Search

The U.S. federal government has played a growing role in setting nationwide education policy since the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 1965. This Act, along with the 'Equality of Educational Opportunity' report commissioned by the 1964 Civil Rights Act, led the U.S. Office of Education to pursue a policy agenda focused on equalizing access and ameliorating poverty through the education system. Despite the promotion of equity serving as the officially stated goal of federal policy, expert evaluations of the government's efforts incorporated technical assumptions from the field of economics that prioritized maximizing efficiency between inputs and outputs in the education system. When the ESEA was reauthorized in 2002 as No Child Left Behind, significant 'policy drift' had occurred such that the evaluation of teacher quality – which was the subject of a large literature in economics on the 'education production function' – was incorporated as a key component of the education system's flagship anti-poverty initiative, Title I. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 requires the use of evidence in adopting programs, particularly for children with reading disabilities. A quasi-experimental study was conducted to evaluate the effects of a literacy intervention called Helping Early Readers Obtain Excellence in Special Education (HEROES), developed for children ages six to 10 with or at-risk of having reading disabilities. After establishing baseline equivalence on two outcome measures, we conducted hierarchical linear modeling using student and teacher covariates to adjust the estimated effects. Students who received HEROES (n = 329) significantly outperformed comparison students (n = 161) on a general reading achievement measure (ES =.25) and a word recognition task (ES =.17). Results of this external evaluation add to a growing evidence base that children with reading disabilities can make significant progress when effective interventions are implemented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2018, 26 states administered a college admissions test to all public school juniors. Nearly half of those states proposed to use those scores as their academic achievement indicators for federal accountability under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA); many others are planning to use those scores for other accountability purposes. Accountability encompasses a number of different uses and subsumes a variety of claims. For states proposing to use summative tests for accountability, a validity argument needs to be developed, which entails delineating each specific use of test scores associated with accountability, identifying appropriate evidence, and offering a rebuttal to counterclaims. The aim of this article is to support states in developing a validity argument for use of college admission test scores for accountability by identifying claims that are applicable across states, along with summarizing existing evidence as it relates to each of these claims. As outlined by The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, multiple sources of evidence are used to address each claim. A series of threats to the validity argument, including weaker alignment with content standards and potential influences in narrowing teaching, are reviewed. Finally, the article contrasts validity evidence, primarily from research on the ACT, with regulatory requirements from ESSA. The Standards and guidance addressing the use of a "nationally recognized high school academic assessment" (Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), Negotiated Rulemaking Committee; Department of Education) are the primary sources for the organization of validity evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article talks about how standards are developed and discusses reasons for standards being developed including to establish uniform measurements and a minimum level of quality. Topics discussed include the process for development of a standard beginning with the establishment of a need for the standard and a mention of standards including the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

The article discusses what the authors refer to as a charter school funding gap in America as of 2019, and it mentions the historical and legal aspects of the charter school movement in the U.S., as well as issues involving federal, state, and local education finance programs in the country. The U.S. Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and the nation's No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 are assessed, along with Local Education Agencies and funding based on an average per-pupil cost.

Many celebrated the 2015 passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act, the most recent reauthorization of the Elementary reduction and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as a much-needed reduction in the federal footprint in the nation's public schools. It repealed the prescriptive interventions into failing schools in the No Child Left Behind Act and eliminated the emphasis on common standards and assessments as well as teacher evaluation linked to student performance required by Department of Education waivers to No Child Left Behind. Given that one of the principal aims of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is to promote equity, the passage of the Every Students Succeeds Act provides an opportune time to examine the effectiveness of the law in advancing educational equity. This Article proposes a model for institutional design for equity that contends that students need fair funding, an equitable distribution of effective teachers, high-quality preK-12 opportunities to learn, and schools that are economically and racially integrated. The Every Student Succeeds Act will be ineffective in helping states and districts provide these building blocks for equity. This Article then recommends how a reauthorized Elementary and Secondary Education Act should adopt an incremental approach for reforming education federalism that would provide more effective incentives and conditions that helps to ensure that the building blocks for equity are provided to all children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current context for educational reform in the United States is codified in revisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965. Periodic reauthoriations reflect changing national and educational landscapes (Klein, 2015). The most recent re authorisation, Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015 (USDE, 2015), is currently undergoing the regulatory process and is scheduled to go into effect during the 2017-2018 school year (USDE, 2017). This paper mil examine the impact of standards based accountability (SBA) reform within a changing national context from the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) reauthorisation of2002 (USDE, 2002) to ESSA in 2015 through the Texas context of SBA, a descriptive analysis of types of standards, and a statistical analysis of performance by cohort from 2013 to 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), signed in 1965, was a pivotal civil rights law to address the dream of equitable education for all children on the mainland and in U.S. territories. The ESEA was followed by the Bilingual Education Act (BEA), signed by President Johnson in 1968. The BEA specifically addressed the necessities of students whose dominant language was not English. Together these two Acts passed in the 1960s offered new government attention in the form of grants and programs for the purpose of providing bilingual education. Both Acts were reauthorized in their 50-year-plus history. Rather than dwell on the government documents themselves, this article examines the question: In what ways do research studies published in the Bilingual Research Journal inform and hold us accountable to the dream of equity—a dream that mandates equitable access to and opportunities for successful learning outcomes for children from all communities including immigrant communities? A qualitative analysis is used to address the question. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses that governments should exempt property tax for supporting preschool education in the U.S. Topics discussed include gap in the current literature on early education policy; enactment of Every Student Succeeds Act and Elementary and Secondary Education Act for the same; and benefits of early education to society and the taxpayer.

An important aspect of the community college mission is to educate working adults including those without a high school diploma or its equivalent. Three important changes are forcing community colleges to reevaluate how these services and activities are delivered as well as policies that govern this critical work. These shifts provide a new opportunity for community college leaders to reenvision how they engage local employers, working adults, and underprepared college students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has been over forty years since the Supreme Court declared a class suspect under the Equal Protection Clause. In that time, the Court has denied suspect-class status--and the special judicial protections associated with it--to the elderly, the disabled, and the poor, and it has avoided suspect-class determinations when addressing laws that discriminate against members of the LGBTQ community. Administrative agencies, however, have stepped in to provide marginalized groups with some protections through their interpretation of civil rights laws. The Court has shown hostility to those agency interpretations, often in opaque decisions that seem to rest on principles of judicial supremacy as much as substantive constitutional principles. This Article argues that the Court's hostility to agencies' role in this area is misguided. Courts should defer to administrative agencies when they protect suspect classes on the basis of reasonable interpretations of civil rights statutes. The principle of judicial supremacy is not relevant: the Court's abandonment of suspect classes appears driven by the Justices' concern that the judiciary is intervening too much into the political process rather than a genuine belief that the groups in question do not qualify for suspect status. Given that this court-centered institutional concern does not apply to agencies, it is entirely appropriate for administrative officials to step in to fill the gap in protecting vulnerable minorities. Further, agencies are better positioned than other institutions to calibrate the protection of groups according to the societal context and the need for intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On December 10, 2015, President Obama signed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) (P.L. 114-95), legislation which reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and replaces the widely criticized No Child Left Behind Act. After various versions were offered, rejected, or revised, the ESSA ultimately passed both chambers of Congress with strong bipartisan support. The general consensus, from special educators, is the new federal law, which grants significantly more power to states while continuing to require reporting from schools about the capabilities of their students, is a step in the right direction for all students, including those with disabilities. Music educators have celebrated the law for its specification of music as part of a “well-rounded education.” The purpose of this article is to provide background on ESSA and to discuss implications of this law for students with disabilities and music educators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article offers an analysis of the legacy of the Obama Administration's education agenda, focusing on implications for American federalism. Faced with partisan gridlock in Congress--which was not able to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) until the last year in office--the Obama Administration opted to make education policy through creative, expansive, and controversial uses of executive power that changed the national political discourse around education and pushed states to enact important policy changes regarding charter schools, common core standards and assessments, and teacher evaluation. The administration's aggressive efforts on school reform, however, eventually led to a political backlash against those same reforms and federal involvement in education more generally and resulted in an ESEA reauthorization (the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act) that rolls back the federal role in K-12 schooling in important ways. One of the enduring legacies of the Obama presidency may well be the invigoration and expansion of the state role in education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the impact of the December 2015 passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) which reauthorized the long-standing Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). It mentions that the shift in attention to student performance and results as a risk of democratic experimentalism. It also mentions that the states in partnership with the U.S. Department of Education should share lessons to accelerate progress toward more effective schooling for all students.

An interview with Robert E. Stake, a contributor to evaluation research and professor emeritus of education at the University of Illinois, is presented. Topics discussed include his story of becoming an educational evaluator, views regarding educational testing, and his role in the National Defense Education Act of 1950's and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of the mid-'60s.

This article examines New Haven (Connecticut) Public Schools' efforts to create a new teacher evaluation model in a collaborative manner. Based on semi-structured interviews with nearly 100 educators, we develop a case study charting the progress of the new system, TEVAL, from an initial concept through early implementation. We find that John Kingdon's three streams -- problems, politics, and policies -- all aligned in the years preceding TEVAL's adoption and were supported by local policy entrepreneurs. Notably, we also find that TEVAL's progress was further facilitated by the relationships and interactions among the participants themselves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on how teachers can conduct transition assessment process for students with disabilities in 21st century. Topics discussed include a plan outlined by the U.S. Department of Education for the reauthorization of the U.S. Elementary & Secondary Education Act, the factors that assist in selecting appropriate assessments, and the variety of techniques and assessments available for assessing needs, strengths, and interests related to transition.

The article discusses the U.S. government's proposed reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for English language arts and mathematics, and the need to align secondary transition skills with standards, curriculum and instruction to improve postschool outcomes for students with disabilities. It discusses approaches for high school special education teachers to align CCSS with academic and secondary transition skills in the classroom.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESA) of 1965 was intended to ensure access to a quality education for low-income and minority children. President Lyndon B. Johnson, a teacher himself at the beginning of his career, saw education as a critical avenue out of poverty. The Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965 was intended to do the same for college and university education. Unfortunately, fifty years later the foundation of these important pieces of legislation has been eroded through continuing attacks on public education at all levels. The doors to quality public education are being closed, not only at the K-12 level but also at the college and university level as well. Why can we not do for today’s young people what was done for those of fifty years ago? Is not a quality public education still in the best interest of the common good? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Under President Obama, over 80 percent of states have received executive approval for waivers from the No Child Left Behind Act in the absence of Congressional reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). These comprehensive ESEA waivers have been quite ambitious, in that they were designed to address broad changes in K-12 education in nearly all fifty states and not in response to specific-state concerns or to foster experimentation on a focused set of issues. In reviewing the actual state implementation, we found that the Obama administration has enjoyed substantial success in using the waiver process to leverage states to adopt policy changes. But there are limits, as seen in the difficulties the administration has encountered in leveraging changes in teacher and principal evaluation, and inducing changes in student learning and performance standards. The major obstacles to the accomplishment of administration objectives are internal state political dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the use of Title I of the U.S. Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 for the Universal Full-Day Kindergarten.

The article explores the Oklahoma discretion over Common Core State Standards (CCSS), as of September 2014. Topics discussed include history of federal involvement in public education and educational debate surrounding CCSS; introduction of the Oklahoma's Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA); and the state flexibility request to the U.S. Department of Education regarding the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).

An introduction is presented in which editor discusses various articles within the issue on topics including tax credits with poverty reduction, changes to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and legal services for low-income people for War on Poverty.

This article offers an analysis of the origins, evolution, and impact of the Obama administration's Race to the Top (RTTT) competitive grant program and places it in the broader context of the debate over President Obama's aggressive use of executive power. Faced with divided control and partisan gridlock in Congress - which has been unable to reauthorize ESEA, the largest federal education program - the Obama administration has opted to make education policy from the executive branch. While many observers have questioned the expansive interpretation of statutory and regulatory authority that undergirds RTTT - and the NCLB waiver process - there is little doubt that the efforts have had a significant impact on the national political discourse around education and pushed many states to propose or enact important policy changes, particularly around charter schools, common core standards, and teacher evaluation processes. Along with health care, education reform is likely to be remembered as the most significant policy legacy of the Obama administration. However, while the Affordable Care Act was drafted by Congress and secured through the 'normal' legislative process, the Obama education agenda has largely been designed and enacted through unilateral executive branch authority. As a result, these actions may well set significant precedents for the separation of powers as well as for education policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on the status of American gifted and talented education in public schools. Topics discussed include the value of gifted education to American society and to the public education system, inadequacies of gifted education and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The author suggests implementation of states' education clauses to improve the gifted services provided in public schools.

Enhancing school principal effectiveness in our nation's lowest-performing schools is essential to improving the academic achievement of Latino students. First, 25 percent of a school's impact on its students' academic achievement is directly attributable to the principal's actions. Second, an effective principal is a prerequisite to having an effective school. Finally, the country's worst schools disproportionately serve Hispanic students. The Obama administration and the U.S. Congress should prioritize principal preparation in the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and should incentivize states to develop rigorous evidence-based frameworks of accountability and supports for new and aspiring principals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Federal waivers to state governments from conditions attached to grants-in-aid and other programs have become a critical factor in U.S. intergovernmental relations, yet no systematic empirical analysis has considered which factors make some states more likely to receive waivers. This article presents results of model estimations of time-series panel data that use as dependent variables measures of waivers to federal Medicaid and education policy from 1991 to 2008. Different factors influence the waivers states receive to different federal programs, suggesting that the waiver process varies greatly from policy to policy. These results do suggest that scholars of future waiver processes look to the capacity of each state's government and the relative size of populations the federal program most affects. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article examines the federal role in adolescent literacy from its roots in Lyndon B. Johnson's administration with the Economic Opportunity Act (1964) through the Reading for Understanding grants of 2010. The authors consider the extent to which the recent attention to and changes in the federal approach to adolescent literacy can be explained through the policy regime framework. Specifically, the study traces shifts in the policy paradigm around adolescent literacy and asks whether key actors and issue specialists that have routinely been part of the reading education policy regime at the federal level have changed over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: No Child Left Behind is only the most recent manifestation of a longstanding American impulse to reform schools through accountability systems created from afar. While research has explored the causes and consequences of No Child Left Behind, this study puts the modern accountability movement in longer historical perspective, seeking to identify broader underlying patterns that shape this approach to reform. Purpose and Research Design: The study explores the question of the short and longer-term causes of the movement to "rationalize" schools by comparing three major movements demanding accountability in American education across the 20th century: the efficiency reforms of the Progressive Era; the now almost forgotten movement toward accountability in the late 1960s and early 1970s; and the modern standards and accountability movement, culminating in No Child Left Behind. This paper considers the three movements as cases of school "rationalization" in the Weberian sense, in that each sought to reduce variation and discretion across schools in favor of increasingly formal systems of standardized top-down control. Findings: This impulse to rationalize schools cannot be explained by interest group or partisan explanations since the reformers defy easy ideological categorization.. Instead, the reforms can be understood as a penetration of "technocratic logic" into the educational sphere. In each movement, this process exhibited a similar pattern: (1) the identification of a crisis of quality which destabilized the existing educational status quo; (2) the elevation of a technocratic logic, backed by the knowledge base of a high-high status epistemic community; (3) the rallying of ideologically diverse powerful actors external to the schools behind a commensurating logic that promised control over and improvement of an unwieldy school system; and (4) the inability of education to resist this technocratic logic (and often to be co-opted by it) due to teaching's historical institutionalization as a feminized, weak, bureaucratically-administered field lacking its own set of widely respected countervailing professional standards. Conclusions/Implications: This history suggests that unless teachers are able to develop and organize a stronger field, they will remain at the whim of external actors. It also suggests that top-down accountability-centered approaches are limited if the goal is to consistently produce teaching that can help students engage in higher level academic work. Rather than continuing to pursue these rationalizing strategies, this analysis and emerging international evidence suggest that a more promising approach would be to work towards professionalizing the educational field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the postscript for this special issue of Education and Urban Society, this article considers the struggles urban schools report confronting as they implement standards-based reform and high stakes testing and discusses the implications these challenge have for future accountability policy aimed at promoting educational equity. Among the issues for future policy to consider with Race to the Top and the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act include the need for adequate resources to develop capacity among school personnel to aid with instructional reform. However, there are three factors that may derail the future effectiveness of accountability policy in urban schools. First, the ongoing federal deficit may limit the availability of resources needed to improve teacher practice. Second, the use of teacher evaluation may cause a narrow focus on tested subjects. Third, the limiting beliefs of teachers may restrict the organizational change within urban schools. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act (US Government, 2001), the current iteration of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, makes it clear that states, districts, schools and teachers are accountable for the education of English language learners (ELLs), as well as all other students. To implement an accountability system, NCLB requires states to create content standards (a set of curricular goals and objectives) for English language arts, mathematics, and science. They must also develop and administer assessments that measure student progress toward mastery of these content standards. Finally, states, districts, and schools must demonstrate that they are making adequate yearly progress toward bringing all students to a previously established level of mastery of these standards (called Proficient) with the goal that by the year 2014 all students will achieve this level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]