To our loving and dedicated wives, Joan and Margo, who have support our careers in so many ways. We greatly appreciate your support and encouragement.
Table of contents(24 chapters)
This chapter reviews the rationale for the text and reflects on the contents of the text. This text was motivated by the issues based upon implementation of the 2001 No Child Left Behind (NCLB) federal education statute. The NCLB Act and other related program designed to help education urban and minority enrolled in Title I programs of NCLB with white children. NCLB applies only to local Title I schools; however, the Act allows individual states to determine the number of Title I schools and the number of subgroups to be assessed using standardized tests. The Text is divided into two sections: Educational Equity and Process and Research. The first section on educational equity discusses the policy implication of NCLB and its history and the second section examines avenues on how to effectively implement programs under Title I and other requirements under NCLB. The authors explore the federal government's efforts to close the achievement gap between different sub-population of students under NCLB. Today, global economic rules and the country's population have changed. Economic globalization demands a better-educated workforce and the new economic players are already making American pay for an increasingly less competitive work force. NCLB has been with us for 40 years with the aim of closing the achievement gap between minority students and white students; and the achievement gap continues 50 years later. These 20 chapters by national and international scholars and educators provide educators, policy makers and government officers with current information and research needed to make improved decisions on closing the achievement gap; and hopeful improve the life of our citizens.
Title I programs provide extra funding for disadvantaged students by the federal government under the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act and reauthorized under the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Title I continues to be the largest funded component of NCLB. I discuss the NCLB stated goal of closing the achievement gap between poor and minority students and their more advantaged peers. Given the modest level of Title I funding in terms of need, local school districts are only able to provide Title I services to those schools that enroll the highest percentages of disadvantaged students, leaving many disadvantaged students without Title I compensatory services. NCLB calls for funding equity between Title I and non-Title I schools, but this goal is rarely achieved. I also discuss the history of funding under ESEA of 1965 and the 2001 NCLB Act.
Diversity is key policy concept in education and public policy, although its specific meaning is subject to debate. This chapter analyzes the meanings of and the roles played by diversity in the implementation and impact of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Although NCLB does not specify how measurements are to be made to determine Annual Yearly Progress (AYP), nor does it designate the groups used in assessing learning gaps, state practices in the classification of individuals into subgroups and measurement of AYP call for the calculation of confidence intervals for proportions, an approach of questionable validity given the lack of randomness of school assignment. Instead, an approach using measurement error to decide whether a school, group, or individual achieves a certain threshold is suggested as an alternative. Emphasizing the school or creating categories of students based on personal characteristics may not be the soundest approach to developing human capital and promoting the success of all, however. Diverse students call for diverse goals and modes of accomplishing these goals; the model for developing Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for special needs students may be a best approach for individualizing education for every child.
America began the process of funding public education beyond the military colleges and American Indian School in 1965 with the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). ESEA has evolved over the past 40 years to be called No Child Left Behind (NCLB). NCLB has had three major evaluations in which I participated in the last two evaluations by the U.S. Department of Education and each evaluation found that NCLB did not make a difference in the education lives of the students who received services from the program; but it did not harm. This chapter explored all the school choice options available to k-12 students in public and private schools; and reviewed the evaluation of these school choice options. Research reveals that for disadvantaged students, traditional public schools outperform private schools and charter schools. Voucher programs are also reviewed. This chapter concludes that educational equity is not adequately addressed by NCLB, school choice programs, charter schools or the traditional public schools.
This chapter addresses the accountability standards expressed in the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the legislative history of this federal statute on education. The author states that the Act recognized that many students are “left behind” and some “way behind” and analyses how this Act will reduce the academic deficit for those students left behind? This review makes it clear that the fiscal equity movement never got off the ground or close to becoming a major part to the legislation. Legal challenges to NCLB is extensively reviewed which raises the question as the amount of support for this legislation. The chapter closes with the note that NCLB is an under-funded mandate placing the fiscal responsibility on the budget-strapped states.
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act is the most sweeping policy legislation in the history of public education in the United States. It is an umbrella for many federal government initiatives impacting public education, including ESEA, Title I, the large federal compensatory education program that began as part of President Johnson's “Great Society” program in the mid-1960s. A brief review of selected interventions to improve public education and social justice for poor African-American public school students, whose education was heavily impacted by decades of slavery and other forms of racism are discussed. Specific requirements of NCLB are presented in detail, including a review of advantages and disadvantages of this legislation. Since its implementation, NCLB has been unpopular with many public school districts and professional education organizations because it seeks to hold them accountable for results obtained with different subgroups of students. Several recent challenges to NCLB are discussed as well as concessions to reduce requirements for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) recently negotiated between the U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) and state departments of education will permit more school to make AYP. Parents views of NCLB and public education in general are presented. Finally, a discussion of poverty, as seen through the revealing lens of Hurricane Katrina, and its impacts on achieving the laudable goals of NCLB are presented in this chapter.
This chapter addresses changes in the reauthorization of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) by the 2001 No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. NCLB Act increases both federal involvement in K-12 education and funding for this purpose. The Act targets poor students and academically weak schools by shifting funding formulas, requiring annual testing of students in grades three through eight; and makes school systems accountable by tracking test results, reporting to parents, and disaggregate tests results by sub-group factors. The goal is to eliminate the achievement gap between minority and white students. We discuss the process and the achievement of this goal.
Supporters of charter schools tend to also be the supporters of 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) regarding choice in education. Many minority parents and their children are disappointed with school desegregation benefits and the pace of school finance reform is embracing choice schools such as charter schools. Charter schools are public schools with a specific mission free from the local school district, and are administered by a group of parents. Charter schools proponents argue that minorities will receive an education superior to traditional public schools. We argue that charter schools combined with accountability goals of NCLB by racial subgroups should enhance the academic achievement of minority students. We also assess the combination of the school choice paradigm with a focus on the interaction of charter schools and NCLB.
The federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) is a reorganization of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). This redesign of the 1965 Act has legal issues to deal with which we will examine. We also discuss NCLB as it relates to education autonomy of the states, local school districts, and individual students and parents. We review several lawsuits challenging the authority of the federal government to regulate local school districts through funding under NCLB. These legal challenges have led to modifications in NCLB in order to gain greater acceptance by the states and local schools. However, legal challenges continue in the courts and in state legislatures.
The American schools are more racially and ethnically diverse and increasing at a faster pace than in the past. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 [NCLB] defines diversity in terms of group differences, not individual variability. Common groupings are white, African American, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American. However, each state is free to select their own groupings for diversity and several states include limited English proficient students as a subgroup. This chapter examines the fastest growing addition to+ American public schools, immigrant students with limited English proficiency and in need of bilingual education. I examine how the states hope to close the achievement gap for students with Limited English Proficiency under NCLB
With the passage of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, the federal government increased its role in the reform of public education. The central feature of this movement is the use of standardized testing to raise student achievement, and particularly among minority and low-income disadvantaged students. Drawing on the slogan of the Children's Defense Fund, the NCLB Act is intended to reverse the “soft bigotry of low expectations” and include all children in efforts to achieve academic excellence. Additionally, the Act requires states to put in place procedures and policies to attract and retain “highly qualified” teachers in core subject matter areas. This chapter will focus on accountability and high stakes testing under NCLB, present arguments for and against the act, and report findings of recent research on standardized testing. The chapter concludes with a discussion of several aspects of NCLB that could produce a disparate impact on African American students in urban schools.
African American male students have traditionally received the most negative treatment by public educators. This study seeks to assess whether a school known to help disadvantaged students to become successful students will include African American males. The study used Henderson and Milstein's Six Trait Resiliency Model (2003): increase pro-social bonding, set clear and consistent boundaries, teach life skills, provide caring and support, set and communicate high expectations and provide opportunity for meaningful participation. This study examined the relationships between 12 African American male students in grades 3–8 and their 10 classroom teachers (nine Caucasians and one African American).
Closing the achievement gap between white and minority students is a proposed goal of the federal 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). We discuss equity in assess to quality education since most students attend public schools; and should enjoy educational equity under the Equal Protection Clause under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We examine the academic achievement gap between the races; and the responsibility of educators and students to close this gap; and the NCLB connection to closing this gap. We also examine the intended and unintended effects of NCLB on minority students and educators.
This chapter examines the federal 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and discusses neo-liberal global ideology that informs NCLB. I review data from the state of Missouri and find that NCLB has not met its goal of improving the academic achievement of students from ethnic minority and lower socioeconomic groups. Minority students represent a large and growing proportion of the school age population; and they are failing disproportionately compared to white students. I also discuss the major focus, accountability, which requires states to annually assess and report progress made by different subgroup of students on standardized tests in the State of Missouri. This neo-liberal globalization education reform agenda is designed to meet the needs of free market capitalism.In spite of the rhetoric of equality of educational opportunity and the value of diversity in America, we find ourselves in the midst of an ultraconservative set of federal policies that is shifting resources from the “have-nots” to “have-mores.” (Joyce Payne)
Efforts to promote equity in mathematics education are becoming more widespread. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics elevated its position on equity from one of societal need to one of six guiding principles required to ensure excellence in mathematics education. I investigate how efforts to promote educational equity in mathematics education are informed by democratic views. In particular, I examine the intersection of course taking, equity, mathematics, and democracy in the context of a case study conducted in one high school mathematics department. This case study was conducted over one academic year, and data included a focus survey, interviews, field notes from department meetings and class observations, and school documents. In this study, I investigated the curricular redesign process undertaken by one high school mathematics department addressing high failure rates in low-level courses disproportionately enrolled with students of color designed to increase access to more advanced mathematics courses. I discuss how those changes impacted access, influenced equity, and aligned with democratic aims and their relationship to mathematics education.
Federal involvement with closing the achievement gap was inspired by the failed local efforts in the 1960s. To aid in closing the achievement gap the federal government has promoted the busing of African American students in sometimes hostile white schools and financially supported educational/social programs such as Head Start. Currently, we are faced with yet another federal effort to close the achievement gap due to the failed attempts by local and state districts. Many school districts across the nation are participating in public school choice programs in response to the choice mandate in No Child Left Behind. The use of school choice, along with testing and accountability measures, is a major mechanism employed by the Bush administration to close the gap. As desegregation has shown, the transfer of students from one facility to a seemingly better facility is not enough. When looking at the majority population served in America's urban schools, we need to continue to raise the question, how do we best serve the needs of those who are most in need and have been historically and systematically placed in need?
Parent involvement is a major component of several school reform initiatives, including the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 commonly referred to as Title I. Parent involvement is also an important provision in the latest reauthorization of the Leave No Child Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, PL 107-110. Important research on parent involvement is presented in this chapter. Also, a brief discussion of the role parent involvement has played in several important school reform initiatives, such as decentralization, community control, and compensatory education are discussed. Finally, specific recommendations are given for school leaders, superintendents, and principals, on how to use parent involvement to help schools and students make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), a requirement of NCLB.
This chapter explores the impact of economic globalization on the country, the reduction of tax revenues, and a decline of our education system. The concept of globalization is explained and a concept is explored as how America can become more competitive with a superior public education system. I discuss prior options to improve public education No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act and the 1957 Education Defense Act as ways to improve education for a more diverse society. I provide evidence that the 40 year effort of using an under funded NCLB Project produced less than the Education Defense Act of 1957 because it attracted more and better qualified individuals to the profession. Globalization forces governments to reduce taxes on industries to help retain them in their states or just held home companies remain competitive. Finally, quality education is viewed as not an option but a must if this country wishes to remain competitive in the global economy and retain political stability that may result from social unrest due to a lack of good employment and educational opportunities.
This paper examines the effects of immigration, urban residency, poverty, and race/ethnicity on the education of students in K-12 school. Findings of this study critiques the gaps between NCLB policy and its implementations as well as the outcomes, and makes several recommendations. This chapter recommends multiple standards and assessment approaches for accountability. The author believes that accountability must be addressed along with, equality, and fiscal adequacy. Accountability can work in a pluralistic nation only when diversity is taken into serious consideration. Recognizing this diversity is critical in developing successful strategies and effective approaches for working with immigrant families and students. Education policy for disadvantaged families and communities should not be limited to conventional education policy alone. Socioeconomic policies that benefit lower-income families and communities also should be recognized as educational policies on behalf of children.
The authors interrogated the contextual spectra of educational and sociological literature to highlight the failings of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Historical and contemporary perspectives on the state of urban schooling, school choice, and community identify fundamental areas in which disadvantaged students are affected disproportionately. Additionally, treatment of the TRIO programs (Upward Bound and Talent Search) and their positive impact on disadvantaged students is presented. The TRIO programs consider issues germane to the academic achievement of low-income, disadvantaged, and marginalized students in ways that the No Child Left Behind framework fails to consider. Policymakers, K-12 teachers/leaders, and parents are admonished to pay careful attention to how No Child Left Behind continues to leave underprivileged children behind through ignorance of their communities and disparate accountability measures. Implications for policy are discussed.
Tawannah G. Allen, EdD has a Bachelor's of Science degree in Psychology and a Masters of Education in Communication Disorders, both from North Carolina Central University, in Durham, North Carolina. Tawannah practiced as a speech-language pathologist for 10 years after having student taught and taught Kindergarten in Durham Public Schools. Her degree in School Administration was obtained from Fayetteville State University, in Fayetteville, North Carolina. Ms. Allen earned her Doctorate in Education in Educational Leadership from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her research interests include resiliency and the African American male and African American women in leadership. She continues to conduct research in the area of African American males and academic success, while also presenting at conferences and professional development trainings. Currently, Dr. Allen is employed with Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) as the Director of Elementary Programming and Professional Development. In this position, she is responsible for the articulation, implementation, and monitoring of the elementary instructional programming for nine elementary schools, while also identifying and providing quality professional development for the teachers, principals, and other administrators within the CHCCS district. Dr. Allen's professional goals include becoming an assistant superintendent in a small urban district and then ultimately becoming a superintendent.