User:Nemerson4970/No Child Left Behind Act

Article Evaluation
While the article's content is very much related to the subject, there are a number of areas that are underdeveloped. Firstly, the section of the article that is dedicated to its legislative history could definitely be bolstered; from the article's Talk page, it appears that other Wikipedians agree with me in this respect. I think that the 'Replacement' section would also be worthwhile to review and contribute to, as its successor (the Every Student Succeeds Act) was informed by many of the perceived failures of No Child Left Behind. The article largely appears to be written neutrally; however, there are instances where claims are made that require additional citations. One example of this is where the article claims that "it is widely accepted that teacher knowledge has two components: specific subject matter knowledge (CK) such as an understanding of mathematics for a mathematics teacher, and pedagogical knowledge (PCK), which is knowledge of the subject of teaching/learning itself." This claim does not have any cited articles to support it. The citations that are appended to the end of the article appear to come from reputable sources. However, some of the citations could stand to be fleshed out, as some do not directly address who the author of the source was without forcing the reader to click on a third party link. - Peer Reviewed Articles and Books:

DeBray-Pelot, E., & McGuinn, P. (2009). The new politics of education: Analyzing the federal education policy landscape in the post-NCLB era. Educational Policy, 23(1), 15–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904808328524

Dee, T. S., & Jacob, B. (2011). The impact of no Child Left Behind on student achievement. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(3), 418–446. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20586

Nichols, S. L., Berliner, D. C., & Noddings, N. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America’s schools. Harvard Education Press.

Legislative History
Original Text:

It was coauthored by Representatives John Boehner (R-OH), George Miller (D-CA), and Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Judd Gregg (R-NH). The United States House of Representatives passed the bill on December 13, 2001 (voting 381–41), and the United States Senate passed it on December 18, 2001 (voting 87–10). President Bush signed it into law on January 8, 2002.

Edited Text:

President George W. Bush first proposed the use of federal aid to create a plan by which to hold schools accountable for the educational outcomes of their students on January 23, 2001; however, as it was initially described, the Act faced significant criticism from interest groups such as the Education Trust because of its inclusion of vouchers. Vouchers would enable parents to choose a different school (public, private, or otherwise) for their child to attend if their district failed to meet state standards; however, critics stated that this move would take funds away from schools that needed the most funding. The NCLB Act was introduced in the United States House of Representatives on March 22, 2001, and it was coauthored by Representatives John Boehner (R-OH), George Miller (D-CA), and Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Judd Gregg (R-NH). As it made its way through the House and Senate, the Bill faced a number of challenges, ranging from Democratic appeals for more funding, to Republican pushback on the increased role of the Federal government in the realm of education. Despite this, the Act garnered bipartisan support in both chambers of the legislature, and it was passed in the United States House of Representatives on December 13, 2001 (voting 381–41), and in the United States Senate on December 18, 2001 (voting 87–10). The Act was then signed into law by President Bush on January 8, 2002.

=== Major Titles of the Act === (There is no original text that specifically addresses what each Title provides for; however, there is a section about the Provisions of the Act. How can these two be reconciled? Is it important to outline each and every Title, or is it more important to outline the major provisions, as other Wikipedia editors seem to have done?)

Title I—Improving The Academic Achievement Of The Disadvantaged
This Title of the Act sets out to meet the specific needs of children who have limited English proficiency (LEP), are migrants, have disabilities, are neglected or delinquent, and/or need increased reading assistance. It appropriates specific amounts of money for each fiscal year that could be used to improve the basic programs operated by educational agencies. Lastly, it outlines a system of report cards that can be used to summarize student achievement within districts, and it alludes to annual testing measures for students in grades 3-8 (which are further elaborated upon in Title VI of the law).

Title II—Preparing, Training, And Recruiting High-Quality Teachers And Principals
Title II seeks to ensure that educators have the appropriate qualifications to be teachers, and sets a deadline for the 2005-2006 school year to make sure that teachers meet the “highly qualified” standard that it defines. It also allocates grant money to recruit and train these ‘high-quality’ teachers, with an emphasis on educators who will be teaching young students.

Title III—Language Instruction For Limited English Proficient And Immigrant Students
Title III of NCLB specifies that instructors who teach programs for students with LEP must be fluent in both the native language of LEP students and in English. Students who have lived in the United States for three or more years must be tested in English, and programs for LEP students must be based in scientific research.

Title IV—21st Century Schools
Title IV outlines some programs and requirements for schools that serve the purpose of reducing violence, disincentivizing drug and alcohol use, and fostering a safe environment for students to perform academically to the best of their abilities. It also provides funds for students who have been expelled for certain offenses to perform community service.

Title V—Promoting Informed Parental Choice And Innovative Programs
Title V lists a number of programs that states can use when finding ways to assist the needs of high-risk students, such as The Voluntary Public School Choice program, the Public Charter Schools program, the Magnet School program, and the Community Technology Centers program. Further, it provides for competitive grant programs (based on AYP) that would provide schools with funding for mental health and counseling staff.

Title VI—Flexibility And Accountability
Title VI provides grants to the States to enable them to develop and administer valid, reliable assessments of English language proficiency (reading or language arts) and mathematics in grades 3 through 8, and allocates special grant money to helping rural and low-income districts meet their states’ definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Furthermore, in order to improve the educational outcomes of students, Title VI names several methods that could be utilized by school districts by means of grants to help their students achieve educational growth, such as teacher professional development, educational technology, and parental involvement activities, among others. In order to determine how much grant money schools should be allocated for the programs enacted by other sections of NCLB, Title VI asks each local agency to determine the average number of students in daily attendance in the K-12 schools that the agencies serve.

Title VII—Indian, Native Hawaiian, And Alaska Native Education
Title VII provides funding for programs in schools managed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs where a certain number of enrolled students are of Native American/American Indian descent. These programs are designed to ensure that the curricula of these schools are challenging and up to that state’s standards. Some of the programs in the title address the specific needs of at-risk Native American, Hawaiian, and Alaska Native students and K-3 literacy.

Title VIII—Impact Aid Program
Title VIII provides formula grants for districts where a large number of students’ parents are employed or connected to the Federal government (such as military installations), and for special needs students in these districts. Also, it allocates funding for the building and renovation of school buildings in these districts.

Title IX—General Provisions
This section describes the various provisions that apply to all of the titles and subsections of NCLB, such as the authorization of States to create their own content standards and the prohibition of federally sponsored national testing (except in certain cases).

Title X—Repeals, Redesignations, And Amendments to Other Statutes
This section addresses various issues related to the education of homeless children and adds provisions for school choice by parents.

Groups of Supporters/Opponents
Because the current iteration of the Article does not have a list of mass membership/interest groups that expressed their support or opposition for the Act, I thought this would be a good place to compile such a list. Whether or not it gets used for the purposes of my assignment, it is still valuable to hold on to for further research.

Supporters:

Business Coalition for Excellence in Education

Family Research Council

Toussaint Institute Fund

United Federation of Workers

American Association of School Administrators

Opponents:

Charles Stewart Mott Foundation

Christian Coalition

Family Research Council

Focus on the Family

Eagle Forum

Traditional Values Coalition

Neither the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) nor the National Education Association were recorded as supporting the legislation; however, congressional hearing records show that the Vice President of the AFT, Randi Weingarten, was supportive of some of the provisions of the Act.