Introduction

California has implemented protocols for visiting K-12 schools and entering classrooms, aligning with the state's commitment to educational reform. Visitors are required to adhere to strict safety measures, which may include health screenings, mask mandates, and physical distancing, to ensure the well-being of students and staff. These protocols reflect California's dedication to maintaining safe learning environments while also recognizing the importance of educational reform. Visitors, including policymakers and educational leaders, are encouraged to engage with classrooms and observe innovative teaching practices, curriculum enhancements, and student-centered approaches that are at the heart of ongoing efforts to improve the quality and equity of education statewide. These visits serve as valuable opportunities for collaboration, dialogue, and the exchange of ideas to drive meaningful educational reform and progress in California's K-12 schools. 

4.1: What are the effects of educational reform in the classroom?

By Sharon Manana

These are not surprising results considering the average student listens to their iPod while text messaging, navigating the Internet, watching television, and doing homework(Rideout, Roberts, & Ulla, 2005). Although technology used in this sense has been characterized as distractions by some, it can also be a means for us as teachers to stay connected with our students, while helping them learn.

Out with the Chalk, In with the... Technology?

For many years, teachers have had rows of students, chalkboards, and red apples on their nicely organized desks. Times have changed and instead of the student asking the teacher where Samoa is located, the student can easily navigate the Internet to find its geographical setting, governmental structure, history, and population capacity. Some teachers are adamant about not changing the way they teach primarily because students are relying more on technology and less on teachers (Teacher, 2005). For this reason, manufacturers like Apple and Microsoft are working with educators to make technology advantageous for everyone. Power points, iPods, and podcasts are some of the technological aids teachers use to help their students learn (Hitlin, Lenhart, & Madden, 2005). Teachers are slowly straying away from primitive methods of teaching and have turned to alternative techniques. For example, instead of passing out handouts in classrooms, teachers save paper by posting the handouts on Blackboard, even making it accessible for the students who missed class. Even teachers who are not accustomed to using Blackboard as a teaching tool, have agreed that it is convenient (Teacher, 2005). As the world vastly advances in the Digital Age, it is our job as teachers to keep up with the times by erasing the chalk marks and using the laser pointers.

The "T" Word

"It's much more important to give teachers a

sense of the range of possible uses of technology and where any given technology activity may lie in

that continuum" (Bledsoe, 2008).

Technology integration in schools has become a common phenomenon. It means, "Using computers effectively and efficiently in the general content areas to allow students to learn how to apply computer skills in meaningful ways."(Holland, 2005). Teachers are now using iPods for testing, podcasts for lectures, and Text Messaging for quizzes (Carstairs, M., 2007). A couple of years ago, these devices would be the reason teachers said, "Power Down," as students walked into classrooms but as of late, those two words are losing their significance. Research indicates that technology integration is a ground-breaking and exciting way to teach especially since students have become increasingly involved in their learning process(Holland, 2005). Also, technology integration has made learning a global enterprise for both counterparts, the student and teacher. A student in Japan can communicate with their teacher in Hawaii via Instant Messaging, a webcam, or even a cell phone. This is one of the remarkable ways students and teachers can stay connected. Technology integration has molded teaching into a simplified process and made learning an experience for academic success. Despite the praise it receives from both the student and the teacher, technology integration has confounded with the recipients of the Digital Age(The Children's Partnership, 2000).

"Atmospheric Technology" by Savannah River Site is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

The Downside to Technology

Unlike students, adapting to technology is not an innate trait for most teachers. In fact, some teachers are required to take courses to familiarize themselves with technological terms, the use of computers—software and hardware, the World Wide Web, Microsoft Word, Excel, Power point, etc. (Holland, 2005). The Digital Divide doesn't just apply to low-income households, foreign-born people, and the under-educated; it also encompasses the wide gap between student and teacher (The Children's Partnership, 2000). Because of this partition, many teachers have become oblivious to the ways in which students "beat the system." A prime example of this stupor is cheating. It has always been education's malignancy and every teacher's worst nightmare. For centuries, students have come up with multiple ways to double-cross the educational system and the use of technology has made cheating even easier. Rebecca Boone wrote a compelling article about one of the ways in which students use technology to cheat; iPods. Teachers who confiscated iPods have found answers to tests embedded in song lyrics, while others were recorded as part of the songs. The growing number of students' cheating caused some schools to ban the devices first in classrooms, then on school grounds (Boone,2007). "With ESL English, some astute students use cell phones for 'dictionaries', and the situation does occur when a student says 'dictionary' when seen texting" (Carstairs, 2007). In incidents like this, the student texts to get the answer to a question and since the teacher is unaware of how manipulative some technology is, they wont know that the student is cheating. It is equally imperative for teachers as well as students to familiarize themselves with technologies' capabilities so that any exploitation in the educational system can straightforwardly be avoided.

"“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”Arthur C. Clarke" by katerha is licensed under CC BY 2.0. 

Remain Mundane Or Divert to the Digital Age?

Incorporating technology in one's curriculum is not mandatory for teachers but it is unquestionably beneficial for students. It is our job as teachers to prepare students for the future and real life experiences. Technology is an immense part for both aspects and for us to shun away from the idea is fundamentally unwise. Some teachers find technology undeniably difficult to use and that is understandable (Teacher, 2005). It is not by any means an easy task to grasp every part of technology but even the diminutive steps count toward a greater feat. Most teachers today have practiced the use of Power point in lectures as opposed to having their backs to the classroom as they fervently write on the chalkboard (Holland, 2005). For the most part, technology can make teaching pleasurable for both the student and the teacher but it is up to the teacher to make the first move; they can remain mundane in their teaching tactics or divert to the digital age. Ultimately, the goal is to teach the student in a way that is efficient, effective, and advantageous.

Supplementary Ways to Teach

The use of technology is certainly a great way to teach but other methods have proven to be just as superior. Research shows that student interaction and group discussions are other resourceful ways for students to learn (Picciano, 2002). This may be because of the peer-to-peer understanding students have with each other that they would not otherwise have with their teacher. Levels of competence, assessments, and difficulty are readily shared between students more so than with their teachers. For this reason, when students learn from each other and discuss their findings, teachers are no longer confined to the traditional way of teaching but broaden the students' potential in terms of what they can contribute to the classrooms' learning experience (Hitlin, Lenhart, & Madden, 2005). In-person discussion boards or the ones found on Blackboard.com encompass the notion of student interaction on a couple of levels. For one, they encourage students to talk amongst themselves and rarely involve the teacher's input. They also promote social skills required in most real-life situations thus preparing the student for life after school(Picciano, 2002).

Summary

The amount of time students spend with the media and technology has grown immensely over the years (Rideout, Roberts, & Ulla, 2005). Teachers are no longer limited to one way of teaching their students and can simply incorporate the use of technology in their everyday learning. Also, student interaction and discussion groups are two different ways students can learn without necessarily following the traditional guidelines of what a typical classroom would look like; this refers to a teacher lecturing for a long period of time without any student input (Picciano, 2002). The use of all three teaching techniques make learning an efficient, effective, and advantageous way for students to learn. On the other hand, the use of technology in classrooms can be an arduous and time-consuming task but the benefits are well worth the efforts (Holland, 2005). Teachers are not required to use any alternative teaching methods in their current curriculums but students would appreciate new and creative ways to learn in order to be successful both in and out of school.

Bibliography

Bledsoe, G. L.(2008). Technology Taxonomy. Retrieved February 5, 2008, from the Nationl Education Association Web Site: www.nea.org/teachexperience/gb050201.html

Boone, R. (2007). Schools Banning iPods to Beat Cheaters. Retrieved February 2, 2008, from Active English Web Site: activeenglish.biz/moodle/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=371

Carstairs, M. (2007). Schools Banning iPods to Stop Cheating: Use Ipod Technology for Testing. Retrieved February 2, 2008, from Active English Web Site: activeenglish.biz/moodle/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=371

Hitlin, P., Lenhart, A., & Madden, M.(2005). Teens and Technology: Youth are Leading the Transition to a Fully Wired and Mobile Nation. Retrieved February 1, 2008, from Pew Internet & American Life Project Web Site: http://www.macfound.org

Holland, J. (2005). When Teachers Don't Get It: Myths, Misconceptions, and other Taradiddle. Retrieved February 1, 2008, from the Tech Learning Web Site: www.techlearning.com/story/showArticle.php?articleID=174401519

Picciano, A. G. (2002). Beyond Student Perceptions: Issues of Interaction, Presence, and Performance in an Online Course. Retrieved February 5, 2008, from Hunter College of the City University of New York, JALN Volume 6, Issue 1 – July 2002 pp. 21–23.

Rideout, V., Roberts, D. F., & Ulla, G. F. (2005). Generation M: Media in the Lives of 8-18 Year-olds. Retrieved February 1, 2008, from The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation Web Site: www.digitallearning.macfound.org

Teacher, N. L. (2005) When Techies Don't Get It. Retrieved February 1, 2008, from the Blue Skunk Blog Web Site: http://doug-johnson.squarespace.com/blue-skunk-blog/2005/12/2/when-techies-dont-get-it.html

The Children's Partnership. (2000). The Digital Divide's New Frontier. Retrieved February 5, 2008, from (pp. 1–11)Online Content for Low Income and Undeserved Americans, 1-11

Villano, M. (2008). Building a Better Podcast. Retrieved February 1, 2008, from T.H.E. Journal Web Site: www.thejournal.com/articles/21814

This page titled 4.1: What are the effects of educational reform in the classroom? is shared under a CC BY-SA license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students.

• 4.1: What are the effects of educational reform in the classroom? by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0.

4.2: How do magnet and charter schools represent new visions of public education?

By: jyaeg001

Learning Objectives

• Define the terms "magnet school" and "charter school."

• Explain how the school populations of magnet and charter schools are chosen.

• List the pros and cons of magnet and charter schools.

• Summarize what the research about these two forms of education reveals.

• Explain the concerns that teachers and parents should have about magnet and charter schools.

Introduction

In the early 1980s, the National Commission on Excellence in Education issued a report card for the public schools of the United States that showed a sharp decline in students’ achievement scores (Noll, 2005). As a response to the news that the United States was no longer a leading country in preparing its youth for the future, educational reforms were initiated in many public school districts. Magnet schools and charter schools were two approaches that stirred excitement among parents and many educators. Exactly what are these alternative forms of education termed magnet and charter schools? Who is allowed to attend magnet and charter schools? What do proponents and critics say about magnet and charter schools? According to the research, how to magnet and charter schools compare with traditional public schools and what are the implications of the research findings for parents and teachers?

What is a magnet school?

A magnet school is designed to do just what its name suggests: attract students. Within any student population, there are children with a variety of interests and career aspirations. Magnet schools offer specialized curriculums that appeal to particular student groups, such as young people who want to study in depth such areas as foreign languages, drama, computer technology, or advanced sciences. These schools are under the umbrella of a larger school district and may even be housed in an existing school that also offers a traditional curriculum (Villaverde, 2003). Magnet schools receive at least part of their funding from the sponsoring public school district. In addition, because magnet schools can assist in attracting racially mixed student populations from different socio-economic backgrounds, federal government grants related to desegregation are available to help support the costs of some schools (Villaverde, 2003).

Who is allowed to attend a magnet school?

The student population of magnet schools can be chosen in more than one way. The enrollment process often begins with the parents of an interested student filling out an application. Some districts choose students solely on the basis of a lottery that includes applicants from different income levels, neighborhoods, ethnic backgrounds, gender, and races. Other districts also have application requirements related to minimum academic achievement levels. Parents list their first, second, and third choice for magnet school attendance on their applications. Waiting lists are compiled for those students who do not receive immediate placement. With these restrictions, free choice is more accurately termed controlled choice (Archbald, 2004).

"Charter Street Ragged School and Working Girls Home" by BinaryApe is licensed under CC BY 2.0. 

What is a charter school?

A charter school is a “publicly funded school that is typically governed by a group or organization under a contract or charter with the state…In return for funding and autonomy, the charter school must meet accountability standards” (National Center for Education Statistics, 2007, par.2). The charters list the school’s goals, details about the programs offered, specifics about student body selection, and the criteria that will be used for assessment (Buckley and Schneider, 2007). The charters have time constraints that typically range from three to five years. At the end of that time period, the charter-granting overseers, such as state officials, make a continuance decision based on how the terms of the charter have been met. A charter school may be founded by teachers or administrators within a school district, by a group of parents, or even by a private or community organization. Federal grants are available to assist with the initial costs, and funds also come from the school districts whose students are being served by the charter school (Peterson, 2003). Like magnet schools, most charter schools are focused on providing more effective, innovative programs than parents are offered in traditional public schools (Buckley and Schneider, 2007).

Who is allowed to attend a charter school?

Since charter schools receive state and federal funding, they need to meet the same diversity requirements as public schools and “reflect the social/ethnic makeup of their district” (Noll, 2005, p. 226). There is an application process that may require meeting certain other criteria, such as passing an audition if the charter school has a curriculum that emphasizes theatrical arts. Many schools have no restrictions and often choose the student population on the basis of lottery outcomes. Using the lottery is a way to fairly decide who gains admittance to these schools with much smaller enrollments than most public schools (Noll, 2005).

What do proponents say about magnet and charter schools?

1. Proponents of magnet and charter schools believe that these schools provide much-desired options for parents who are dissatisfied with the job that public schools are doing. Magnet and charter schools are especially appealing to those parents whose children are from lower socio-economic backgrounds and have been placed in schools with below average achievement statistics (Peterson 2003).

2. Magnet and charter schools encourage competition and make public schools more aware of and more involved in improving their curriculums, teachers’ performance, and administration procedures (Villaverde, 2003).

3. When compared with most traditional public schools, both magnet and charter schools offer better student-teacher ratios and smaller, more personal school environments that help prevent student dropouts and capitalize on students’ interests (Noll 2005).

The director of the organization called Friends of Choice in Urban Schools stated about alternative schools that they “provide choices for parents, opportunities for teachers, and better schooling right now to some kids, rather than making them wait for yet another system-wide overhaul” (Buckley and Schneider, 2007, p. 285).

What do critics say about magnet and charter schools?

1. These special schools can drain school districts’ budgets and result in districts having less money to meet the needs of a much larger percentage of students (Peterson, 2003).

2. Magnet and charter schools have failed to attract diverse student populations that match the composition of the communities’ school districts, and the existing diversity requirements are not being enforced (Archbald, 2004).

3. The average achievement scores of students in magnet and charter schools are not higher than those of traditional public schools (Buckley and Schneider, 2007).

What does the research reveal about magnet and charter schools?

1. Use of public funds and effects on school districts: A Western Michigan University study (1998) concluded that "charter schools may not be living up to their promise of educational innovation and more effective use of public money” (Noll, 2005, p. 227). An extensive UCLA study of California charter schools (1998) in ten school districts found “no evidence that charter schools can do more with less” (Noll, 2005. p. 226). Marc Bernstein, a New York school district superintendent, explains that when money is taken from public school districts for the operation of charter and magnet schools, “there are but two choices: raise taxes or reduce programming. Either choice has serious consequences for public education” (Noll, 2005, p. 228).

2. Diversity of student populations in magnet and charter schools: A 2003 study of magnet schools across the nation was reported in Sociology of Education. The researchers examined the effect of magnet school choice on the socio-economic stratification in school districts with magnet school as compared with the socio-economic stratification in school districts without magnet schools. The study did not find a positive growth in the socio-economic redistribution of students as a result of offering magnet school choices (Archbald, 2004). Similar research findings of charter schools were reported earlier in a Minneapolis study (1997) and a Texas study (2002). The reason for this failure of specialty schools to redistribute students more equitably along socio-economic lines was believed to be due to parents’ reluctance to have their children bussed long distances and due to parents’ reluctance to “face the prospect of their child being in a small minority…parents were likely to sort themselves along racial/ethnic lines” (Buckley and Schneider, 2007, p. 122). A 2004 study of magnet schools reported in the Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk found that magnet schools did not significantly affect racial and class segregation because many magnet schools have entrance requirements that can only be met by students from higher income areas (Neild, 2004).

3. Achievement: Magnet and charter schools typically attract higher achieving students, so it could be predicted that achievement scores of students attending these schools would be higher than students in traditional public schools. However, a November 2004 report by the National Assessment Governing Board concluded from its testing of elementary students in public school and elementary students in charter schools that the average achievement scores of those students enrolled in charter schools were lower than those students in public schools (National Education Association, 2008). The UCLA study of seventeen California charter schools (1998), mentioned above, also did not find an increase in academic scores (Noll, 2005). Finally, in 2006, the Public Policy Institute of California studied the magnet and charter schools in the city of San Diego and concluded that “on the whole, there was no systematic improvement or deterioration in test scores from participating in a choice program” (Betts and Rice, 2006, p. 184).

Conclusion: What are the considerations for parents and teachers in relation to magnet and charter schools?

There are success stories among the many magnet and charter schools started across the nation, but the overall research findings concerning average achievement levels are not favorable to these school reforms. Parents may want to consider using their influence to encourage school districts to offer innovative educational programs for all students, rather than creating or encouraging separate schools. Teachers may need to voice their concerns about the financial resources that are siphoned from the school districts for these unproven schools that serve a small proportion of the community’s children. This outflow of tax dollars affects the curriculums that public schools can afford. Both parents and teachers should be concerned about the fact that specialty schools can further segregate children along racial, socio-economic, and ethnic lines since school choice can often mean choosing to attend a school with students of the same backgrounds. Rather than creating the diversity that was intended by these school reforms, school choice could actually foster the growth of the very prejudices that a free public education for all was meant to eliminate.

References

Archbald, D. (2004). School choice: magnet schools and the liberation model. Sociology of Education, 77 (4), 283-310.

Betts, J. and Rice, L. (2006). Does School Choice work: Effects on Student Integration and Achievement. San Diego, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.

Buckley, J. and Schneider, M. (2007). Charter Schools: Hope or Hype? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). Contexts of elementary and secondary education: school choice. Retrieved September 14, 2008 from nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2007/section4/indicator32.

National Education Association. (2008). Charter schools. Retrieved September 15, 2008 from www.nea.org/charter/index.html

Neild, R. (2004). The effects of magnet schools on neighborhood high schools: an examination of achievement among entering freshmen. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk,9 (1), 1-21.

Noll, J. (2005). Taking Sides: Educational Issues. Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin.

Peterson, P. (2003). The Future of School Choice. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution.

Villaverde, L. (2003). Contemporary Education Issues: Secondary Schools. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

This page titled 4.2: How do magnet and charter schools represent new visions of public education? is shared under a CC BY-SA license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students.

• 4.2: How do magnet and charter schools represent new visions of public education? by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0.

4.3: What is the case for and against vouchers?

by Lucyna Russell

Learning Objectives

1. Readers will learn what school vouchers are.

2. Readers will learn what proponents of school vouchers say.

3. Readers will learn what opponents of school vouchers say.

4. Readers will learn if school vouchers work.

"Sainsburys Active Kids vouchers" by HowardLake is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0 

What are school vouchers?

A school voucher, also called an education voucher, is a certificate issued by the government by which parents can pay for the education of their children at a school of their choice, rather than the public school to which they are assigned(Wikipedia). School vouchers can also be considered scholarships funded by the government, private organizations, or both. These funds are given directly to the family instead of the public schools. Parents then have the choice to choose whatever public or private school they would like their child to attend (Coulson 1998,).

There has been heated controversy on the subject of educational vouchers. There are many variables to be considered. One to be considered is who would receive school vouchers? Is everyone with school aged children eligible or do we target specific groups? There are many plans being proposed as to how to use school vouchers. One being restricting vouchers to private schools that will accept vouchers as full payment and limiting vouchers to low income families, children with disabilities, and those attending substandard schools (McCarthy,2007).

Proponets of School Vouchers

One of the arguments for school vouchers is that low income families should have the same opportunity to send their children to any school they desire as do wealthy parents (Messerli 2008). Proponents of school vouchers argue that vouchers targeted to low income families more clearly serve the goal of enhancing equal opportunity (Howell, West, & Peterson, 2008).

" Support for vouchers is highest among African Americans and Hispanics. Within these two groups, supporters outnumber opponents by as much as five to one." (Howell,2008)

Another argument for school vouchers is that through competition public schools will be made better (Matus, 2008). Competition between school will increase, thus forcing public schools to be more efficient and public schools will be compelled to teach values such as hard work, respect, and discipline(Messerli,2008). Milton Friedman, a Nobel Prize winning economist, argued that school quality would improve with free-market competition as the student and their money would go to good schools and leave the bad ones behind(Boyd,2006). Market pressures will improve education for everyone because incompetent schools will be eliminated(McCarthy,2007).

Yet, another argument is that private schools would help improve children's values and their academics. Private schools have a certain reputation and a proven history of results. Private schools do not have an accountability to the government, but to the parents of their children. If they do not do well, the parents can remove the children. This kind of dynamic forces the private schools to do better(Messerli,2008). Another factor to consider is that private schools are not bound by the same government regulations as public schools are and can therefore have more flexibility in their teaching methods.(Messerli,2008). Statistically, parents of voucher students are more satisfied with their current schooling than non voucher parents. Parents are more satisfied with the overall school performance in discipline, academics, class sizes, and racial mix(Rouse, Burrow,2009).

One more argument for school vouchers is that it would bring more diversity and equality into the schools(Messerli,2008). Howard Fuller, Ph.D, Director of the Institute for the Transformation of Learning at Marquette University in Wisconsin, states that "we should focus vouchers on poor and working class families who do not have the resources to move if they live in communities where schools do not work, nor do they have the resources to put their children in private schools."(Boyd,2008) It is true that poor and minority students are limited to their educational choices and are forced to go to failing schools(Boyd,2008). African-American students who participated in the voucher program in New York City Schools Choice Scholarship Program stated that they were more satisfied, the classrooms were more diverse, and they received higher scores on their test compared to students in public schools (Boyd,2008).

Opponents of School Vouchers

One of the arguments against school vouchers is that they violate the 1st Amendment which is the separation of church and state. Most private schools are religious and the majority of school vouchers go to religious schools, therefore, government funding to religious schools violates the 1st Amendment.(Messerli,2008). There have been many court decisions opposing and supporting the inclusion of religious schools. "The central question concerning the legality of state-supported school voucher plans under the U.S. Constitution is whether the inclusion of religious schools violates the First Amendment's establishment clause by allowing government funds to flow to religious institutions. Claims have also been made that free exercise and equal protection rights are abridged if religious schools are excluded from voucher programs that allow nonsectarian private schools to participate." (McCarthy,2007) The Supreme Court answered that question in 2002 when it upheld the decision in, Zelman v. Simmons-Harris.The Supreme Court decided that the Cleveland Scholarship Program which allowed public funds for private education was neutral in providing choices to families and answered the establishment clause question in 2002(McCarthy,2007). In other words, it was not unconstitutional to provide public funding for religious education if it is the parents choice. However, a state is not required to include secular schools if other private schools are participating (McCarthy,2007).

In the Washington DC Opportunity Scholarship Program the statistics showed that of those who participated:

• 65% went to Roman Catholic schools

• 17% went to other religious schools

• 18% went to non-sectarian schools

(Wolf,Gutman,Puma,etc.,2007)

Another argument against school vouchers is that public schools will lose their fundings. This would be devastating to schools who are already underfunded. As it is, public schools are underfunded and cannot keep up with the rising cost of books, technology, security, and, salary. To take even more money away would be detrimental(Messerli,2008). Arguments for vouchers are that a "an education voucher system should be no more expensive than the current system as the state (or other public entity) would simply send a voucher check to schools for each participating child rather than to the local public school or district. However, if implemented on a large scale, there may be other, less appreciated costs that would depend critically on the design of the program." (Rouse, Barrow,2009). What else needs to be kept in mind is how the programs are handled. Who would fund the transportation of children, the record keeping, the monitoring of enrollments and, the handling of voucher disputes when amounts are varied. These factors could actually exceed what is being estimated now and would not make school vouchers "cost-neutral"(Rouse, Barow,2009).

Yet, another argument against school vouchers is the right for private schools to discriminate. Unlike public schools, private schools are not required by law to accept everyone. Therefore, they could discriminate between who they can accept or make their standards higher to make it harder for certain families to get in (Messerli,2008).

One more argument against school vouchers is ironically the same as the argument for school vouchers. This is that private schools are not accountable to the government. The argument is that private schools do not have to follow that same rules and regulation and teaching methods proposed by the government. This in turn leaves private schools with no accountability to anyone and their performance cannot be monitored (Messerli,2008).

Do School Vouchers Work?

The jury is still out on whether or not school vouchers improve academics in students. Although there are some reports on successes,the "empirical evidence regarding the impact of vouchers on parent choice, student achievement, and fiscal school management is inconclusive and incomplete" (McCarthy,2007). A report that came out by the Department of Education stated that there were no significant differences in math and reading scores compared with students that were not on a voucher system. This report was focused on the Washington Dc Opportunity Scholarship fund a year later (Wolf, Guttman, etc.,2007). Even the longest running voucher programs in Milwaukee, Wisconsin(1990)and Cleveland, Ohio(1990) showed insignificant results when it came to students academic success (McCarthy,2007).

Conclusion

The school voucher debate has been a controversial topic for many years. Both the proponents and opponents carry equally weighted arguments. As to whether these arguments can be adjudicated through data and research remains unclear. The only data we have received is from small samples and it has been inconclusive. It is impossible to know what the data would show with a larger sample and over an extended period of time. Though, it would be interesting to see!

References

Boyd, H. (2008). The school voucher debate. Retrieved February 16, 2009 from www.education.com/print/School_Vouchers/

Coulson, A.J. (1998). School vouchers. Retrieved February 16, 2009 from www.schoolchoices.org/roo/vouchers.htm.

Krueger, A.B., Zhu,P.(2004). Another look at the New York City school voucher experiment. The American Behavioral Scientist, 47(5), 658-698. Retrieved February 5, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 515764731).

Howell, W. G., et al. (2008). The 2008 education next - PEPG survey of public opinion. Education Next, 8(4), 12-26.

Matus, R., Times Staff Writer. (2008). Support for school vouchers growing. St. Petersburg Times, retrieved February 8, 2009 from www.tampabay.com/news/education/k12/article510630.ece

McCarthy, M. (2007). Determining the legality of school vouchers: are state courts the new venue?. Journal of Education Finance, 32(3), 352-72.

Messerli, J.(2008). Should school vouchers be given to pay for private schools, even if they're religious schools?. retrieved February 16, 2009 from http://www.balancedpolitics.org/school_vouchers.htm

Rouse, C.E., & Barrow, L. (2009). School vouchers and student achievement: Recent evidence, remaining questions. Annual Review of Economics. Annual Review of Economics- ncspe.org, 1, 1-49

Wikipedia retrieved February 8, 2009 from en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/School_voucher

Wolf, P., Gutman, B., Puma, M., Rizzo, L., Eissa, N., Silverberg, M. (2007). Evaluation of the DC opportunity scholarship program: Impacts after one year. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1-153.

This page titled 4.3: What is the case for and against vouchers? is shared under a CC BY-SA license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students.

• 4.3: What is the case for and against vouchers? by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0.

4.4: What are the benefits and drawbacks of home schooling?

By: Megan Galligan

Introduction

Many believe that home schooling has its roots in the 1960s though the 1970s when educational reform became an issue on the national forefront (Dobson, 2000, paragraph 5). Actually, until 1852, public school attendance was not mandatory. It was only in 1852 that the state of Massachusetts made the first compulsory attendance law and eventually all other states followed suit. (All About Parenting).  Parents are faced with the option to send their children to public or private schools, or to keep their children at home to educate the children themselves. The parents must consider many aspects of education to make this decision including their educational aptitude as teachers, the possible social effect on the children, the production of good citizens, the attention the children need to learn, and the external pressures of the school systems placed on the children.

Currently 3%-4% of the US school-going population is homeschooled.  51% of homeschooled students are female while 49% are male.  White students make up the bulk of homeschooled students at 68%.  Hispanics make up about 15%; Black students account for 8%; Asian students make up about 4%.  Until 2019, the number of homeschooled students had been growing by 2% to 8% each year.  From 2019 to the fall of 2020, the percentage of homeschooled students changed from 3.4% to 9%.

"Homeschooling - Gustoff family in Des Moines 020" by IowaPolitics.com is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0. 

Pros of Home Schooling

Home schooled children had many more freedoms than other children in public school settings. They have Educational freedom giving them choices to learn what they want with subjects that interest them. They have physical freedom to have more hands on experiences such as field trips to museums or aquariums. Religious freedoms is one of the largest gains of home schooling for most families. They have the opportunity to incorporate their religious and spiritual beliefs without standards and rules to abide by. According to the Journal of College Admissions, home schooling is the fastest growing forms of educating children (Ray, 2004, paragraph 2). It is estimated that there are 1.7 to 2.1 million students in grades k-12 that are enrolled in home school as of 2003 and that number seems to be growing every year (Ray, 2004, paragraph 2). Home schooling began as a way for parents to have more control over the curriculum being taught to their children (Cooper and Sureau, 2007, paragraph 9). There were two major view points considered when deciding to remove a child from public school and continuing the education at home. Parents either believed that public schooling developed topics that conflicted with the religious teachings or believed that they, as parents, could serve as a better educator for their children (Cooper and Sureau, 2007, paragraph 9).

In an article written by Michael Romanowski, a professor at Ohio Northern University, he states that “No other factor in life will have more of an effect on a child's life than the family, and home schooling enables the family to play its important role more actively”(2001, paragraph 6). Home schooling also allows the parents more of and opportunity to become involved in all aspects of the child’s life because they become the focal point in all aspects of their life. In Romanowski’s article, he also states that the intensified relationship with the parents will extend to other siblings that are also being home schooled. He believes that the since of communication is strengthened which allows a more personal relationship (2001, paragraph 7).

There is also the argument that home schooled individuals grow up to become more well rounded citizens. According to a separate article by Romanowski, 71 percent of people who were home schooled were involved in community service(2007, paragraph 14). Moreover, only 37 percent of individuals who were educated in the public school system were involved in public service activities (Romanowski, 2007, paragraph 14). The percentage variations also exist when examining topics such as young voters aged eighteen to twenty-four, contributions to a political party, and active participation in local politics (Romanowski, 2007, paragraphs 15,16,17, and 18)

Another reason for parents choosing the option of home schooling is for the protection of their children. It seems that reports of violence in schools in the news and media are increasing. For example, weapons being brought into public and private schools; increase in gangs; bulling and fights have become more violent; and acts against students are being video taped and broadcast on the internet. These are a few of the reasons why some parents feel that public as well as private schools are no longer safe. Although news reports of such violence seems to be increasing, the percentage of violent acts occurring in public schools has decreased; yet students’ absence due to fear of violence has increased. According to the National Indictors for Education Statistics, “There is some evidence that student safety has improved. The victimization rate of students ages 12–18 at school declined between 1992 and 2005. However, violence, theft, drugs, and weapons continue to pose problems in schools” (“Indicators of School Crime and Safety,” 2007). Furthermore, some parents who home school do so as a way of protecting their children from the exposure to drugs, alcohol, tobacco, and premarital sex. Parents who home school are able to teach their children about these issues in a way that supports their beliefs. By home schooling their children they believe that they can provide them with a well rounded education in the safety of their own home.

Public education uses a set curriculum to teach all children in a given classroom. The classroom is filled with a variety of learning styles, interests, and abilities. For the parent who has chosen to educate their child at home, the curriculum can be catered to meet each child's individual needs, interests and learning style. There is also the element of time. More personalized time is given to the child at home and there is not the waisted time standing in line for lunch, recess, others to finish their work, etc. and therefor much of the schoolwork is completed much earlier in the day, leaving time for real life learning experiences. (All About Parenting).

I have also discerned that parents who are teaching their children at home also have the benefit of the one-on-one interaction with the child. The child does not need to pace them self with the other members of the classroom. They have the freedom to spend extra time on a troubling topic or to speed through a trivial part of a subject.

Note

Amos Bronson Alcott, a teacher and writer from the 19th century once said, "A true teacher defends his pupils against his own personal influence". Is this possible when it is a parent teaching their child?

"Homeschooling - Gustoff family in Des Moines 004" by IowaPolitics.com is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0. 

Cons of Home Schooling

On the other side of the issue there are many downsides of homes schooling that need to be accounted for. Parents who home school their children struggle with time constraints for getting all of the work load done by one person. This can consist of creating a schedule, activities, learning, and hands on projects/trips. Aside from time restraints there are many financial restraints as well, having one parent in the working world and one in the teaching world can cause some financial strain. In the article “The Pros and Cons of Homeschooling” Isabel Shaw says, “Surprisingly, most home schooling families believe that the brief loss of income is well worth the satisfaction of watching their kids grow and learn in freedom.” In an article by Susan Orloff, she states that there are certain things learned in the school setting that do not occur in other environments but they “…in the school setting they are happening every day” (Orloff, 2005, paragraph 5). These things include making friends, learning to follow directions, and becoming able to handle deadlines. Orloff also states that she has “All too often… seem home schooling as an escape from school and pressures that structured environment demands” (Orloff, 2005, paragraph 7). However, note that many home schoolers participate in peer groups that allow for some of these things to happen.

Another factor that should be considered in the choice to home school is that added financial burden. Families spend an average of $400 per child each year to cover costs of curriculum, softwar, field trips, materials for projects, etc. (All About Parenting)

If the reason behind taking the child out of public school and beginning home school is to decrease the pressures that the public school produces, it could only lead to the future detriment of the child. The child needs to be able to develop coping skills to deal with the trials that life would present. Set backs allow a person to grow and develop the skills to combat similar situations in the future. Taking the child out of public education for this reason only teaches the child to escape their problems, not how to learn from them.

Based on the data provided by the Home School Legal Defense Team, 92% of who parents make the decision to home school their children intend to have the child’s entire education at home, grades K-12 (Ray, 1997). Although the majority intend to complete they education at home, only 26% of students can claim to have over ten years of their schooling at home (Ray, 1997). These statistics seem to imply some type of inconsistence in schooling. On average, of high school graduates who were home schooled can claim 6.9 years of home schooling (Ray, 1997). This seems to require quite an adjustment for the children in school. They are required to go in between home and public school and make the required modifications socially and academically.

In Romanowski’s article, “The Strengths and Limitations of Home Schooling”, he states that “To receive a complete education, students need to engage in discussions, share ideas, compete, and work with other students” (2001, paragraph 19). He believes that in order to strengthen the ideas, a person must get feedback and criticism on those ideas. The original idea seems to change, expand, and grow with the input of others. He also introduces the idea that the parent that becomes the primary educator might not have the proper background to adequately teach the upper level subject to the children (Romanowski, 2001, paragraph 24). He questions whether parents have the ability to teach their children “…higher levels of math, complex biological terms, or an in dept analysis of American history” (Romanowski, 2001, paragraph 24). A parent may be knowledgeable in some of the subjects required, but it would be astonishing if they were skilled enough to teach in all areas.

Home Schooling and the Federal Government

Once an isolated practice with little support, home schooling “has now reached a level of unprecedented visibility, politicization, and publicization” (Cooper, p. 111). Parents and advocates have gained significant legal, political, and social ground, substantially raising public awareness. Subsequently, the increase in home schooling’s power and popularity has caused state and local educational leaders to adjust some of their policies. This has brought considerable criticism from supporters of the “democratic, public control of education” (Cooper, pg 112). They claim home schooling “denies democratic accountability” (Cooper, pg. 112) and is “detrimental to the common good” (Cooper, pg. 115).

Despite political pressure to conform, homeschool families have become well informed, active, and influential - all qualities that are critical to the public life of society (Cooper, pg. 132).

In light of this fiery opposition, how far legally and constitutionally can the federal government go to regulate home schooling and overturn parents’ rights? Twenty years ago, home schooling was considered a crime, and although many states began legalization in 1999, the court controversies are far from over. The cases range in variety and often address attendance, parent qualifications, supervision, and dual-enrolment in public facilities (Cooper, pg. 123).

In most recent legislation, the Second District Court of Appeals in Los Angeles, CA stated in February 2008 that “children ages six to 18 may be taught only by credentialed teachers in public or private schools — or at home by Mom and Dad, but only if they have a teaching degree” (Kloberdanz-Modesto). California’s governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, defended parents’ rights for the well-being of their child and guaranteed protest (Kloberdanz-Modesto). This decision is merely another pull by the federal government in the tug-of-war being played with home school advocates.

Conclusion

There seem to be many considerations before deciding which type of schooling is best for a child. What seems to be the overriding factor is that all children are different. It depends of the individual when deciding if home school is a plausible option. There seems to be pros and cons that balance each other. The benefits and the detriments are comparable. The education of children seems to be an extremely important and personal decision that all parents face. Yet, will this decision stay in the parents' hands? The constant influx of court cases addressing the uses and abuses of homeschooling makes the future of home schooling unpredictable.

Works Cited

Cooper, b. and Sureau, J. (2007). The politics of home schooling: new developments, new challenges. Educational policy, 21 no10, 111-132. Retrieved April 16, 2008 from SAGE Publications.

Kloberdanz-Modesto, K. (2008). Criminalizing home schoolers. TIME Magazine. Retrieved April 16, 2008, from www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1720697,00.html.

Orloff, S. (2005). Facts to Consider before Home Schooling. The Exceptional Parent, 39 no4 54. Retrieved February 3, 2008 from ODU Library Database.

Romandowski, M. (2001). Common Arguments about the Strengths and Limitations of Home Schooling. The Clearing House, 72 no 2 79-83. Retrieved February 3, 2008, from ODU Library Database.

Romandowski, M. (2006). Revisiting the Common Myths about Home Schooling. The Clearing House, 79 no3 125-9. Retrieved February 3, 2008, from ODU Library Database.

Ray, B. (2004). Home Schoolers on to College: What Research Shows Us. Journal of College Administration, no.185 5-11. Retrieved February 3, 2008, from ODU Library Database.

Ray, B. (1997). How Long Are They Going to Home School?: Fig 17.1 Parents’ Intent to Continue Home School Education. Home School Legal Defense Association. Retrieved February 3, 2008 from www.hslda.org/docs/study/ray1997/21.asp.

Ray, B. (1997). How Many Years Were Home School Graduates Taught at Home?: Fig.18.0. Home School Legal Defense Association. Retrieved February 3, 2008 from www.hslda.org/docs/study/ray1997/22.asp.

Shaw, Isabel, (2008). The Pros an Cons of Homeschooling. retrieved April 18, 2008 from school.familyeducation.com/home-schooling/parenting.

National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2007. nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindicators/crimeindicators2007/index.asp

"Advantages and Disadvantages of Home schooling." Retrieved April 26, 2008. www.allaboutparenting.org

This page titled 4.4: What are the benefits and drawbacks of home schooling? is shared under a CC BY-SA license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students.

• 4.4: What are the benefits and drawbacks of home schooling? by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0.

4.5: Every Student Succeeds Act (replacing NCLB)

by Elizabeth Donoghue

Note

“No matter what your circumstance, no matter where you live, your school will be the path to promise of America. … [We are] challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations. … We will leave no child behind.” --- George W. Bush in his acceptance speech to the Republican National Convention, September 9, 2004 . ("Text of Bush Speech", 2004)

"We must fix the failures of No Child Left Behind. We must provide the funding we were promised, give our states the resources they need and finally meet our commitment to special education." --- Barack Obama in his speech, “What’s Possible for Our Children,” May 28, 2008 ("Text of Obama Speech",2008, para. 17)

"No child left behind" by waitscm is licensed under CC BY 2.0. 

Introduction

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was a major emphasis of the Bush Administration education policy. ("How to Fix", 2007) The law was meant to hold schools accountable for student progress, and, in fact, to expect that all children will be able to perform at or above grade level in reading and math by the year 2014. ("Key Policy", 2002; "How to Fix", 2007)

After the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), many educators and politicians loudly expressed their disagreement with the law and its regulations, while others lauded the accomplishments of successful schools around the country. The Obama administration began implementing its agenda, which was critical of aspects of the No Child Left Behind legislation. In 2015 President Obama signed into law the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) to replace NCLB.

The Pros and Cons of NCLB

List of the Pros of No Child Left Behind

1. It added structure to educational programs nationwide.
Although the standards were set by the states, No Child Left Behind became one of the first concentrated efforts to improve the standing of US students compared to the rest of the world. By creating standardized testing results, students could be compared via performance to identify learning gaps. That allowed more students to receive an individualized plan to improve their learning opportunities.

2. It held teachers and administrators accountable for student performance.
Before No Child Left Behind, it was easy to write off some kids as being “bad learners” or “troublemakers.” With standardized testing requirements applying to everyone, the goal was to provide each student with a learning opportunity that suited them. If teachers or administrators could not provide that opportunity, the legislation offered remedies that would benefit students.

3. Socioeconomic gaps had less influence with this legislation.
The overall goal of No Child Left Behind was to provide students in disadvantaged areas an equal opportunity to learn compared to other students in the US. Children with special needs could receive detailed IEPs. Low-income families received resources without a large budget commitment. Bilingual teachers were brought into communities where English wasn’t the first language.

4. Teacher qualifications were emphasized during NCLB.
In past generations, the only thing required to become a teacher was experience and perhaps a license. After No Child Left Behind, there were incentives in place to encourage teachers to pursue higher-level credentials. Teachers with a better education, in theory, can teach their own students in a better way. The goal of these improvements was pretty basic: to get the best-possible teachers in front of students in every community.

5. Resource identification became easier.
No Child Left Behind also made it possible for schools to be incentivized to find students who required extra help with their education. It wasn’t just about losing money if test scores didn’t “make the grade.” Free supplemental help gives a child a better foundation for life without requiring a family or household to find extra financial resources. Extra teaching assistants and other classroom assets could be directed toward these students as well, ensuring the best possible school experience.

6. It gave parents a better understanding of their schooling options.
Many parents have their public school assigned to them based on their current address. With No Child Left Behind, families realized that they had more options than the assigned school. They could transfer students in-district to the best schools if there was room. They could go to a charter school if their district was consistently bad. In some areas, students could even go to a different school district to receive a better education. This process allowed parents to make better decisions because they had more information.

7. Minority students could provide an equal contribution.
Even in school culture, there is a majority vs minority culture in place. By providing minorities with an equal learning experience, students could learn more about one another. They could get to know different cultures and ethnicities in the safety of the classroom. That learning support even included information about different religions. It was a process that allowed every student to feel like they were contributing to the learning process.

8. It improved student test scores.
For the United States as a whole, No Child Left Behind brought about a general improvement in test scores since it was fully implemented in 2002. The test scores for minority students have shown some of the highest levels of growth since its first implementation. Although test score improvements have been happening since the 1980s and some may argue NCLB had no influence on this trend, it hasn’t hurt test scores either.

9. Schools were required to report their data.
NCLB required schools, at the end of the 2002-2003 school year, to begin supplying an annual report card with a wide range of data. Student achievement information was required to be reported by sub-group demographics. Each school district had to break down the information on a school-by-school basis. In return, a $1 billion grant program was initiated to help states and school districts offer reading programs in K-3.

"no child left behind" by chizang is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0. 

 List of the Cons of No Child Left Behind

1. Many schools tied student performance to teacher salaries.
If students didn’t perform well, then teachers received poor marks on their annual review. That offered the potential of losing a raise or even a job because students were under-performing. Since teachers have no real control over who is assigned to their classroom, many felt like this process kept them from teaching. They felt forced to “teach to the test” just so they could protect their own livelihood. It became a process that was intended to help students, but wound up hurting many learning opportunities instead.

2. The best students in a classroom were often ignored.
If a student could pass the standardized testing requirements and didn’t need much help understanding the school work, then teachers and administrators often “passed the buck” on these achievers. Parents were given homework and instructions in some instances so that the teachers could focus on getting the grades of the other students up to an acceptable level.

3. The students with the worst grades in a classroom were often discarded.
Teachers and administrators would also pay little attention to the students with the poorest grades. The idea was that the best students would already pass and the students with the worst grades would never make it anyway. That meant many classrooms focused on teaching a core group of students that could potentially make the grade, leaving all other students to their own devices.

4. It created teacher shortages in many communities.
In a large urban area, strict teaching requirements are not much of an issue. There is a large enough population base to find the necessary instructors. In small, rural communities, teacher shortage areas became a real problem. It is an issue that is still plaguing many districts today. Specific subject areas are seeing shortages as well. For the 2016-2017 school year, the State of Washington listed 18 specific subject areas where there is a shortage of teachers, based on reporting from the USDE Office of Postsecondary Education.

5. Smart children do not always perform well on standardized tests.
Testing is not an accurate reflection of a child’s ability to perform. Some children know the material, but the structure of the test is confusing to them. Audio portions of a standardized test may be affected by the quality of the equipment being used. Something as simple as a malfunctioning set of headphones can be enough to change a student’s scores. Children with learning disabilities or special education needs were not excluded from the data either in many states.

6. It changed the goal of learning.
In the past, a grasp of the material being learned was the most important part of the school day. After No Child Left Behind became law, the emphasis shifted to teaching students how to properly take a standardized test. This created a limited range of knowledge for an entire generation of students. They know enough to pass a test, but do not really understand the subject matter that they tested successfully on. It’s like knowing how to cook on paper, but not understanding how to turn the stovetop on when trying to make something in real life.

7. The structure of NCLB was more about money than student learning.
Some schools just didn’t bother to care about what No Child Left Behind mandated. Since the only pull was Federal money, there were some districts that chose not to take the money so they wouldn’t be liable for the outcomes. In a December 2003 report by the New York Times, school districts in 3 Connecticut towns turned away a total of $133,000 to avoid what one superintendent called a “bureaucratic nightmare.”

8. Teachers could be involuntarily transferred.
Districts that had schools which were poorly performing had the option to replace their teachers. In 2007, an addition to No Child Left Behind allowed school districts to go around existing contracts to involuntarily transfer teachers from their preferred school to one that was performing poorly. In larger cities, the new schools could be more than an hour away and the teachers would be responsible for the added commuting costs. This issue created many rifts between teachers and administrators and many households saw that rift as an argument about money and nothing more.

9. It never really addressed the core issues behind poor student learning.
The No Child Left Behind legislation made three core assumptions about how students were failing to meet expectations: 1) that the curriculum was at fault; 2) that teachers and administrators were not performing as expected; and 3) that students were not spending enough time in a classroom environment. Factors such as large classroom size, poor building condition, or even hunger were not part of the legislation.

10. School funding was driven into test-related subjects.
Students in schools that were struggling to reach NCLB score mandates funneled money away from creative subjects. Instead of funding art or music, private tutoring and after-school programs that worked on homework with students was funded.

"Fall 2010 hackNY Student Hackathon" by hackNY is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0. 

Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was signed by President Obama on December 10, 2015, and represents good news for our nation’s schools. This bipartisan measure reauthorized the 50-year-old Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the nation’s national education law and longstanding commitment to equal opportunity for all students.

The new law builds on key areas of progress in recent years, made possible by the efforts of educators, communities, parents, and students across the country.

For example, today, high school graduation rates are at all-time highs. Dropout rates are at historic lows. And more students are going to college than ever before. These achievements provide a firm foundation for further work to expand educational opportunity and improve student outcomes under ESSA.

The previous version of the law, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, was enacted in 2002. NCLB represented a significant step forward for our nation’s children in many respects, particularly as it shined a light on where students were making progress and where they needed additional support, regardless of race, income, zip code, disability, home language, or background. The law was scheduled for revision in 2007, and, over time, NCLB’s prescriptive requirements became increasingly unworkable for schools and educators. Recognizing this fact, in 2010, the Obama administration joined a call from educators and families to create a better law that focused on the clear goal of fully preparing all students for success in college and careers.

ESSA Highlights

President Obama signs the Every Student Succeeds Act into law on December 10, 2015.

ESSA includes provisions that will help to ensure success for students and schools. Below are just a few. The law:

• Advances equity by upholding critical protections for America's disadvantaged and high-need students.

• Requires—for the first time—that all students in America be taught to high academic standards that will prepare them to succeed in college and careers.

• Ensures that vital information is provided to educators, families, students, and communities through annual statewide assessments that measure students' progress toward those high standards.

• Helps to support and grow local innovations—including evidence-based and place-based interventions developed by local leaders and educators—consistent with our Investing in Innovation and Promise Neighborhoods

• Sustains and expands this administration's historic investments in increasing access to high-quality preschool.

• Maintains an expectation that there will be accountability and action to effect positive change in our lowest-performing schools, where groups of students are not making progress, and where graduation rates are low over extended periods of time.

"Bologna University Students" by micurs is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0. 

 The Pros and Cons of NCLB

List of the Pros of the Every Student Succeeds Act

1. It continues to advance equity within the K-12 public school population.
Before the 1960s, the best education went to students who had connections, money, or both. After the U.S. government made every child a priority, the goal was to provide equal access to the systems that could help the next generation be able to read and right. The Every Student Succeeds Act works to uphold the critical protections that are in place for students who come from disadvantaged families. There are also supports in place to provide assistance for high-need students who may struggle in the traditional classroom environment.

2. The ESSA requires all students to be taught to high academic standards.
Before the implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act, individual planning for students meant that they would receive an education based on their evaluated capabilities. If you had a child in special education classes, then their requirements to graduate might be entirely different than a student in the school’s gifted program. This legislation mandated for the first time in the United States that all students in the country were to be taught to the same high academic standards. The goal of this process is to prepare more K-12 students for their upcoming career or time in college.

3. It provides a vehicle for better communication between schools and parents.
The implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act meant that the vital information that students produce in the classroom are distributed to families, communities, and educators so that everyone knows where a student’s progress is at any given moment. The K-12 student receives updates about their progress as well. Although this has caused teachers, administrators, and parents to talk more often, the real benefit here are the annual statewide assessments that measure the progress of each child with the high standards that are in place for their future success.

4. This legislation helps to promote local innovative methods.
Different communities must approach education in a way that best suits the needs of their district and the families they serve. The goal of the initial laws passed in the 1960s were to create more equality through civil rights legislation. It provided grants to districts that provided services to low-income students, including money for library books, textbooks, and educational centers.

Now the money goes toward place-based and evidence-based interventions that local teachers, administrators, and leaders create to encourage more educational opportunities. This benefit is consistent with the Promise Neighborhoods and Investing in Innovation programs that support public schools across the United States.

5. It expands the investments made into preschools in the United States.
The historic investments made into the country’s preschools over the past decade are formalized in the Every Student Succeeds Act. This option is a fantastic solution for many families because it introduces young children to a consistent routine and structure. Most of the supported programs teach kids a variety of social, emotional, and cognitive skills. They also get to practice language learning in a safe environment, giving families an opportunity to start getting ready for kindergarten.

The Every Student Succeeds Act provides over $250 million in allocations for preschool grants. Although critics suggest that this amount is not enough to cover all of the needs for students in the birth-to-4 demographic, this figure is still significantly better than what was previously available.

6. The ESSA maintains the same emphasis on accountability.
One of the primary reasons why the United States continues to fall with regards to the quality of education that a child receives is because there was a lack of accountability in the system. No Child Left Behind took meaningful steps to correct this issue, but there were also unreasonable standards in place that sometimes required 100% achievement rates – a near impossibility for some schools.

The Every Student Succeeds Act works to maintain the expectation that schools must be held accountable for the quality of the education they offer. This process works to create positive changes in the lowest-performing schools where students struggle to make progress. The expected outcome is to increase graduation rates over an extended period of time.

7. The federal government can still participate through grant stipulations.
Although states have the option to create their own solutions in the ESSA, the federal government still controls the purse strings of the grants. Updates to the template for grant approval went through in 2017 to encourage specific results. One of the most important changes made in the most recent update was to encourage the hiring of effective, in-field, experienced teachers whenever possible. Research finds that the best teachers typically look for employment opportunities away from the schools that underperform according to the local standards. This update encourages more funding to the districts who can encourage good teachers to come to the schools that need the most help.

8. It discourages the use of test results as a criterium for teacher performance.
Under No Child Left Behind, teachers were often graded based on the results that their students could achieve on the standardized tests. This issue caused many educations to teach subject information to the expected tests instead of providing a well-rounded approach that encouraged advanced learning outcomes. The Every Student Succeeds Act works to move away from the idea that a teacher should get a raise or not based on the fact that a random set of students could or could not meet particular expectations.

List of the Cons of the Every Student Succeeds Act

1. It maintains the status quo in many areas where previous attempts already underperform.
Even though the ESSA does improve the accountability concept in education across the United States, the 1,061-page bill, which is about 400 pages longer than the previous legislation addressing these issue, does not radically vary from earlier efforts to improve outcomes. This law relies on testing to create accountability outcomes, which can be an unreliable way to measure the success or failure of a student. The only primary change in this area is that it shifts the responsibility of implementation from the federal government to the states.

2. There is no effort made to address the root causes of inequality.
Because the Every Student Succeeds Act emphasis accountability in the K-12 system by looking at testing scores and classroom environment, the root issues that cause inequality don’t get fixed yet again. When economic disadvantages are tied directly to the performance of a student, then the problems in public schools can only be fixed when there are ways to improve the standard of living in each community.

Although the ESSA is better because it takes a critical aim at the test and punish strategies that many schools were using under No Child Left Behind, a few valuable programs won’t counter the adverse impacts that poverty has on many communities.

3. It removed the stipulation for adequate yearly progress.
Supporters of the Every Student Succeeds Act celebrate the fact that it provides more flexibility on the testing requirements placed on public schools. It also eliminates one of the vital areas of accountability that were used to ensure compliance with the expectations of No Child Left Behind. Under the ESSA, there is no longer the requirement to report adequate yearly progress on the test score gains from the student body.

There are some exciting changes that could support a better classroom environment in the future. The preschool development grants for low-income families is one of the strongest components of the measure. It even includes an arts education fund. When the states are given the requirement to hold their schools accountable, then who holds the overseers accountable as well?

4. There are more ways to mask inequalities in the ESSA.
Poor families and their communities show high levels of resilience, but that is not enough to help them achieve better results. All of the schools that received an F rating in North Carolina had a student population that was more than 50% low-income children. In 2013, the U.S. saw low-income children, defined as living in a household earning no more than 185% of the poverty threshold, became the majority of students in the public school system.

States will be testing 95% of children and intervening in the lowest-performing schools. Classrooms can then select the students who they believe will perform the best on the required tests, masking the results that the under-performing students achieve. Those who must take the test then feel like they are being given more work, so it encourages K-12 students with defiant personalities to tank the test on purpose.

5. It does not stop the process of school closures in some communities.
The testing mandates found in the Every Student Succeeds Act continue to make a retreat from the anti-poverty focus included in the original legislation from the 1960s. The Johnson administration said that poverty was the greatest barrier to educational opportunities. In cities like Newark, NJ, accountability doesn’t mean taking the Title I approach that was in the original spirit of the law. It involves more testing, additional school closures, and potential long-term trauma to the kids because they receive the blame for the outcomes instead of the adults.

6. When schools close because of the ESSA, it hurts vulnerable students the most.
The communities and neighborhoods that see school closures most often are the ones that need this resource available to them. When the city of Chicago closed almost 50 elementary schools because of issues involving performance, African-American students were the majority population in 90% of the districts. What is even more disturbing is that about 60% of the impacted schools had a high concentration of special needs schools.

The answer from the ESSA is to replace the underperforming schools with charters. This educational approach offers mixed results through a preference for autonomy. Children with disabilities and those with English language barriers tend to struggle the most in this environment.

7. It keeps the federal government on the sidelines.
The obligation to education all children, no matter what their economic circumstances may be, gets weakened when the federal government decides to sit on the bench. The Every Student Succeeds Act creates a patchwork system where each state, territory, and district can potentially use a different system of accountability. This inconsistency creates the potential for unequal practices, which means the government has no way to intervene if there is resistance to certain kinds of reforms.

Note

“If we really want our children to become the great inventors and problem-solvers of tomorrow, our schools shouldn't stifle innovation, they should let it thrive … by using visual arts, drama and music to help students master traditional subjects like English, science and math.” --- Barack Obama in his speech, “What’s Possible for Our Children,” May 28, 2008 ("Full Text", 2008, para. 15)

References

https://www.ed.gov/essa?src=rn

https://vittana.org/19-no-child-left...-pros-and-cons

4.6: What is the purpose of school?

BY: Jennifer Scarce

Learning Objectives

• Reader will recognize the social effects of school on a child's life.

• Reader will recognize the intellectual effects of school on a child's life.

• Reader will know when the first school came into existence.

"School" by jdog90 is licensed under CC BY 2.0. 

WHAT IS SCHOOL?

1. an institution where instruction is given, esp. to persons under college age: The children are at school.

2. an institution for instruction in a particular skill or field.

3. a college or university.

4. a regular course of meetings of a teacher or teachers and students for instruction; program of instruction: summer school.

5. a session of such a course: no school today; to be kept after school.

6. the activity or process of learning under instruction, esp. at a school for the young: As a child, I never liked school.

7. one's formal education: They plan to be married when he finishes school.

8. a building housing a school.

9. the body of students, or students and teachers, belonging to an educational institution: The entire school rose when the principal entered the auditorium.

10. a building, room, etc., in a university, set apart for the use of one of the faculties or for some particular purpose: the school of agriculture

BACKGROUND

The first public school came into existence in the mid-nineteenth century. Its founders called it the “common” school. Common schools were funded by local property taxes, charged no tuition, open to all white children, governed by local school committees, and subject to a modest amount of state regulation(Tyack,2001). Students often went to the common school from ages six to fourteen, although this could vary widely. The duration of the school year was often dictated by the agricultural needs of particular communities, with children being off when they would be needed on the family farm(Katz, 1987). Typically, with a small amount of state oversight, each district was controlled by an elected local school board. Traditionally a county school superintendent or regional director was elected to supervise day-to-day activities of several common school districts. Since common schools were locally controlled, and the United States was very rural in the nineteenth century, most common schools were small one-room schools(Kaestle, 1983). Common schools had a single teacher (usually female) and all the students were taught together, regardless of age. Common schools typically taught reading, writing, arithmetic, history, geography, and math. Evaluation of students was very varied (from 0-100 grading to no grades at all), but an end-of-the-year recital was a common way that parents were informed about what their children were learning(Cremin,1980).

"Rochdale Primary School 20 April 12" by pgcap is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0. 

THE INTELLECTUAL IMPACT OF SCHOOL

What's the purpose of school anyway? This is a question that every child asks at some point in their adolescent years. After all, what is appealing to a child about going to bed early, getting up early, and sitting in a desk for six and a half hours a day? Children don't understand how important going to school really is, but the importance of education is quite clear. Education is the knowledge of putting one's potentials to maximum use. Training of a human mind is not complete without education. It tells one how to think and how to make decisions. The importance of education is that only through the attainment of education, man is enabled to receive information from the external world to acquaint himself with past history and receive all necessary information regarding the present(Katz, 1987). Knowledge of education is built upon a foundation that begins with pre-school, where a lifetime of learning begins. It is vital to have a solid foundation of learning because each year new applications are taught and learning is like building blocks, you continually build on what you were initially given. If you miss a piece of information along the way, you will never be able to reach the top.

GOOD CITIZENSHIP

Achieving a good education to further knowledge is not the only purpose of school. Today’s schools really focus on teaching good citizenship and good character. I have substituted for the past year and a half and I have to share an example of being a witness of following through with this application. I recently substituted at an elementary school that encourages children to be honest and that no good deed goes unnoticed. To follow through with this concept, each morning during announcements the principle recognizes children for picking up paper towels in the restroom or turning in money found on the floor, even if it is just a penny. The children are so proud of themselves when they are acknowledged and this has really become an epidemic throughout the entire school.

SOCIAL SKILLS

At a very young age children are taught to share and to be considerate of other people’s feelings. They are also taught a great deal about emotions, behavior, and the consequences of their actions. Being able to interact socially and have healthy relationships is a very important part of life. While in the classroom children are constantly interacting with others and whether they are aware of it or not, they are learning to co-exist in a very diverse world. This socialization helps children build critical thinking skills and develop good communication skills. Schools also provide lots of extracurricular activities that incorporate teamwork, good sportsmanship, and exercise into participation. The elementary school ages are considered to be the fundamental grades and stages of development. With this in mind, it is important that children are taught positive behaviors and habits early in life. By teaching children positive behaviors at a young age, kids are more able to understand and engage in long-term attitudes and actions that will guide them towards future success. To encourage students, and to teach all kids positive behaviors, elementary schools across the country have implemented positive behavior programs to improve student awareness, knowledge, and development(Wiggins, McTighe, 2008).

CONCLUSION

Even before they enter school, young children learn to walk, to talk, and to use their hands to manipulate toys, food, and other objects. They use all of their senses to learn about the sights, sounds, tastes, and smells in their environments. They learn how to interact with their parents, siblings, friends, and other people important to their world. When they enter school, children learn basic academic subjects such as reading, writing, and mathematics. They also continue to learn a great deal outside the classroom. They learn which behaviors are likely to be rewarded and which are likely to be punished. They learn social skills for interacting with other children. After they finish school, people must learn to adapt to the many major changes that affect their lives, such as getting married, raising children, and finding and keeping a job. Because learning continues throughout our lives and affects almost everything we do, the study of learning is important in many different fields. Teachers need to understand the best ways to educate children. Psychologists, social workers, criminologists, and other human-service workers need to understand how certain experiences change people’s behaviors. Employers, politicians, and advertisers make use of the principles of learning to influence the behavior of workers, voters, and consumers. The purpose of school is to provide a quality education so that all students have an equal opportunity to develop their full potential(Wiggins, McTighe, 2008).

Note

“The central job of schools is to maximize the capacity of each student.” ~Carol Ann Tomlinson

REFERENCES

Cremin, Lawrence (1980). American Education: The National Experience. New York: Harper Collins.

Kaestle, Carl (1983). Pillars of the Republic: Common schools and American society, 1780-1860. New York: Hill and Wang.

Katz, Michael (1987). Reconstructing American Education. Cambridge: Harvard.24-57.

Learning (2009). Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved February 20, 2009 from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/school

Wiggins, G., McTighe, J. (2008). Educational Leadership, Vol. 65 Issue 8, p36-41, 6p. Retrieved February 20, 2009 from Teachers Reference Journal.

This page titled 4.6: What is the purpose of school? is shared under a CC BY-SA license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students.

• 4.6: What is the purpose of school? by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0.

"USA Flag Map" by Lokal_Profil is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.5. 

4.7: Are we really a nation at risk?

By Ed Farinholt

Learning Objectives

• Identify specific risks outlined in the 1983 "Nation At Risk" document.

• Relate various means that the Public Education system has used to deal with the identified risks

• Name at least one method available to address the qualification risks faced by U.S. Public education teachers

• Identify some choices for increasing teacher motivation from a list of options

Introduction

Having been in school during the Ronal Reagan presidency and coming from a conservative political background these years were exciting to say the least. My friends and family were excited to hear that Dr. William Bennett had been named Secretary of Education and would be investigating the state of education systems in the United States. This article examines several of the risks identified by the National Commission on Excellence in Education headed by Dr. Bennett and assesses their relative merit vis-a-vie the advancements made in the United States public education systems.

Identified Risks

In 1983 the National Commission on Excellence in Education enumerated the following risks faced by the public education systems at that time in an "Open Letter to the American Public" entitled "A Nation At Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform." (Gardner, 1983) The impetus for this commission, and ultimately this report (hereafter referred to as NAR), was the precipitous decline of the competitive advantage the United States enjoyed in the realm of education compared to that of other countries. (Segal, 2004) While students abroad have long sought advanced degrees from many of the United States noted medical and legal engineering and technological degree programs there has been a noted decrease in the number of Unites States-born students in these schools.

The NAR attempted to grasp for an ultimate direction the United States needed to take to insure the general increase in academic standards for both teachers and students. The directives of this article will focus on the recommendations made toward the public education system since they account for over eighty-seven percent of all United States students. (Hanushek, 1997) While the report from the Commission covers a wide berth of issues pertinent to the state of education, this article will deal with the risks identified in dealing with teachers.

1. Teacher qualifications

2. Teacher preparation weighted toward methods, vice subject matter expertise

3. Salaries are not condusive to attract highly qualified and experienced individuals to the field

4. Shortage of teachers qualified to teach such courses as mathematics, science, languages, as well as courses for gifted and talented or special needs students

5. Compared to other countries, there are severe deficiencies in the relative competency of both teachers and students in the areas of math and science

Considerations

Note

All, regardless of race or class or economic status, are entitled to a fair chance and to the tools for developing their individual powers of mind and spirit to the utmost. This promise means that all children by virtue of their of their own efforts, competently guided, can hope to attain the mature and informal judgement needed to secure gainful employment, and to manage their own lives, thereby serving not only their own interests but also the progress of society itself. (Gardner, 1983)

While many erstwhile pundits have severely criticized the Commissions findings on the state of education, we will for purposes of this exercise address the ways these identified risks have been addressed to date. In truth, many of these deficiencies have been directly addressed in many of the High School programs throughout the country. We must also remember that public school education monies are largely dependent on local property tax dollars and heavy state and federal subsidies. It could be argued that local business investment in local schools may have a direct impact on supply of qualified graduates.

In practice high schools are designed to prepare students for both degree-oriented academics or vocational careers. In terms of financials, “expenditure outside of instructional staff salaries, going from one-fifth of total current expenditure in 1890 to one-third in 1940 and to more than one-half in 1990. “ (Hanushek, p. 5). School budgets must now cover everything from teachers but extended administrative personnel and counselors with extended social and even psychological skills. During some of my own experience during teacher observation I learned that public schools are now in a situation that all applicants must be accepted and accommodated. In addition, the introduction of technical resources such as computers and sophisticated measurement technologies into the public school classrooms has further extended expenses. When you add the fact that these computers require software, licenses and extensive support resources the price tag for maintenance magnifies each passing year.

Many regard the subsequent reforms imposed upon the education system as "laid down" and often missing the mark with regard to root problems faced by teachers. Teachers must now be equipped to handle a wide array of potential issues in their classrooms, especially with the onslaught of such conditions (properly or improperly diagnosed) as Attention Deficit Hyperac DisorderAcute Hyperactivity Disorder and those of students with English as a second language. While no one ever regarded the costs of providing and maintaining a public education system was ever going to be inexpensive, the jury is still out concerning the return on investment when the public schools attempt to effectively teach under such circumstances. No doubt this is why such programs as Standards of Learning (SOL) and demands for certification of all teachers has been promoted at both the state and federal levels.

Assessments

The publication of the NAR has resulted in numerous studies and controversies attempting to address some of the risks identified. Among those dealing with teacher qualifications, references were made to increased expenditures for both staff and non-staff resources. Schools today are equipped with technical devices such as cable television networks, local area networks, and sophisticated computer software in order to offer students access to the global world of educational opportunities. These in turn require staff who are well versed in these technologies, their maintenance and current uses of them in the global marketplace. The implications of this trend are staggering in terms of the support structure that will be necessary to keep students on an equitable if not a more advanced standing compared to students in other countries.

Teachers are obtaining advanced degrees and in many states must obtain certification from state mandated programs in order to teach. While these have been requirements for a number of years the breadth and extent to which these qualifications cover subject areas pertinent to modern classrooms has significant bearing. Skills such as assessment, familiarity with current technology and multimedia are bearing fruit in terms of involving students and enhancing educator's means of communication and lesson planning.

Tuition tax credits have resulted from the long and bitter battle for vouchers for parents seeking some relief from the taxation burden when in fact they chose to send their children to private schools. Whether for spiritual, advanced placement or special needs, the public school system did not always offer students a suitable environment to excel.

Standards of Learning (SOL) requirements have applied to children in public schools to gage their progress but unfortunately have caused the negative effect of pressure upon teachers to instruct toward specific test goals rather than tailor classes according to the more laudable intrinsic and formative form of pedagogy. The summative aspect of SOLs provide only a benchmark but have treated the objective of learning as the proverbial black box. (Black and William, 1998) Mr. Black and Mr. William contend the focus ought to be on the process of education and the use of formative assessment to insure students are on target with learning objectives and assisted as needed should they fall behind.

Charter, private and home schools have increased in number during the last ten years and bear witness to the increased participation of parents into the educational welfare of their children. Studies have shown that Charter schools have both increased the aptitude of both students who excel in public schools and minority students who would not otherwise have means or access to the advanced technologies or skilled teachers these institutions employ. (Hoxby, 2004) Home schooling have burgeoned and while their effectiveness has largely been at the primary school level, the author's experience is that the issues of limited socialization and technological opportunities faced by home schooled children are more than compensated by innovative parents pooling their collective resources to meet these needs. With this population of students growing yearly it would behoove the public education systems to study their methods.

Another consideration maybe that the problems with education today lay squarely in the laps of parents and guardian involvement in their children's learning. Given that the composition of students throughout the United States has become multicultural, the fact of cultural variances with regard to expectation of parents in regard to their children's knowledge levels brings to bear a much broader element of adaptability by teachers than even ten years ago. The rate of growth of Hispanic full-time teachers increased 2.7 percent to 5 percent between 1998 and 2003. (Weinberg, p. 10) Arguments have been made for bi-lingual education and in many states such as California, Florida and Texas.

Arguments have been made for bi-lingual education and in many area of this country such as Southern California and much of Texas and Florida this may in fact be a necessity. Following an original supposition of this article one could forcefully contend that if answers to educational reform should be indicative of the local community than in fact what happened in the Salinas high school district provides an excellent example of parental activism with regard to not just what their children ought to be taught but how it should be taught. (Arriaza, p. 14) This argument as been argued at a more universal level by Mr. Author Combs who notes that “educational reforms which do not have whole-hearted support of those who must carry them out are a waste of time, effort and taxpayer's money.” (Combs, p. 4)

Another risk which was not broached by NAR was that of morals. When I was in elementary school I remember seeing videos about family planning produced by Planned Parenthool and videos discouraging from drug use like the plague. As an adult, I am offended that I only received part of the story with regard to these ethics while the Christian point of view was not even considered. Today school teachers and administrators cannot even provide an aspirin to a child without a release from the parent or doctor. Yet this same student can receive counseling about such moral decisions as birth control or abuse prevention with no consultation of the child's guardian. (FCPS, 2008)

Conclusion

School reforms ought to be a continual process. Unless public schools are constantly questioning their direction, their curriculum, and their motivations the changing world will continue to force their obsolescence. So in answer to the title of this article, the author proposes a resounding “YES.” Risks are a part of life as everyone can attest. In fact it is the human condition to not only contend with but to face and conquer risks each day. While the right to education by all is firmly upheld in these United States there are many troubles introduced and even some ethical considerations which are inadvertently compromised. The degree to which our nation's educational systems, whether public or private, contend with the ever changing educational requirements will effect the competitiveness and even the moral fortitude of today's students. The ability to effectively teach our young the skills required to think, judge and choose properly, based on sound learning principles, will ultimately decide the degree of success our future leaders will have facing the challenges of the world.

References

Arriza, Gilberto, Making Changes that Stay Made: School Reform and Community Involvement, The High School Journal v. 87 no. 4 (April/May 2004), p. 10-24; Retrieved October 2, 2008 from: http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.proxy.lib.odu.edu/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.29.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment. London: School of Education, King's College. Retrieved October 17, 2008 from: powayusd.sdcoe.k12.ca.us/projects/literacy/SSTTL/AssessDocs/PDFs/BlackBox_Article.pdf.

Combs, Authur W. (1991), The Schools We Need: New Assumptions for Educational Reform. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc.

Gardner, David P.; et al., (1983), A Nation At Risk: The Imperative For Education Reform, (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office), Retrieved September 12, 2008 from: eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/2f/f7/3d.pdf .

Hanushek, E. A., et al., Understanding the Twentieth Century Growth in U.S. School Spending., Journal of Human Resources v. 32 no. 1 (Winter 1997) pp. 35–68; Retrieved September 28, 2008 from ERIC Journal Articles (No. EJ538743).

Hoxby, Caroline M. (2004) Achievement in Charter Schools and Regular Public Schools in the United States: Understanding and Differences. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University & National Bureau of Economic Research, December 2004. Retrieved October 17, 2008 from: edgeweb.heritage.org/research/education/upload/hoxbycharter_dec2.pdf.

Lewis, Barbar, et al. (2002), Software Compare and Contrast: Blackboard, WebCT and Lotus Notes a Panel Discussion, Informing Science Proceedings. Retrieved October 7, 2007 from http://www.proceedings.informingscience.org/IS2002Proceedings/papers/lewis167softw.pdf.

Segal, Adam (2004) Is America Losing Its Edge? Foreign Affairs, Council on Foreign Relations, November/December 2004; Retrieved October 17, 2008 from: www.foreignaffairs.org/20041101facomment83601-p0/adam-segal/is-america-losing-its-edge.html.

Taylor, Patricia. (2008) Frederick County Public Schools: Student Handbook. Winchester, VA. Retrieved October 17, 2008 from: www.frederick.k12.va.us/education/components/scrapbook.

Weinberg, Sharon L, Monitoring Faculty Diversity: The Need for a More Granular Approach, The Journal of Higher Education (Columbus, OH) v. 79 no.4 (July/August 2008), p. 365-87; Retrieved October 2, 2008 from: http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.proxy.lib.odu.edu/hww/results/getResults.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.20#record_5.

This page titled 4.7: Are we really a nation at risk? is shared under a CC BY-SA license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students.

• 4.7: Are we really a nation at risk? by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0.

"Best Buy Corporate Campus" by relux. is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0. 

4.8: Are for-profit schools and corporate sponsorships viable?

by Myanc004

Can you imagine a school sponsored by NIKE or maybe Levi Straus? Would you be apprehensive about sending your son or daughter to a school that promotes specific products? What if that same school had the highest test scores in the state and the highest percentage of graduates going on to college? The very idea that our children could be subjected to commercial product endorsement as early as kindergarten may be of concern, but so too is the idea that our children are failing to rise academically in the global arena (Zeiger, 2004) (KJ, 2008).

Learning Objectives

• understand the motivations behind for-profit and corporate sponsorship of schools.

• know the concerns, advantages, and disadvantages of for-profit and corporate sponsored schools.

• recognize a for-profit and corporate sponsored school.

Introduction

For-profit schools claim they can better manage the school system and are more equipped to run the financial side of educating our youth. Those who agree with this premise believe it is the combination of forces in business, competition and profit, which will produce the exceptional education that people in the U.S. desire (Symonds, Palmer, Lindorff, McCann, "For-Profit", 2000).

In today’s economic times, many people are concerned about the future. With the collapse of mortgage companies, banks, and insurance giants; coupled with rising fuel prices that make basic operating costs of schools difficult, many are struggling to obtain funding for the public school system (KJ, 2008).

This financial question has caused many public school systems to search for means of change from a seemingly unlikely source: the corporate world. Whether it is handing management of the schools over to a corporations, or merely seeking sponsored products and supplies, schools are looking to the business world (Keen, 2006).

In a search for a solution to this growing problems of public education; states, cites, and parents have considered many alternative answers, from school vouchers, charter schools, magnet schools, etc. This search has yielded a myriad of possibilities that are being attempted throughout the country today. Within these options is the alternative of outsourcing public schools to varying degrees to private businesses that may open up a wide array of educational choices. This alternative of corporate involvement was used by the city of Philadelphia, when in 2002, they turned over management of forty-two of their schools in an attempt to improve their school system (Steinberg, 2002).

Results

Of the six largest for-profit organizations operating in 2000, none of them were making a profit, (Symonds, Palmer, Lindorff, McCann, "The Business", 2000).

Harvard study found that between 2002 and 2006, Philadelphia EMOs had a 10-8 percentage point increase over the other public and district run schools operating in the same area. (Garland, 2007)

Many for-profit schools remain unregulated and in the state of California, it is the responsibility of the student to assure accreditation, until full disclosure laws become enacted (Fensterwald, 2008).

A slight yearly increase in the number of EMOs, approximately 2 additional EMOs in 2007, and student enrollment, approximately 25,000 students, has been seen. (Molnar, 2008, p. 7-10)

Suggestions

The debate over the extent or even involvement of private corporations in the school system stems from a concern over influence and goals. Since corporations are by nature indebted to their stockholders, where do their loyalties lie when running a school? This is the concern that motivated the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS, 1999) to advise a focus on these eight steps to maintain the integrity of education where corporations are involved:

• • • "Corporate involvement shall not require students to observe, listen to, or read commercial advertising.

  • • Selling or providing access to a captive audience in the classroom for commercial purposes is exploitation and a violation of the public trust.

  • • Since school property and time are publicly funded, selling or providing free access to advertising on school property involves ethical and legal issues that must be addressed.

  • • Corporate involvement must support the goal and objectives of the schools. Curriculum and instruction are within the purview of educators.

  • • Programs of corporate involvement must be structured to meet an identified education need, not a commercial motive, and must be evaluated for educational effectiveness by the school district on an ongoing basis.

  • • Schools and educators should hold sponsored and donated materials to the same standards used for the selection and purchase of curriculum materials.

  • • Corporate involvement programs should not limit the discretion of schools and teachers in the use of sponsored materials.

  • • Sponsor recognition and corporate logos should be for identification rather than commercial purposes."(NCSS, 1999)

Conclusion

We all want the ability to have and offer the best possible education for our youth and ourselves. Though there may be debate as to how to achieve this, for-profit schools and corporate sponsorship of schools is an option to attempt to achieve our full potential as an educated country.

References

Brown, E. (2004, December 12). Can For-Profit Schools Pass an Ethics Test? The New York Times. Retrieved September 18, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/12/business/yourmoney/12school.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&oref=slogin

Corporate-Sponsored Public Schools. (1998, July 8). CorpWatch.com. Retrieved September 16, 2008, from http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=3028

Fensterwald, J. (2008, July 3). For-Profit Schools Still Unregulated. Educated Guess. Retrieved September 19, 2008, from blogs.mercurynews.com/edreform/2008/07/03/still-no-oversight-of-for-profit-schools/

Garland, S. (2007, April 11). Study Back Results of For-Profit Schools. The New York Sun. Retrieved September 21, from http://www.nysun.com/new-york/study-backs-results-of-for-profit-schools/52198/

Keen, J. (2006, July 28). Wisconsin Schools Find Corporate Sponsors USATODAY. Retrieved September 17, 2008, from http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-07-27-naming-rights_x.htm

KJ. (August 17, 2008). U.S school weeks may shorten to four days due to fuel costs. Digitaljournal.com. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/258713

Lips, C. (2000, November 20). ’Edupreneurs’ A Survey of For-Profit Education. Policy Analysis. 386. Retrieved September 18, 2008, from http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa386.pdf

Molnar, A., Miron, G., and Urschel, J. (2008, July). Profiles of For-Profit Educational Management Organizations. Commercialism in Education Research Unit. Retrieved September 19, from http://epicpolicy.org/files/EMO0708.pdf

NCSS Principles for Corporate Involvement in the Schools. (1999, February). NCSS. Retrieved September 16,from http://www.socialstudies.org/positions/corporate

Simplicius. (2008, June 25). Old classroom at Torf- and Siedlungsmuseum Wiesmoor. Wikimedia Commons.Retrieved September, 2008, from commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Old_classroom_at_Torf-_and_Siedlungsmuseum_Wiesmoor.jpg

Steinberg, J. (2002, April 18). Private groups get 42 schools in Philadelphia. The New York times. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F05EFDA173FF93BA25757C0A9649C8B63

Symonds, W. C., Palmer, A.T., Lindorff, D., and McCann,J. (2000, February 7). For-Profit Schools. BusinessWeek. Retrieved September 17, 2008, from http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_06/b3667001.htm

Symonds, W., Palmer, A. T., Lindorff, D., and McCann, J. (2000, February 7). For-Profit Charters: A Primer. BussinessWeek. Retrieved September 20, 2008, from http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_06/b3667004.htm

Symonds, W., Palmer, A. T., Lindorff, D., and McCann, J. (2000, February 7). The Business of Education. BusinessWeek. Retrieved September 20, 2008 from http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_06/b3667003.htm

Zeiger, H. (2004, February 4). Failing public schools. RenewAmerica. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/zeiger/040207

This page titled 4.8: Are for-profit schools and corporate sponsorships viable? is shared under a CC BY-SA license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students.

• 4.8: Are for-profit schools and corporate sponsorships viable? by Jennfer Kidd, Jamie Kaufman, Peter Baker, Patrick O'Shea, Dwight Allen, & Old Dominion U students is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0.

This chapter explored various aspects and models of education, emphasizing their impact, challenges, and benefits. Overall, the chapter provided a comprehensive overview of the changing landscape of education, focusing on the various models and approaches shaping the future of learning and teaching.

• It began by discussing educational reform in classrooms, highlighting the integration of technology as a pivotal change. The evolution of public education was examined through the lens of magnet and charter schools, revealing their innovative approaches and challenges in achieving diversity and academic excellence.

• The debate over school vouchers was analyzed, revealing the contention surrounding their impact on educational quality and equality. The purpose of schools was then explored, underscoring their role in intellectual development, social skills, and citizenship formation. Additionally, the chapter delved into the Every Student Succeeds Act, scrutinizing its attempt to refine and improve upon previous educational legislation.

• Finally, the viability of for-profit schools and corporate sponsorships in education was scrutinized. This segment highlighted the complex interplay between educational objectives and commercial interests, examining both the potential advantages of increased resources and innovation, and the ethical concerns raised by profit-driven educational models.

1. How do for-profit schools and corporate sponsorships in education impact the quality and integrity of educational outcomes? Discuss the potential benefits and drawbacks of integrating business models and commercial interests into the educational system.

2. In what ways have educational reforms, such as the Every Student Succeeds Act, addressed the challenges identified by the No Child Left Behind Act? Evaluate the effectiveness of these reforms in improving educational standards and equity across diverse student populations.

3. Consider the role of technology in educational reform. How has the integration of technological advancements in classrooms transformed the learning experience for students? Discuss the implications of this shift for both teachers and students, especially in terms of accessibility and engagement.

Further Reading 

• https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Courses/Fresno_City_College/Education_30%3A_Introduction_to_Education_(Perez)/04%3A_Educational_Reform

• Educational Reform by Kidd etl al 4.1-4.8