| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "CHILD LEFT ACT 2001": |
|
|
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 2008.
Looks at the leadership of Secretary of of Education Rod Paige during which the controversial No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 was passed and implemented.
895 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the Secretary of the Department of Education (DOE) from 2001 through 2005, Rod Paige, is a controversial figure. The paper describes Secretary Paige's primary responsibility for the initial passage and implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which has been the most sweeping educational reform legislation in a generation, intended to raise all schoolchildren in the United States to a uniform level of achievement by 2014. The paper then presents several important issues contributing to the failure of the DOE to fully come to terms with the complexities and enforced uniformities of NCLB. The paper concludes that Paige's own controversial stances and excessively strident political viewpoint may have reduced his potential effectiveness during his term.
From the Paper
"Paige went on to note that with over 15,000 individual school districts in the nation, with assessment and governance standards varying almost on a district-by-district level (and certainly on a state-by-state level), he made it a priority for his department to work closely with each state to institute appropriate assessment and accountability programs. He stated that this first goal was accomplished (in 2003) for all fifty states, in large part due to the cooperation of delegations from many states, which had been invited to meet with DOE leadership in Washington, D.C., to discuss their issues and concerns."
| |
|
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, 2006.
This paper argues that the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 has a negative impact on teachers, students and parents.
2,650 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 9 sources, APA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that there are many positive goals associated with the NCLB Act; however, the Act ultimately takes the control of classrooms away from the schools, teachers, parents, and communities who are directly accountable to the children. The author points out that the national standards are forcing schools to move away from creative, individualized and caring programs, where teachers learn about each child's learning style, towards a generic program for all students. The paper states that schools are forced to eliminate excellent programs, which work under the challenging conditions of poverty and disease, and instead implement programs, which are effective simply because the groups being served are not as challenging.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Results of the Act
Impact on Assessment
Impact on Equity
Impact on Teachers, Parents and Schools
Conclusion
From the Paper
"According to Robert Linn, the criterion of equity needs to be applied to any assessment. It is a mistake to assume that shifting from standardized tests to performance-based assessments will eliminate concerns about biases against racial/ethnic minorities or that such a shift will necessarily lead to equality of performance. Although many at-risk students come to school deficient in prior knowledge that is important to school achievement, teachers and schools can make a substantial difference through the construction of assessments that take into account the vast diversity of today's student populations."
| |
|
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 2005.
This paper is a literature review of the critique of the effectiveness of the No Child Left Behind Act.
1,300 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 43.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the No Child Left Behind Act, sponsored by President Bush, is arguably the most ambitious education-reform bill in the history of this country. The author points out that bill's main emphasis is improving scores in subsets of students, such as minorities and children who receive free or reduced-price lunches; if they do not pass the standardized tests, schools will face penalties, which range from offering extra tutoring time to yielding control of the school to the state. The paper concludes that supporters of the bill insist that in order to make its promises a reality, higher standards need to be enforced through increased testing and greater accountability for individual schools; whereas, the opponents argue that, after four years, little has changed and the act has left a bitter taste in the mouths of educator's nation-wide.
From the Paper
"There is no doubt that there is a direct correlation between the atmosphere that a child is raised in and their scholarly achievements, but North Carolina Representative Martin Nesbitt seems to imply that even if a pupil were to do fine in all five factors which have been determined to affect educational development, including their family life, some students grades will not shine simply because they are not able to grasp certain concepts. It's not that they do not want to learn or are defiant, they simply learn at a slower pace. It's not that they watch too much television, or even that they face distracting circumstances at home, Nesbitt says, "some children have learning disabilities...you can't put a child who has a learning disability or other impediment in a class of 30 children and expect [him] to achieve at the level the other children achieve at." "
| |
|
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 2002.
An overview and discussion of the NCLB Act which modifies the role of the Federal Government in K through 12 education.
2,287 words (approx. 9.1 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 70.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
On January 8th, 2001, President Bush signed the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 into law. This law is a summation of Bush?s reform of education platform and contains some of the most sweeping of all changes and modifications to the Elementary and Secondary Education Acct (ESEA) since it was put into law in 1965. The paper shows that this act has resulted in a great deal of controversy on all sides of the issue. The paper examines the nature of the NCLB, its impact and the controversy over the issue.
From the Paper
"The new requirements for accountability include documentation of the program's effectiveness in supporting technology integration into curriculum and instruction and the intervention's influence on instructional practice. Research is showing that technology can effectively capture information about change in teachers' use of technology. For example, the California Department of Education developed the California Technology Assistance Project/Technology Assessment Profile, a tool for teachers to self-assess their competency in integrating technology into instruction. Typically, teachers complete CTA online before and after staff development. Results are graphically reported online as well. The state recommends that school districts use CTA as part of the overall assessment strategy and to assess the effects of the NCLB-EETT requirement that 25% of the technology funding be used for staff development (Cradler and Cradler, 2002)."
| |
|
No Child Left Behind Act Of 2001, 2003.
Policy analysis of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 7 sources, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Discusses problems the Act seeks to solve, including low student achievement scores and chronic poor performance of many schools. Discusses the central assumption of accountability underlying ESEA Act.
From the Paper
"ESEA ACT OF 2001: A POLICY ANALYSIS
Precipitating Problems
As noted by Robelen (2002), the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 2001 (otherwise known as the No Child Left Behind Act) will have states implementing reading and mathematics tests ..."
| |
|
No Child Left Behind Act, 2007.
An overview of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and its implementation in the school system in America.
1,190 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 that was implemented by the Bush administration because of the inconsistencies that existed in the public education system in the United States. The paper analyzes the background and history of the policy and focuses on its implementation within the educational system in America.
Table of Contents:
I. Overview of the Policy
II. Historical Overview of the Policy
III. Implementation of Policy
IV. Economic Analysis
From the Paper
"According to Giroux & Schmidt (2004) a great deal of the underperforming that occurs in public schools has to do with socioeconomic factors. These factors can affect the amount of funding that schools receive but also the quality of the teachers that are at a particular school. The article also asserts that many of the programs that have been implemented in the past have utilized tactics that have not been proven effective in turning around underperforming schools (Giroux & Schmidt 2004)."
| |
|
No Child Left Behind Act, 2006.
This paper discusses the controversial No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
1,345 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 7 sources, APA, $ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, according to the United States Department of Education, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is necessary to promote scholastic achievement amongst American students by promoting stronger accountability, more freedom for states and communities, more choices for parents and proven education methods. The author points out that many people believe that it is a step in the right direction but see that it has some very serious flaws. The paper concludes that the real victims will be students left behind in failing schools because these schools do not possess the financial wherewithal to attract good teachers.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Defining NCLB and Parental Involvement
Stronger Accountability for Results
More Freedom for States and Communities
More Choices for Parents
Proven Education Methods
Economic, Social and Political Institutions or Players
Factual Analysis
From the Paper
"As it relates to political institution, this Act is one of the policies that have emerged during the Bush administration; making the Bush administration a major player in the implementation of the act. Although there are republicans that are supportive of this act, there are other Republicans and Democrats alike that do not believe it will accomplish the goal of leaving no child behind. This has made this Act a hot button issue in the political world. State governments also have a great deal to loose or gain through the implementation of the Act."
| |
|
The ?No Child Left Behind Act?, 2002.
An examination of the educational reform - ?No Child Left Behind Act?.
1,509 words (approx. 6.0 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the ?No Child Left Behind Act, 2001?, which is the latest attempt by the federal government to introduce tougher measures to arrest the trend of falling standards in education especially among the less privileged. It discusses the development of public education in the U.S.A., the political nature of education and its historical and socio-cultural aspects. The aims of the "No Child Left Behind Act" in these areas as well as its pros and cons are also examined.
From the Paper
"From the earliest days of America?s independence, its founding fathers had realized the importance of education for the prosperity and survival of the new nation. Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, called education a ?crusade against ignorance? and suggested a system of free schools for all persons that would be publicly supported through taxes. (Powell) Jefferson?s vision formed the basis of the US public schools system developed in the 19th century leading to free and compulsory elementary level school education for all American school children. American educators such as Horace Mann were instrumental in the 1830s and 1840s to introduce reforms focused on elementary education. The reforms were based on the notion that all young children should be schooled, and that the content of education should be the same for everyone. Mann believed that: ?The scientific or literary well-being of a community is to be estimated not so much by possessing a few men of great knowledge, as its having many men of competent knowledge.? (Quoted by Powell)"
| |
|
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA), 2006.
This paper discusses the No Child Left Behind Act signed by President Bush in 2001.
3,600 words (approx. 14.4 pages), 8 sources, $ 142.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses the Head Start program and the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA). The writer explains that these were both educational policies introduced to redress gross inequalities between the educational achievements of average youth and impoverished youth in the United States. The writer
explains the differences in these programs and comments on their impact on equitable outcomes and democratic representation in K-12 schooling.
From the Paper
"In 2001 Pres. Bush signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA), parts of which were aimed at improving educational services and outcomes for low-income students. It has been said that NCLBA might soon replace Head Start, a program created by the Johnson administration in the 1960s that was also designed to improve educational provision and outcomes for impoverished youth."
| |
|
The "No Child Left Behind Act", 2008.
An analysis of testing in relation to the "No Child Left Behind Act".
820 words (approx. 3.3 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper attempts to determine if testing under the "No Child Left Behind Act" (NCLB), signed into law in 2001 by President George Bush, is capable of accomplishing what it is intended to accomplish. The paper points out that NCLB was intended to address the needs of students to achieve proficiency in basic reading and mathematical skills. Prior to the implementation of NCLB, many youths throughout the country were exiting the educational system without possessing these skills and this hindered their ability to achieve personal and professional goals. As a solution, NCLB required each state to develop standardized testing that would produce test scores indicating each student's level and allowing officials to determine whether or not the schools were accomplishing their goals. The paper finds that one of the most significant issues is that each state's tests are not universal and in some states the tests are consistently changed, providing no clear evidence of progress that can be compared over time. The paper concludes that, for students struggling in school, state testing measures do not support the intention of NCLB and reduce the validity of the accountability of the educational system.
From the Paper
"The text of the NCLB indicates that "each state may select and design assessments of their choosing" ("No Child", 2001, sec. 3). Wenning, Herdman, Smith, McMahon and Washington (2003) discuss the fact that in states such as Louisiana and Maryland the tests that have been developed to meet the mandates of NCLB are both norm-referenced and criterion based (sec. 2). According to Wenning, Herdman, Smith, McMahon and Washington (2003) this means that some students are tested on their "board knowledge" of a subject, while other students are tested on their specific knowledge of objectives associated with the curriculum in each state (sec. 2). As this consistently occurs the tests results that are gathered by the state and federal governments cannot be compared to one another because there is not a universal system of testing that occurs. Additionally, because the testing of students is determined by each state, some states alter the testing patterns given, further complicating the accountability and assessment process."
| |
|
The ?No Child Left Behind? Act, 2005.
Presents a qualitative study of the effects of the "No Child Left Behind" Act on special education and general educational outcomes.
2,400 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 10 sources, APA, $ 73.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The primary aim of this research proposal is to to determine how the NCLB program impacts special education students, general collaboration and educational outcomes. NCLB was introduced by the Bush Administration in 2001 with the intent of improving the performance of sub groups and special populations in educational institutions across the nation. The focus of this paper revolves around how NCLB impacts special education students and classroom structure, in addition to examining the deficits in NCLB programming with regard to special education students. At this time there is a large body of research that focuses on the impacts of NCLB both positive and negative. Though some mention of special education students is made in many of these studies, this paper narrows the gap that exists with regard to comprehensive information regarding NCLB. Relatively few studies have focused on the impact NCLB legislation has had on specific teaching practices and attitudes among general educators vs. the attitudes and teaching practices of special education educators.
From the Paper
"Young (2003) also points out that legislators have been struggling with this act since its inception in 2001, and that many schools are reflecting a state of chaos rather than a state of success when it comes to realizing the stringent requirements of the act. Further, he suggests that the implications of the act are becoming more clear as time progresses, suggesting that while legislators are supportive of the law in general, the act is actually placing more and more legislators in a state of controversy and chaos rather than facilitating progress among the nation's school districts (Young, 2003). For schools to actually improve student performance so that all children, including special education children, meet the requirements, continuous improvement efforts are still necessary (Young, 2003)."
| |
|
No Child Left Behind, 2007.
This paper analyzes the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and looks at the related effects and reactions.
3,058 words (approx. 12.2 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article the writer discusses the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). The writer notes that this Act is tremendously controversial, despite the fact that at the time of its passage most people agreed that some type of education reform was long overdue. This article looks at the legislation leading up to the NCLB and examines its goals. Further, the writer examines various reactions to the Act. The writer notes that although commentators have suggested that the NCLB might present several legal issues, there has been a surprising scarcity of litigation surrounding the Act. However, the writer points out that this relative lack of litigation should not be seen as an acceptance of the requirements of the NCLB, but instead the lack of litigation must be revisited in a timely manner. The writer concludes that if people desire changes in the NCLB, they may be forced to seek them through the legislative, rather than the judicial progress.
From the Paper
"Despite its lofty goals, the NCLB has been met with serious opposition by some surprising segments of society; educators, parents, and state government officials. Many states believe that the NCLB's major problem is that it permits the federal government to preempt states in their educational programs. While the federal government has had ancillary involvement in state and local education programs in the past, the NCLB signals a dramatic change in the structure of the American public education system because it places severe contingencies upon federal financial aid. Parents seem to mention two central problems with the NCLB. The first problem is that the NCLB requires students to pass standardized tests in order to advance, with little regard for individual students' differences. The second problem is that the NCLB punishes schools with low test scores by withdrawing funding; the result is that the most disadvantaged children end up receiving the least federal aid. Educators agree with parents' concerns, and also express the concern that the NCLB's focus on standardized teacher testing ignores years of teacher classroom experience. The most controversial charge that critics have made against the NCLB is that it may result in the de facto resegregation of certain schools."
| |
|
?No Child Left Behind?, 2004.
An assessment of the ?No Child Left Behind? Act of 2001 initiated by President Bush.
726 words (approx. 2.9 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the educational reform brought about by the ?No Child Left Behind? (NCLB) Act. The paper presents the problems evident in this program, both from the parent's point of view and from the teacher's. The paper states that the NCLB Act will need to be rewritten for it to be a realistic educational approach.
From the Paper
"The ?No Child Left Behind? (NCLB) Act of 2001 signed by President George Bush, Jr. is supposed to be ?a landmark in education reform designed to improve student achievement and change the culture of America's schools.? Bush describes this law as the "cornerstone of my administration." The program aims to: support learning in early years, provide parents and teachers with more information about the child?s performance through designed measurements, improve teacher performance by setting criteria needed for instructors; and give more resources to schools."
| |
|
No Child Left Behind Law, 2002.
This paper is an analysis of the " No Child Left Behind Act of 2001" (NCLB Act) that would provide all children with equal education opportunities, no matter what their economic situation.
1,775 words (approx. 7.1 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 57.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the affects of the "No Child Left Behind Law" on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that was originally passed in 1965. The paper defines the new law and then examines how it was supposed work. Some of the topics discussed include discussion of Title 1 with great detail about whether or not the law will be implemented as it was intended, paying close attention to the weaknesses in the legislation. The paper looks at individual states' compliance, the question of funding in middle schools for extra reading programs and the challenge of getting the information out about the law and the schools' rights under it. The author also points out it should assist in the improvement of the quality of educators and hold low-performing schools accountable and demand improvement. The law will also mean big changes in testing policies for elementary and middle schools, changes in the state accountability systems and increased state and local government involvement in the education systems in order to monitor compliance with the new regulations for funding.
From the Paper
"While a determined band of educators, advocates, and their philanthropic clique have pushed hard over the past decade and a half to improve the achievement and development of young adolescents, federally funded programs have practically ignored these students. Title I funds touched them infrequently, focusing chiefly on elementary school grades. Vocational education funds were for high school students. Safe and Drug Free Schools, Gear Up, and fractions of other programs helped students in the middle grades a bit, but no federal money supported their core academic learning."
| |
|
"No Child Left Behind" Plan, 2006.
An essay arguing that President Bush's "No Child Left Behind" education plan is ineffective and short-sighted.
2,729 words (approx. 10.9 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 81.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains the procedural, cultural and moral reasons behind educators' stance that President Bush's "No Child Left Behind" education program is not only ineffective but detrimental as well. The paper describes lawsuits filed by students, community activists and local districts, demanding that states provide resources adequate to the standards and high-stakes tests imposed by the "No Child Left Behind" plan and explains that instead of fostering diversity as intended, the plan is actually acting as an obstacle to diversity.
Outline
Introduction
No Child Left Behind/Leave No Child Behind
Lawsuit Spawned
Basis of Suit
Parties to Suit
Government Point of View
NEA Point of View
NCLB Objectives
Accountability
Report Cards for Schools
Resources, Good Teachers
Federal Takeover Last Resort
Problems with the Objectives
Loss of Local Control
Money Issues
Damage to Already Disadvantaged School Populations
Blacks
Latinos
Gifted Students
Conclusion
From the Paper
"By 2004, NCLB had spawned an increase in "the wave of adequacy lawsuits filed by students, community activists and local districts, demanding that states provide resources adequate to the standards and high-stakes tests they've imposed" (Schrag 2004, 38+). Earlier lawsuits were in response to the standard tests, such as various state graduation requirements and SATs and so on. However, "A recent adequacy decision in Kansas, which ordered that state to restructure its funding, explicitly cited NCLB; So have new suits filed by school districts and others in Nebraska, Missouri and North Dakota" (Schrag 2004, 38+) and in Ohio."
|
|
|
