federal education legislation
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

12
(FIVE YEARS 5)

H-INDEX

1
(FIVE YEARS 0)

Author(s):  
Jason P. Nance

In this chapter, Jason P. Nance explores why the United States should recognize a federal right to education. Nance offers rationales for the federal government to address the current inequalities and inadequacies within the education system, including economic, criminal justice, health, democratic, and fairness rationales. He also critiques past and current federal education legislation designed to address these disparities and concludes that such legislation has been inadequate to remedy these shortcomings. In fact, federal legislation has established conditions for such disparities to continue and perhaps widen. He concludes by arguing that further federal intervention is needed and that the time is ripe for the creation of a federal right to a high-quality education for all children that can be enforced by both federal agencies and courts.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  

Changes in federal education legislation have presented scholars, educational activists, and educators with an opportunity to influence educational outcomes that are youth-centered and youth-driven, specifically among students of color in underserved schools. Opportunities for youth to initiate, design, implement, and evaluate district programs and interventions are beneficial not only to youths’ intrinsic development, but also to the school communities in which they spend the most time. This article links the growth and promotion of positive youth development (PYD) theories and programming to current federal policy changes that support the inclusion of youth in school reform. The authors also discuss historical PYD programming, the role of cultural relevance in educational settings, and future areas of PYD research at the school level.


2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Devon Brenner

Rural education is becoming an increasing focus of federal education legislation. The Every Student Succeeds Act explicitly addresses rural education through the REAP program, by taking steps to ensure geographic distribution in competitive grants, by requiring states to consider rural LEAs in the development of state plans, and in many other ways. The mandated report on rural education is intended to provide data about whether these provisions are sufficient for ensuring that federal policy and funding address the needs of rural schools and students and its impact remains to be seen.


2017 ◽  
Vol 53 (5) ◽  
pp. 705-726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle D. Young ◽  
Kathleen M. Winn ◽  
Marcy A. Reedy

Purpose: This article offers (a) an overview of the attention federal policy has invested in educational leadership with a primary focus on the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), (b) a summary of the critical role school leaders play in achieving the goals set forth within federal educational policy, and (c) examples of how states are using the opportunity afforded by the focus on leadership in ESSA. Findings: Through the examination of federal policy and existing research in this arena, we review the level of attention paid to educational leadership within Elementary and Secondary Education Act, its reauthorizations, and other federal education legislation. ESSA provides an enhanced focus on educational leadership and acknowledges the importance of leaders in achieving federal goals for education. Furthermore, ESSA acknowledges the importance of developing a strong leadership pipeline and, thus, allows states and districts to use federal funds to support leadership development. In this article, we delineate this focus on leadership within ESSA and offer examples of how states are planning to support leadership development. Implications and Conclusion: The important role that school leadership plays in supporting student, teacher, and school-wide outcomes warrants its inclusion within federal education policy. However, the opportunity to realize ESSA’s intended goals around leadership development could be undermined by forces at both the state and federal levels.


Author(s):  
Jal Mehta

In late 2001, three months after the September 11 attacks, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) passed both House and Senate with strong bipartisan majorities and was signed by a Republican president. Promising to use the power of the state to ensure that all children were proficient in reading and math by 2014, proponents heralded the act as the greatest piece of federal education legislation since the creation of the original Elementary and Secondary Education Act in 1965. By requiring the states to set high standards, pairing them with assessments that measured whether students were achieving those standards, and holding schools accountable if students failed to do so, NCLB, in the eyes of its sponsors, would close achievement gaps and make America’s schools the envy of the world. A decade later, the bloom is off the rose. While almost everyone today continues to share the aim of leaving no child behind, the act itself has come in for criticism from many quarters, to the point that Bush’s former Education Secretary Margaret Spellings declared that NCLB is now a “toxic brand” in American politics. Careful studies of the implementation of NCLB have shown that it has done what less bullish observers might have predicted from the outset. It has increased the focus on the education of poor and minority students, but it has not provided schools with needed tools to create higher quality schooling for these students. There has been improvement in some national test scores (e.g., 4th and 8th grade math), while others have remained largely unchanged (e.g., 4th and 8th grade reading). Even accounting for the progress in math, there is no sign that the reforms have had a significant impact in closing achievement gaps or in improving America’s mediocre international educational standing. Particularly in the most troubled schools, there has been rampant teaching to the test and some outright cheating. In-depth studies have shown that some schools now devote a large part of their year to test prep; Atlanta and DC public schools have both contended with widespread cheating scandals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document