The Act Of 1965 : An Overview

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) was brought into provision during Lyndon B Johnson’s first elected term as president. With his landslide victory and the support of both houses, he was able to initiate the ESEA under the Great Society Program. The goals of the ESEA was providing federal funding to elementary and secondary education and to set a precedence for a universal federal curriculum. By allowing the federal government to administer funds to each state for education, the states had to follow federal guidelines to be eligible for the benefits. What the ESEA accomplished beyond allocating monetary benefits for education to each state, was forcing schools in the south to desegregate their school districts to allow all children the same right to a quality education.

“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:

Fifty-two years after the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, the racial tensions and geopolitical pressures within the United States continue to influence the policies of immigration. Since 1965, there has not been any major advancements in immigration policies, though with current President, Donald Trump, immigration policies are facing reforms. President Trump has followed closely with the ideals of past strict immigration policies in the America first attitude. Trump’s goals are to achieve three key objectives, that are, “to ensure safe and lawful admissions; defend the safety and security of our country; and protect American workers and taxpayers” (Office of the Press Secretary). With his newly proposed travel ban in effect, the country is eager to see how it will impact the United States and its relations with other countries.

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

“This Civil Rights Act is a challenge to all of us to go to work in our communities and our states, in our homes and in our hearts, to eliminate the last vestiges of injustice in our beloved country”, this quote from Lyndon B. Johnson truly represents how difficult it was to get to the civil rights act and how hard it was once it was passed. Many cases were apart of this act that played a big role at the U.S. Supreme Court. It wasn't only race that the civil rights act of 1964 ended it also ended segregation in race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The Civil rights act was a big movement effecting so many people: Dred Scott v. Sanford, Plessy v. Furguson, and Brown v. Board of education.

Although George W. Bush passed NCLB, the road to this policy began before he assumed the presidency. Contrary to popular belief, NCLB is a renewal of a much older education initiative, titled the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). President Lyndon B. Johnson implemented ESEA in 1965, during his grand domestic agenda labeled “the Great Society”. During this time Johnson created ESEA, and numerous other social welfare policies, in order to realize his vision of an ideal American society. The 1965 ESEA, “offered new grants to districts serving low-income students, federal grants for text and library books, it created special education centers, and created scholarships for low-income college students.” Most importantly, it provided federal grants to state agencies to improve the quality of elementary and secondary education. Johnson upheld the belief that, “full education opportunity”

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a major achievement in granting equal opportunity for everyone regardless of their differences. This piece of legislation crafted a framework for change and was created with the intent that all human beings be treated with dignity and respect. Unfortunately, legislation cannot force people to change their hearts and attitudes, and 50+ years later, we see this legislation is still regarded and relevant as more and more groups are singled out for their differences. As a Cuban American, I have seen discrimination firsthand. While I have had it better than some of my peers because I don't possess some of the obvious physical traits that so many people use to label and denigrate Hispanics, I have seen my friends

According to the Committee on Education and the Workforce (CEW), “Congress must replace No Child Left Behind with new policies that help every child access an excellent education.” (2015). They also stated that introducing ESSA, “will reduce the federal footprint, restore local control, and empower parents and education leaders to hold schools accountable for effectively teaching students.” The purpose of the ESSA to replace NCLB strict and unattainable regulations. For example, the accountability for the access of the students will depend on the state and school districts. Additionally, parents, particularly of those students who require special education, will have greater input in the education plan of the students and how it affects

Federal involvement in education began in 1954 with the National Defense Education Act (NDEA), which initiated federal funding to schools in the United States. NDEA marked the beginning of a long line of education policy bills over the course of more than forty years. No Child Left Behind, or NCLB, was not a novelty piece of legislation; its ancestry dated back to 1965 with President Lyndon B. Johnson’s passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act—a more descriptive mandate for the usage of federal funds and the requirements of schools in the United States (Anderson 3). Through Title 1 provisions, ESEA intended to alleviate the inequality in public schools by providing federal funding for schools in areas with high percentages of children

Graduating at 20 years old, Jaybelle searched for petitioners in the United States to notice her potential as a hard-working, competent health professional. By 1993, she found a petitioner in the area around Palms Springs, California. The petitioner screened her while she was in the Philippines to check her qualifications. When she was accepted through the petitioning system, she received an H-1B to work in a nursing home. “I came here on May 6th, 1994 with five other people. I only had one suitcase and $200 in my pocket. It was hard leaving my family back in the Philippines,” Jaybelle recounts. After working in the nursing home for a few months, she took her board exams and passed, thus establishing her permanent residence in the United States.

The No Child Left Behind act was signed and put into place by President George W. Bush in 2002. The act was passed in order to replace the Elementary and Secondary Act (ESEA), put into place by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965, as part of his Great Society Program. The ESEA helped to cover the cost of educating disadvantaged students, while expanding the federal role in education. (Education Week 2015) The idea of the NCLB act, much like ESEA, was to help reform the educational system in both elementary and secondary school systems. The NCLB act was very ambitious, and brings up issues on improving the academic achievement of the disadvantaged, training high-quality teachers, language instruction for limited English proficient students, 21st-century schools, and enforcing technology. (U.S. Department of Education, 2010) One of the biggest factors of this bill was the idea of closing the gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students. Bush felt that this could be done by using standardized tests to measure how students were doing, and to see how well the teachers are doing. These tests were then used to identify which school systems were not performing