AHS-9/Federalism-NCLB
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•351 views
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) established standardized testing requirements in US schools. There is controversy over whether standardized test scores should determine student placement and graduation. While NCLB costs $144.5 billion, the government only pays 56% of costs. NCLB is being replaced by the State Accountability Systems of Assessment program due to concerns it has failed US education by incentivizing teaching to tests. 34 states received waivers from NCLB requirements in 2012-2013.
Report
Share
Report
Share
Recommended
History of No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
- A 1983 report titled "A Nation at Risk" found that the American education system was falling behind other countries and that equal education was not being provided to all students. It recommended strengthening high school graduation requirements and improving teacher preparation programs.
- The 1994 Improving America's Schools Act restructured the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and shifted the focus from poor students to all students. States began implementing content and performance standards.
- The 2001 No Child Left Behind Act significantly expanded the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. It set standards for grade-level achievement and measured progress for all students, including subgroups, in meeting state standards. It aimed to improve education for disadvantaged students through highly qualified teachers, accountability, and
No Child Left Behind
The document summarizes key points from three articles that are critical of the No Child Left Behind Act. The first article discusses how supplemental tutoring programs required by NCLB are ineffective due to low enrollment and a lack of oversight. The second article argues that NCLB harms elementary students by reducing recess, not challenging gifted students, and inappropriately testing disabled students. The third article identifies seven "sins" of NCLB, including an overreliance on standardized testing and a failure to help impoverished children. The document concludes that NCLB needs reform or replacement to address these issues.
NCLB
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) aims to improve educational outcomes for disadvantaged students. It requires states to develop academic standards and annual student assessments in basic skills. NCLB increased accountability for results, giving more flexibility and options to local schools and parents while emphasizing evidence-based teaching methods. The act substantially increased federal funding for education from 2001 to 2007, including major increases for Title I funding and special education.
Nochildleftbehindppt
This document provides an overview of the No Child Left Behind Act, including its key provisions, arguments for and against it, and issues with federalism. It was passed in 2002 to set high standards and measurable goals to improve education outcomes. It requires standardized testing, school improvement plans for low scores, and tutoring for struggling students. While it aims to improve education quality, critics argue it focuses too much on testing and has unintended consequences like increased teacher shortages. It also raises issues around federal control of education traditionally reserved for state governments. Studies have found some achievement gains in math but overall goals have not been fully met.
W 200-- No Child Left Behind
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) aims to improve education by holding teachers accountable, empowering parents, and ensuring all students achieve academic standards. It requires teachers to be highly qualified and uses testing to monitor student progress and teacher performance. Supporters believe NCLB benefits students and communities by providing oversight of schools and allowing progress tracking. However, critics argue it has increased academic competitiveness and raised graduation requirements to an unreasonably difficult level. The act also demands teachers use data from student assessments to inform instructional decisions and continuously evaluate and modify their teaching methods to address learning needs.
No Child Left Behind Powerpoint
The No Child Left Behind Act requires states to develop plans to ensure all teachers are highly qualified in their subject areas by the end of the 2005-2006 school year. Key provisions include annual testing in reading and math for grades 3-8, setting achievement targets, and distributing over $2.8 billion in Title II funding to support professional development to help teachers meet highly qualified status. Districts must assess needs and develop plans for using Title II funds to increase teacher qualifications and student achievement.
No child left behind 2013 presentation PAA 601
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 aimed to increase accountability for K-12 public schools. It required states to develop standards and annual student assessments in math and reading. Schools that received Title I funding had to meet adequate yearly progress targets for all student subgroups or face consequences. The act increased the federal role in education and sought to close achievement gaps, but critics argued its one-size-fits-all approach and unrealistic proficiency goals negatively impacted schools, teachers, and students. Revisions to the law have been proposed to better balance accountability and local control over curriculum.
Introduction to the No Child Left Behind Policy
This is presentation serves as an introduction to the No Child Left Behind policy. It was created for my Honors Public Policy class at the State University of New York at Albany.
Recommended
History of No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
- A 1983 report titled "A Nation at Risk" found that the American education system was falling behind other countries and that equal education was not being provided to all students. It recommended strengthening high school graduation requirements and improving teacher preparation programs.
- The 1994 Improving America's Schools Act restructured the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and shifted the focus from poor students to all students. States began implementing content and performance standards.
- The 2001 No Child Left Behind Act significantly expanded the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. It set standards for grade-level achievement and measured progress for all students, including subgroups, in meeting state standards. It aimed to improve education for disadvantaged students through highly qualified teachers, accountability, and
No Child Left Behind
The document summarizes key points from three articles that are critical of the No Child Left Behind Act. The first article discusses how supplemental tutoring programs required by NCLB are ineffective due to low enrollment and a lack of oversight. The second article argues that NCLB harms elementary students by reducing recess, not challenging gifted students, and inappropriately testing disabled students. The third article identifies seven "sins" of NCLB, including an overreliance on standardized testing and a failure to help impoverished children. The document concludes that NCLB needs reform or replacement to address these issues.
NCLB
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) aims to improve educational outcomes for disadvantaged students. It requires states to develop academic standards and annual student assessments in basic skills. NCLB increased accountability for results, giving more flexibility and options to local schools and parents while emphasizing evidence-based teaching methods. The act substantially increased federal funding for education from 2001 to 2007, including major increases for Title I funding and special education.
Nochildleftbehindppt
This document provides an overview of the No Child Left Behind Act, including its key provisions, arguments for and against it, and issues with federalism. It was passed in 2002 to set high standards and measurable goals to improve education outcomes. It requires standardized testing, school improvement plans for low scores, and tutoring for struggling students. While it aims to improve education quality, critics argue it focuses too much on testing and has unintended consequences like increased teacher shortages. It also raises issues around federal control of education traditionally reserved for state governments. Studies have found some achievement gains in math but overall goals have not been fully met.
W 200-- No Child Left Behind
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) aims to improve education by holding teachers accountable, empowering parents, and ensuring all students achieve academic standards. It requires teachers to be highly qualified and uses testing to monitor student progress and teacher performance. Supporters believe NCLB benefits students and communities by providing oversight of schools and allowing progress tracking. However, critics argue it has increased academic competitiveness and raised graduation requirements to an unreasonably difficult level. The act also demands teachers use data from student assessments to inform instructional decisions and continuously evaluate and modify their teaching methods to address learning needs.
No Child Left Behind Powerpoint
The No Child Left Behind Act requires states to develop plans to ensure all teachers are highly qualified in their subject areas by the end of the 2005-2006 school year. Key provisions include annual testing in reading and math for grades 3-8, setting achievement targets, and distributing over $2.8 billion in Title II funding to support professional development to help teachers meet highly qualified status. Districts must assess needs and develop plans for using Title II funds to increase teacher qualifications and student achievement.
No child left behind 2013 presentation PAA 601
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 aimed to increase accountability for K-12 public schools. It required states to develop standards and annual student assessments in math and reading. Schools that received Title I funding had to meet adequate yearly progress targets for all student subgroups or face consequences. The act increased the federal role in education and sought to close achievement gaps, but critics argued its one-size-fits-all approach and unrealistic proficiency goals negatively impacted schools, teachers, and students. Revisions to the law have been proposed to better balance accountability and local control over curriculum.
Introduction to the No Child Left Behind Policy
This is presentation serves as an introduction to the No Child Left Behind policy. It was created for my Honors Public Policy class at the State University of New York at Albany.
No child left behind ppt.
The No Child Left Behind Act aimed to improve student achievement and reform schools. It established higher standards for student testing, school accountability, and teacher qualifications. Schools that did not meet standards faced penalties such as restructuring of staff and curriculum. Supporters argued it created higher standards and informed parents, while critics noted challenges for rural schools with less funding and increased burdens for teachers adopting new methods.
No child left behind
The No Child Left Behind Act was established from 2001-2002 under President George W. Bush. It was proposed in January 2001, passed the House of Representatives in May 2001, passed the Senate in June 2001, and was signed into law by President Bush in January 2002. The Act was based on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and supports standards-based education reforms through standardized testing to improve education outcomes.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
5 main points of the No Child Left Behind Act in bullet form. It does not expand into detail. It includes two graphs showing how education in mathematics and reading is doing.
League of Education Voters
The document discusses proposals to reform Washington state's K-12 education system. It outlines recommendations from the Basic Education Finance Task Force (BETF) to redefine basic education, implement a new school funding formula based on prototype schools, and improve teacher compensation and evaluation systems. It also describes a proposal from the Full Funding Coalition to phase in full funding of basic education over 5 years using new funding formulas.
Education Policy- No Child Left Behind and the Every Student Succeeds Act
This document provides an overview of two major pieces of US education legislation: No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). It discusses the historical context around the federal role in education and the motivation behind these bills. NCLB aimed to improve education quality and close achievement gaps through increased testing and accountability. While testing was controversial, proponents argued it was necessary to assess progress. ESSA later revised NCLB by reducing the federal role and allowing more state/local control over standards and accountability.
Edf415 online teaching
The document discusses the increasing role of the federal government in education through policies like No Child Left Behind, which requires states to implement standardized testing and academic standards in order to receive federal funding. However, this level of federal involvement is controversial and has unintended consequences such as teaching to tests, increased cheating on assessments, and negative impacts on students from low-income families. The document also examines debates around testing accommodations and the high-stakes nature of standardized tests.
Edf415 online teaching
The document discusses the federal government's increasing role in education through policies like No Child Left Behind (NCLB). It established academic standards, testing, and accountability measures that states were required to comply with to receive federal funding. However, this created challenges for states that had to accept the policies to get money but did not always agree with the policies. The document also examines issues with high-stakes testing, such as cheating scandals, teaching to tests, and negative impacts on vulnerable student groups.
Edf415 online teaching
The document discusses the federal government's increasing role in education through policies like No Child Left Behind (NCLB). It established academic standards, testing, and accountability measures that states were required to comply with to receive federal funding. However, this created challenges for states that had to accept the policies to get money but did not always agree with the policies. The document also examines issues with high-stakes testing, such as cheating scandals, teaching to tests, and negative impacts on vulnerable student groups.
Model6
Edu 200 module 6 presentation on Federal and Indiana standards to bring education into the global community.
Utah Higher Ed Public Opinion Survey
A survey of 675 Utah adults was conducted in July 2009 to assess public opinion on issues related to higher education. Key findings included:
- 99% felt a college education was important for career and economic opportunities.
- 80% gave colleges a grade of A or B.
- 80% favored increasing state financial aid for needy students.
- Both men and women should attend college according to respondents, with the expectation gap between genders narrowing.
Chapter 15: Policy Issues and Early Childhood Practice
Early Childhood Education: Learning Together
by Virginia Casper and Rachel Theilheimer
(c)2009 McGraw-Hill Publishing
MeginShow Version 2
The document discusses the various political forces that influence school governance and finance in the United States. It outlines the key stakeholders in education including political interest groups, businesses, teachers' organizations, and parents/students. It then describes the roles of federal, state, and local governments in education policy and funding. Specifically, it discusses how education is governed at the state level through boards of education and departments of education, and at the local level through school districts, boards, superintendents, and principals. The document also examines issues around school accountability, administration, and the sources of funding for public education including federal, state, local property taxes, and private donations.
Education Reform
This section of Solutions for America discusses the problems facing the future of education under the current administration and the ways to fix it.
MeginShow
The document discusses the various forces that influence school governance and finance in the United States. It outlines the key stakeholders in education, including political interest groups, businesses, teachers' organizations, and parents/students. It also describes the roles of federal, state, and local governments in establishing policies and providing funding for K-12 education. Specifically, it discusses how schools are governed at the state level by boards of education and departments of education, and at the local level by school districts, local boards, superintendents, and principals. The document also examines the sources of funding for public schools, including support from federal, state, and local governments as well as private organizations.
Education Policy
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) policy aimed to improve education by requiring annual student testing, teacher quality standards, and school accountability. However, it has not fully addressed racial disparities. Test scores and graduation rates remain lower for minority students, and high-minority schools are still more likely to have underqualified teachers. While NCLB increased standards, it has not yet achieved equal educational opportunities for all students.
Megin Show - Updated Version 2
The document summarizes the key forces that influence school governance and finance in the United States. It discusses how the federal, state, and local governments all play roles in education policy and funding. It also outlines the various stakeholders that shape education, including political groups, businesses, teachers' organizations, parents, and students. Additionally, it examines issues of accountability, standards, and the debate around the appropriate balance of federal versus state control of public education.
Megin Show - Version 3 Final
The document summarizes the key forces that influence school governance and finance in the United States. It discusses how the federal, state, and local governments all play roles in education policy and funding. It also outlines the various stakeholders that shape education, including political groups, businesses, teachers' organizations, parents, and students. Additionally, it examines issues of accountability, standards, and the debate around the appropriate levels of local versus state versus federal control over public education policy and spending.
No Child Left Behind1
The No Child Left Behind Act aims to improve education standards but many argue it is unrealistic and may do more harm than good. It puts pressure on schools and teachers to improve test scores without accounting for students' individual needs or disabilities. As a result, some schools reverse inclusion efforts or see higher dropout rates among students who require more assistance. While the goals of the act are well-intentioned, its overreliance on standardized testing and "one-size-fits-all" approach has unintended negative consequences, especially for students with special needs.
Nclb
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) aims to improve education standards but also has limitations. It requires all students to meet state standards by 2014 and holds schools accountable for results. However, teachers feel restrained from individualizing lessons or teaching beyond standardized tests. While NCLB aims to close achievement gaps, some argue it has negative effects like limiting curriculum and student learning. Changes are being discussed to maintain high standards while allowing more flexibility.
US Education Reform Essay
A paper I wrote for English 04. It discusses what options are available to Public School Districts, unable to comply with government regulations. i discuss choices for districts, who cannot currently comply with, No Child Left Behind initiative.
Writing Sample-Policy Memo
- The movement for standards, testing, and accountability began in the 1980s from a belief that federal aid was failing to improve academic achievement, especially for disadvantaged students. This led to reforms under four presidents between 1989-2010.
- Each president contributed to the federal structure of Title I and added new requirements like testing and accountability. No Child Left Behind significantly expanded the use of standards, testing, and accountability but left content definition to states.
- Research shows both benefits like increased focus on low-performing students, but also drawbacks like overemphasis on standardized testing and narrowing of curriculum. Recommendations include measuring student progress more appropriately and focusing more on learning needs than achievement gaps.
20130718 Alger Time to Retire, Not Reauthorize, No Child Left Behind
The document discusses the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and argues that it should be retired rather than reauthorized. It summarizes that NCLB has failed to meaningfully improve student test scores or close achievement gaps despite massive spending. States have also lowered standards to meet NCLB targets, undermining the law's accountability. The document concludes that control over education would be better returned to states and localities, and that parental choice programs leave no child behind.
More Related Content
What's hot
No child left behind ppt.
The No Child Left Behind Act aimed to improve student achievement and reform schools. It established higher standards for student testing, school accountability, and teacher qualifications. Schools that did not meet standards faced penalties such as restructuring of staff and curriculum. Supporters argued it created higher standards and informed parents, while critics noted challenges for rural schools with less funding and increased burdens for teachers adopting new methods.
No child left behind
The No Child Left Behind Act was established from 2001-2002 under President George W. Bush. It was proposed in January 2001, passed the House of Representatives in May 2001, passed the Senate in June 2001, and was signed into law by President Bush in January 2002. The Act was based on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and supports standards-based education reforms through standardized testing to improve education outcomes.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
5 main points of the No Child Left Behind Act in bullet form. It does not expand into detail. It includes two graphs showing how education in mathematics and reading is doing.
League of Education Voters
The document discusses proposals to reform Washington state's K-12 education system. It outlines recommendations from the Basic Education Finance Task Force (BETF) to redefine basic education, implement a new school funding formula based on prototype schools, and improve teacher compensation and evaluation systems. It also describes a proposal from the Full Funding Coalition to phase in full funding of basic education over 5 years using new funding formulas.
Education Policy- No Child Left Behind and the Every Student Succeeds Act
This document provides an overview of two major pieces of US education legislation: No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). It discusses the historical context around the federal role in education and the motivation behind these bills. NCLB aimed to improve education quality and close achievement gaps through increased testing and accountability. While testing was controversial, proponents argued it was necessary to assess progress. ESSA later revised NCLB by reducing the federal role and allowing more state/local control over standards and accountability.
Edf415 online teaching
The document discusses the increasing role of the federal government in education through policies like No Child Left Behind, which requires states to implement standardized testing and academic standards in order to receive federal funding. However, this level of federal involvement is controversial and has unintended consequences such as teaching to tests, increased cheating on assessments, and negative impacts on students from low-income families. The document also examines debates around testing accommodations and the high-stakes nature of standardized tests.
Edf415 online teaching
The document discusses the federal government's increasing role in education through policies like No Child Left Behind (NCLB). It established academic standards, testing, and accountability measures that states were required to comply with to receive federal funding. However, this created challenges for states that had to accept the policies to get money but did not always agree with the policies. The document also examines issues with high-stakes testing, such as cheating scandals, teaching to tests, and negative impacts on vulnerable student groups.
Edf415 online teaching
The document discusses the federal government's increasing role in education through policies like No Child Left Behind (NCLB). It established academic standards, testing, and accountability measures that states were required to comply with to receive federal funding. However, this created challenges for states that had to accept the policies to get money but did not always agree with the policies. The document also examines issues with high-stakes testing, such as cheating scandals, teaching to tests, and negative impacts on vulnerable student groups.
Model6
Edu 200 module 6 presentation on Federal and Indiana standards to bring education into the global community.
Utah Higher Ed Public Opinion Survey
A survey of 675 Utah adults was conducted in July 2009 to assess public opinion on issues related to higher education. Key findings included:
- 99% felt a college education was important for career and economic opportunities.
- 80% gave colleges a grade of A or B.
- 80% favored increasing state financial aid for needy students.
- Both men and women should attend college according to respondents, with the expectation gap between genders narrowing.
Chapter 15: Policy Issues and Early Childhood Practice
Early Childhood Education: Learning Together
by Virginia Casper and Rachel Theilheimer
(c)2009 McGraw-Hill Publishing
MeginShow Version 2
The document discusses the various political forces that influence school governance and finance in the United States. It outlines the key stakeholders in education including political interest groups, businesses, teachers' organizations, and parents/students. It then describes the roles of federal, state, and local governments in education policy and funding. Specifically, it discusses how education is governed at the state level through boards of education and departments of education, and at the local level through school districts, boards, superintendents, and principals. The document also examines issues around school accountability, administration, and the sources of funding for public education including federal, state, local property taxes, and private donations.
Education Reform
This section of Solutions for America discusses the problems facing the future of education under the current administration and the ways to fix it.
MeginShow
The document discusses the various forces that influence school governance and finance in the United States. It outlines the key stakeholders in education, including political interest groups, businesses, teachers' organizations, and parents/students. It also describes the roles of federal, state, and local governments in establishing policies and providing funding for K-12 education. Specifically, it discusses how schools are governed at the state level by boards of education and departments of education, and at the local level by school districts, local boards, superintendents, and principals. The document also examines the sources of funding for public schools, including support from federal, state, and local governments as well as private organizations.
Education Policy
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) policy aimed to improve education by requiring annual student testing, teacher quality standards, and school accountability. However, it has not fully addressed racial disparities. Test scores and graduation rates remain lower for minority students, and high-minority schools are still more likely to have underqualified teachers. While NCLB increased standards, it has not yet achieved equal educational opportunities for all students.
Megin Show - Updated Version 2
The document summarizes the key forces that influence school governance and finance in the United States. It discusses how the federal, state, and local governments all play roles in education policy and funding. It also outlines the various stakeholders that shape education, including political groups, businesses, teachers' organizations, parents, and students. Additionally, it examines issues of accountability, standards, and the debate around the appropriate balance of federal versus state control of public education.
Megin Show - Version 3 Final
The document summarizes the key forces that influence school governance and finance in the United States. It discusses how the federal, state, and local governments all play roles in education policy and funding. It also outlines the various stakeholders that shape education, including political groups, businesses, teachers' organizations, parents, and students. Additionally, it examines issues of accountability, standards, and the debate around the appropriate levels of local versus state versus federal control over public education policy and spending.
No Child Left Behind1
The No Child Left Behind Act aims to improve education standards but many argue it is unrealistic and may do more harm than good. It puts pressure on schools and teachers to improve test scores without accounting for students' individual needs or disabilities. As a result, some schools reverse inclusion efforts or see higher dropout rates among students who require more assistance. While the goals of the act are well-intentioned, its overreliance on standardized testing and "one-size-fits-all" approach has unintended negative consequences, especially for students with special needs.
Nclb
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) aims to improve education standards but also has limitations. It requires all students to meet state standards by 2014 and holds schools accountable for results. However, teachers feel restrained from individualizing lessons or teaching beyond standardized tests. While NCLB aims to close achievement gaps, some argue it has negative effects like limiting curriculum and student learning. Changes are being discussed to maintain high standards while allowing more flexibility.
What's hot (19)
Education Policy- No Child Left Behind and the Every Student Succeeds Act
Education Policy- No Child Left Behind and the Every Student Succeeds Act
Chapter 15: Policy Issues and Early Childhood Practice
Chapter 15: Policy Issues and Early Childhood Practice
Similar to AHS-9/Federalism-NCLB
US Education Reform Essay
A paper I wrote for English 04. It discusses what options are available to Public School Districts, unable to comply with government regulations. i discuss choices for districts, who cannot currently comply with, No Child Left Behind initiative.
Writing Sample-Policy Memo
- The movement for standards, testing, and accountability began in the 1980s from a belief that federal aid was failing to improve academic achievement, especially for disadvantaged students. This led to reforms under four presidents between 1989-2010.
- Each president contributed to the federal structure of Title I and added new requirements like testing and accountability. No Child Left Behind significantly expanded the use of standards, testing, and accountability but left content definition to states.
- Research shows both benefits like increased focus on low-performing students, but also drawbacks like overemphasis on standardized testing and narrowing of curriculum. Recommendations include measuring student progress more appropriately and focusing more on learning needs than achievement gaps.
20130718 Alger Time to Retire, Not Reauthorize, No Child Left Behind
The document discusses the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and argues that it should be retired rather than reauthorized. It summarizes that NCLB has failed to meaningfully improve student test scores or close achievement gaps despite massive spending. States have also lowered standards to meet NCLB targets, undermining the law's accountability. The document concludes that control over education would be better returned to states and localities, and that parental choice programs leave no child behind.
Stopping Common Core and Homescholing
This document provides background information and context on Common Core State Standards. It begins with a list of acronyms related to education policy. It then discusses concerns about Common Core overreaching into homeschooling and shaping what public students are taught. The document outlines support for Common Core as providing clear standards to prepare students, but also notes criticisms such as Common Core being copyrighted and its lead architect David Coleman having political connections. It provides information on organizations involved like NGA and cites proper attribution of the standards.
North Carolina budget analysis from NC Justice Center
The budget agreement provides some increased funding for education in North Carolina but does not fully address the needs outlined in the Leandro Comprehensive Remedial Plan. It provides teacher and other staff salary increases averaging 5% over two years, supplements for low-wealth districts, and additional funding for students with disabilities and instructional support staff. However, it falls short of the Leandro plan's calls for greater investments in targeted allotments, early childhood education, principal and teacher recruitment programs, and overall K-12 funding. While the budget makes initial investments, long-term recurring funding is still needed to ensure all students receive a sound basic education as required by the state constitution.
California State_Levinar
The document discusses California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) which established a new school funding system in 2013. It overhauled the previous funding streams and categorical programs into base, supplemental and concentration grants. Districts must adopt a Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) with input from stakeholders focusing on 8 state priorities to improve outcomes for all students, especially traditionally underserved groups. The formula aims to increase transparency, equity and community engagement in decision making through the LCAP process. While implementation has faced challenges, districts that meaningfully engaged communities have seen benefits in cultural transformation and student achievement.
No Child Left Behind
This report summarizes recommendations for reauthorizing the No Child Left Behind Act from South Carolina and the Greenville County School Board. It discusses problems caused by NCLB such as an over-emphasis on standardized testing, overcrowded classrooms, and lack of qualified teachers. The state recommends using multiple measures for student performance instead of solely standardized tests, reducing class sizes, and increasing the number of qualified teachers. The school board resolution expresses concerns over inadequate funding, loss of local control, and unrealistic accountability benchmarks. Both entities urge congressional representatives to support revisions addressing these issues.
ihenacho_Writing_Sample
The document summarizes California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), which overhauls the state's education budget to increase funding for schools serving low-income, foster, and English-learning students. It discusses how these students have historically faced inadequate support and are concentrated in lower-performing schools. While LCFF aims to remedy this inequity by providing extra funding to schools based on their numbers of disadvantaged students, it faces challenges in implementation at the local level due to ambiguous directives and demographic factors that could undermine its effectiveness.
Annual meeting ppt for schools 16 17.revised.pptx
Title I is a federal program that provides funding to schools and districts with high percentages of economically disadvantaged students. In the 2016-2017 school year, 47 schools in the Wake County Public School System (WCPSS) received Title I funding. Title I funds can be used for teacher hiring, materials/supplies, parental involvement activities, and professional development. WCPSS schools receiving Title I funds seek to actively engage families, share information about programs, involve families in reviewing policies and participating in school/district activities, and partner with families to support student excellence.
DHHS_ChildWelfareEdCollab_Review_2012
The Fiscal Research Division conducted a review of the NC Child Welfare Education Collaborative. It found that the program is meeting its objectives of providing social workers, but has not reduced turnover rates. The program receives funding from multiple sources and has demonstrated an ability to restructure with less funding. The review recommends reprioritizing the goals to better address workforce issues, linking the program to broader stabilization efforts, and restructuring training to accommodate county needs.
ihenacho_Writing_Sample
The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) in California aims to address historical underfunding of schools serving low-income, foster, and English-learning students. However, it faces challenges in implementation. LCFF gives school districts flexibility but provides ambiguous guidance on achieving its goals of improved teaching, standards, engagement, and outcomes. Measuring progress is difficult without clear scales. Large districts struggle to obtain community input within tight timelines. The formula risks symbolic implementation instead of strategic achievement of its objectives to remedy inequities facing underserved students.
Model 6 of Education 200 class
This document discusses technology and education reform efforts at both the federal and state levels. It summarizes the $4.35 billion in competitive grants from the Obama administration to promote reform. Key points of the competition include requirements for states to show improvement to receive funds, detail reform plans, and use performance-based incentives. The goals are to narrow learning gaps, develop excellent teachers, turn around struggling schools, and give charter schools equal guidelines as public schools. The document also discusses the No Child Left Behind Act and provides links to the Department of Education and Indiana's Department of Education websites for more information on rules, programs and academic standards. It advocates for empowering students, providing quality teachers, and using resources wisely to prepare children for
4Discussion 6 Review of Four Indiana State Policies.docx
4
Discussion 6: Review of Four Indiana State Policies
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Name
Instructor
Due Date
Discussion 6: Review of Four Indiana State Policies
In Chapter 9, St. John, Daun-Barnett, and Moronski-Chapman (2013) discuss four state policies in Indiana, which ensure low-income students have better chances of getting higher education opportunities. These state policies are the 21st Century Scholars (TFCS) program, Core 40, Indiana Project on Academic Success (IPAS), and the DREAM Act Bill. The State of Indiana and tuition facilitates the financing of these policies. Specifically, funding is attained through need-based student aid and public tuition charges. This coordination ensures that neither the parents nor the state is overwhelmed with funding the learners. Higher education institutions play a limited role in supporting these four state policies. These policies rely on financial incentives for students, colleges, and schools. Higher education systems play a tiny part in offering support services to students in this regard. Nevertheless, they have tried to implement retention projects through policies such as IPAS.
Regarding the outcome of these policies, for starters, they have improved academic preparation among students in high school. These students are better prepared to succeed in higher learning institutions. However, despite the academic preparation facilitated by the policies, there have been no notable improvements in high school graduation rates among the different racial/ethnic groups. Nevertheless, the SAT scores in Indiana have been considerably better compared to other states in the country (St. John, Daun-Barnett, & Moronski-Chapman, 2013). Also, degree completion, college access, and diversity have been remarkably good in Indiana due to these policies. Out of the four policies, the one that I feel has had the greatest success in eradicating inequalities, supporting students’ progress, and enhancing learners’ access to higher education is the TFCS program. This program not only funds needy students but also prepares them from an early age to be model citizens who do not engage in vices such as drug abuse. It guides both parents and students to take practices that will facilitate good learning outcomes.
Reference
St. John, E. P. S., Daun-Barnett, N., & Moronski-Chapman, K. M. (2013). Public policy and higher education: Reframing strategies for preparation, access, and college success. Routledge.
Vera Discussion:
Hello all,
In higher education financing a student’s tuition is a critical part of enrollment and admissions. The principal component of the funding for state colleges and universities comes from the state government, and ultimately tax dollars. Federal money is available through loans and grants to students, but the schools are primarily depending on state support. Our textbook presented four different higher education plans from California, Indiana, M.
4Discussion 6 Review of Four Indiana State Policies.docx
4
Discussion 6: Review of Four Indiana State Policies
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Name
Instructor
Due Date
Discussion 6: Review of Four Indiana State Policies
In Chapter 9, St. John, Daun-Barnett, and Moronski-Chapman (2013) discuss four state policies in Indiana, which ensure low-income students have better chances of getting higher education opportunities. These state policies are the 21st Century Scholars (TFCS) program, Core 40, Indiana Project on Academic Success (IPAS), and the DREAM Act Bill. The State of Indiana and tuition facilitates the financing of these policies. Specifically, funding is attained through need-based student aid and public tuition charges. This coordination ensures that neither the parents nor the state is overwhelmed with funding the learners. Higher education institutions play a limited role in supporting these four state policies. These policies rely on financial incentives for students, colleges, and schools. Higher education systems play a tiny part in offering support services to students in this regard. Nevertheless, they have tried to implement retention projects through policies such as IPAS.
Regarding the outcome of these policies, for starters, they have improved academic preparation among students in high school. These students are better prepared to succeed in higher learning institutions. However, despite the academic preparation facilitated by the policies, there have been no notable improvements in high school graduation rates among the different racial/ethnic groups. Nevertheless, the SAT scores in Indiana have been considerably better compared to other states in the country (St. John, Daun-Barnett, & Moronski-Chapman, 2013). Also, degree completion, college access, and diversity have been remarkably good in Indiana due to these policies. Out of the four policies, the one that I feel has had the greatest success in eradicating inequalities, supporting students’ progress, and enhancing learners’ access to higher education is the TFCS program. This program not only funds needy students but also prepares them from an early age to be model citizens who do not engage in vices such as drug abuse. It guides both parents and students to take practices that will facilitate good learning outcomes.
Reference
St. John, E. P. S., Daun-Barnett, N., & Moronski-Chapman, K. M. (2013). Public policy and higher education: Reframing strategies for preparation, access, and college success. Routledge.
Vera Discussion:
Hello all,
In higher education financing a student’s tuition is a critical part of enrollment and admissions. The principal component of the funding for state colleges and universities comes from the state government, and ultimately tax dollars. Federal money is available through loans and grants to students, but the schools are primarily depending on state support. Our textbook presented four different higher education plans from California, Indiana, M.
model 6 of Education 200 class
The document discusses the Obama administration's $4.35 billion competitive grant program to spur education reform in line with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. States must show improvement data to receive funds and develop reform plans with performance incentives to close achievement gaps, reward excellent teachers, and turn around struggling schools. It also discusses No Child Left Behind, education department resources, Indiana's education initiatives, and partnerships to provide high-quality educators and academic standards. The goal is to empower students and families through technology access, quality teachers, and grant funding to prepare children for a global economy.
Btwcf Sif Presentation For May 5
The document discusses early childhood education in Massachusetts. It states that Massachusetts ranks highly in some child well-being metrics but poorly in others, especially for low-income families. Access to high-quality early education programs is limited for low-income families. The foundation advocates for improved access to early education through research, policy work, and community engagement. Its goals are to ensure all children have an equal chance at success.
20100630 Fostering Opportunity and Improving Achievement The Benefits of a Fo...
This document discusses expanding educational options for students in foster care. It provides examples of foster care scholarship programs in Arizona and Florida. Arizona enacted Lexie's Law in 2006, which provides vouchers for students currently or formerly in foster care. Florida reformed its education system through initiatives like the A+ Plan, improving student achievement significantly. The document argues a similar program could help California's 73,000 foster youth by improving educational outcomes and encouraging adoptions.
Future reforms
Race to the Top provided incentives for states to implement reforms focused on four key areas: standards and assessments, data systems, teacher/leader effectiveness, and turning around low-performing schools. It helped 19 states create plans around these areas and spurred changes to laws and standards in many other states. While No Child Left Behind increased achievement discussion, it had unintended consequences like incentivizing lower standards and focusing more on punishment than growth. The Obama Administration proposed a new blueprint to reform education by raising standards, recognizing growth, closing achievement gaps, and improving teacher/principal quality.
Future reforms
Race to the Top provided incentives for states to implement reforms focused on four key areas: standards and assessments, data systems, teacher/leader effectiveness, and turning around low-performing schools. It helped 19 states create plans around these areas and spurred changes to laws and standards in many other states. While No Child Left Behind increased achievement discussion, it had unintended consequences like incentivizing lower standards and focusing more on punishment than growth. The Obama Administration proposed a new blueprint to reform education by raising standards, recognizing growth, closing achievement gaps, and improving teacher/principal quality.
A Political Economy Analysis of School Funding Policies
This document provides an overview of school funding policies in the United States, including key federal laws and programs. It discusses the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and its reauthorizations, including No Child Left Behind. It describes accountability measures under NCLB, such as Adequate Yearly Progress. It also discusses waivers states have received from some NCLB requirements, and programs related to teacher quality and grants.
Similar to AHS-9/Federalism-NCLB (20)
20130718 Alger Time to Retire, Not Reauthorize, No Child Left Behind
20130718 Alger Time to Retire, Not Reauthorize, No Child Left Behind
North Carolina budget analysis from NC Justice Center
North Carolina budget analysis from NC Justice Center
4Discussion 6 Review of Four Indiana State Policies.docx
4Discussion 6 Review of Four Indiana State Policies.docx
4Discussion 6 Review of Four Indiana State Policies.docx
4Discussion 6 Review of Four Indiana State Policies.docx
20100630 Fostering Opportunity and Improving Achievement The Benefits of a Fo...
20100630 Fostering Opportunity and Improving Achievement The Benefits of a Fo...
A Political Economy Analysis of School Funding Policies
A Political Economy Analysis of School Funding Policies
Recently uploaded
How to Manage Your Lost Opportunities in Odoo 17 CRM
Odoo 17 CRM allows us to track why we lose sales opportunities with "Lost Reasons." This helps analyze our sales process and identify areas for improvement. Here's how to configure lost reasons in Odoo 17 CRM
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)Academy of Science of South Africa
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.Advanced Java[Extra Concepts, Not Difficult].docx
This is part 2 of my Java Learning Journey. This contains Hashing, ArrayList, LinkedList, Date and Time Classes, Calendar Class and more.
CACJapan - GROUP Presentation 1- Wk 4.pdf
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
Digital Artifact 1 - 10VCD Environments Unit
Digital Artifact 1 - 10VCD Environments Unit - NGV Pavilion Concept Design
The History of Stoke Newington Street Names
Presented at the Stoke Newington Literary Festival on 9th June 2024
www.StokeNewingtonHistory.com
Biological Screening of Herbal Drugs in detailed.
Biological screening of herbal drugs: Introduction and Need for
Phyto-Pharmacological Screening, New Strategies for evaluating
Natural Products, In vitro evaluation techniques for Antioxidants, Antimicrobial and Anticancer drugs. In vivo evaluation techniques
for Anti-inflammatory, Antiulcer, Anticancer, Wound healing, Antidiabetic, Hepatoprotective, Cardio protective, Diuretics and
Antifertility, Toxicity studies as per OECD guidelines
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
RPMS TEMPLATE FOR SCHOOL YEAR 2023-2024 FOR TEACHER 1 TO TEACHER 3
RPMS Template 2023-2024 by: Irene S. Rueco
PCOS corelations and management through Ayurveda.
This presentation includes basic of PCOS their pathology and treatment and also Ayurveda correlation of PCOS and Ayurvedic line of treatment mentioned in classics.
How to Fix the Import Error in the Odoo 17
An import error occurs when a program fails to import a module or library, disrupting its execution. In languages like Python, this issue arises when the specified module cannot be found or accessed, hindering the program's functionality. Resolving import errors is crucial for maintaining smooth software operation and uninterrupted development processes.
How to Build a Module in Odoo 17 Using the Scaffold Method
Odoo provides an option for creating a module by using a single line command. By using this command the user can make a whole structure of a module. It is very easy for a beginner to make a module. There is no need to make each file manually. This slide will show how to create a module using the scaffold method.
DRUGS AND ITS classification slide share
Any substance (other than food) that is used to prevent, diagnose, treat, or relieve symptoms of a
disease or abnormal condition
Recently uploaded (20)
How to Manage Your Lost Opportunities in Odoo 17 CRM
How to Manage Your Lost Opportunities in Odoo 17 CRM
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
Group Presentation 2 Economics.Ariana Buscigliopptx
Group Presentation 2 Economics.Ariana Buscigliopptx
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...
Film vocab for eal 3 students: Australia the movie
Film vocab for eal 3 students: Australia the movie
RPMS TEMPLATE FOR SCHOOL YEAR 2023-2024 FOR TEACHER 1 TO TEACHER 3
RPMS TEMPLATE FOR SCHOOL YEAR 2023-2024 FOR TEACHER 1 TO TEACHER 3
How to Build a Module in Odoo 17 Using the Scaffold Method
How to Build a Module in Odoo 17 Using the Scaffold Method
AHS-9/Federalism-NCLB
- 1. NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND By Emily Schmidberger, Brittany Shearer, Destinee Simonin, and Lindsay Stricker
- 2. What Law Established NCLB? Reauthorization of Elementary and Secondary Act This program was established while George W. Bush was president
- 3. Controversy There is a lot of controversy and debate surrounding what the standardized test scores should stand for Some people believe that the scores of the standardized tests set up in this act should not determine the students placement and graduation Many people are upset because they think that schools are teaching to help students pass the test versus actually educating them and helping them learn the material The government is changing from NCLB to SASA It is said that common core (SASA) is NCLB on steroids, which is where the controversy lies today
- 4. Waiver A waiver is what the government gives states so they have more flexibility on the act 34 states signed up for the waiver in 2012-2013 These expire at the end of the 2013-2014 school years
- 5. Cost 144.5 billion all together (Ohio spent 35.1 billion on education) In 2013, the program cost around 20.5 billion. The costs are greater than anticipated by about 30%
- 6. When and Why? NCLB was established on January 8th, 2002 Mission Statement: higher accountability for test results More choices for parents Higher qualified teachers Flexibility regarding funding Encourage proven education methods
- 7. States Participation Not all states participate in NCLB or the administration Connecticut Delaware Louisiana Maryland New York North Carolina Ohio Rhode Island
- 8. Percentage of Cost Amount of money borne by the federal government 56% in 2008 76% in 2002
- 9. How is NCLB administered? Congress authorized 5 year funding levels for 5 of the 45 authorized NCLB programs The other 40 programs were authorized at specific amounts for the initial year of funding
- 10. Grants Basic Grant Formula: allocates funding to school districts based on number of poor children. They serve any school district with at least ten poor children or +2% of it’s students in poverty Concentration Grant Formula: School must have at least 15% of children in poverty or 6500 poor children
- 11. Grants Cont. Targeted Grant Formula: Provides more money per child as districts poverty rate increases, so that higher poverty school districts get more money per child than lower ones Education Finance Incentive Grant Formula: Takes into account the percent of per capita income devoted to education and equitably the state school finance system distributes state and local funding for education
- 12. Other Requirements for Funding Implement a number of education policies States must implement laws that hold school and districts accountable if they fail to make adequate yearly progress in improving student achievement
- 13. Department of Education The department of Education is the federal government department agency that oversees and administers the NCLB The department of education under the Obama administration is proposing improvements The Obama administration released its blue print for revising the ESEA on March 13th, 2010
- 14. Department of Education Cont. This blueprint builds on the significant reforms already made in response to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 around four areas 1. Improving teacher and principal effectiveness 2. Providing information to families to help them evaluate and improve their children’s schools 3. Implementing college-and-career-ready standards 4. Improving student learning and achievement in in America’s lowest-performing schools by providing intensive support and
- 15. NCLB vs SASA In the article, they discussed moving toward SASA and moving away from NCLB, because it is said that NCLB is the reason education in America is failing The government believes that moving towards SASA will help create higher education, because it uses proven
- 16. What percent did the government pay in 2008? A. 56% B. 76% C. 94% D. 12%
- 17. Answer A. 56%
- 18. What is the program taking over NCLB? A. ESEA B. SASA C. NBLA
- 19. Answer B. SASA
- 20. How many type of grants are mentioned? a. 6 b. 9 c. 3 d. 4
- 21. Answer D. 4
- 22. What is most controversy over? A. Test scores B. Teachers C. Grades D. Funding
- 24. How many waivers were signed last year? A. 64 B. 44 C. 24 D. 34
- 25. Answer D.34