goal, which remains today, was to improve educational equity for students from lower income families by providing federal funds to school districts serving poor students. School districts serving lower income students often receive less state and local funding than those serving more affluent children. The purpose of the NCLB is to ensure that all children in the United States receive a high-quality education and to close the achievement gap that exists between children who
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.
Since the 1980’s, US students have been falling well behind students in other industrialized nations in terms of knowledge and education. The US is losing its ability to create a quality education for the majority of its students. The government has attempted to combat this by introducing the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2002, then replacing that with the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in 2016. Nonetheless, these laws have failed in their attempts to improve education and have implemented rigorous amounts of testing rather than fixing the education system. They have created a flawed testing system, applied too harsh of punishments on under-performing schools, and harmed disadvantaged students. The fact that these problems exist is
“The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (No Child Left Behind) is a landmark in education reform designed to improve student achievement and change the culture of America's schools.” President George W Bush had good intentions of implementing various policies to improve our nation's education system but fell short. The No Child Left Behind Act caused havoc in schools nationwide. Fortunately, I believed the No Child Left Behind Act is supportive and effective for children and families to an extent. The No Child Left Behind Act placed a serious damper on schools because of the English language learners. Many educators failed to see the positive impact standardized test had with English language learners. “One positive impact the NCLB has had on