Lecture 15 POLS 207Outline of Last Lecture: NCLB, the Obama Administration, and Education (Oh My!)I. Continuing issues in NCLBII. The Obama Administration’s educational agendaA. Race to the TopB. National Assessment of Educational Progress (“common standards”)Outline of Current Lecture:More Thoughts on NCLB and School FundingI. No Child Left BehindA. Is it even possible? a. Coleman Report (1966)II. Federal Courts’ role in educationA. 14th Amendment litigationB. Religious practices in the public school systemCurrent Lecture:For the most part, states decide if their students are “proficient” in reading and math. Is the national education assessment standard too high?It’s easy to “cherry pick” one question and point to it as an example of how dumb everyone is.Postscript on NCLB… “Liberals” and “conservatives” alike both criticize this Act, which has been in effect since 2002. Some common criticisms:- Federal intrusion - Insufficient funding- Mandated testing distorts education (over-emphasis on subjects tested, short-changing excellence, etc.)- Unreasonable and arbitrary AYP standardsBut the most fundamental criticism of NCLB (is the idea behind NCLB even possible? Is it possible for no child to be left behind?)- NCLB premised on belief that what a child “brings to school” doesn’t matter….(or, if it does, the classroom experience alone can overcome it). But we know that this is not thecase. What a child brings into the classroom in terms of attitude, work ethic, etc. DOES matter.- BUT, note Coleman Report (published in 1966), see D&M 16:534o Lead researcher: James S. Coleman (1926 – 1995)o Its core finding was that the “home” environment matters MORE than the “school” environment in terms of explaining student performance.o However, this doesn’t mean that the school environment doesn’t matter.o It is unrealistic to expect that we can overcome by 2014 (or even in the longer term), using the public education arena alone, the massive racial/ethnic/class inequalities of American social and economic life.- Are the underlying goals of NCLB attainable?Some “practical realities” facing 21 st century education reform efforts…o School is only part of a child’s life (with diminishing impact as the child gets older)o Balancing the “inclusion” of all against achieving the “excellence” of some (Especially an issue among suburban schools). How to balance educating high and low achievers in the same classroom?o Recurring difficulty of “replicating” and “scaling-up” (replicating at a state or national level) education success stories. Often things get lost in translation and the success story isn’t easy to replicate at a state or national level.o It’s hard to define “proficient” or to define “common standards”Remember that the Federal role in public education is an old but limited legislative role – Northwest Ordinance (1787)- Federal Courts’ role (particularly over the last 65 years or so) There are basically two sources of the Federal government’s involvement in public education:o 14th Amendment litigation Due process clause (“fairness”) Equal protection clause (“equality”) Courts’ record on civil rights is invariably tied into these two clauses and their interpretation of them.o Civil rights legislation Federal statutory law 14th Amendment (esp. since 1950s)- Religious practices within the public school systemo See D&M 16:554 – 57o 1st Amendment – “no establishment” clause and “free exercise” clauseo Starting in the 1940s, these 1st Amendment restrictions began applying to the states as well as the national government.Wrapping up…Federal courts heavily entangled (esp. since ‘50s) in “civil rights” and “religious practices” litigation but NOT school financing (except for some rulings on “vouchers”) “Vouchers” are more of a 1st Amendment issue than a financing issue (See D&M 16:535 - 37)because it goes back to religion in school.If “private” education were “secular”- By constitutional language, congressional practice and judicial rulings…o U.S. Congress has virtually unlimited power to “tax and spend” (including subsidizing “private” activities and institutions)o BUT most “private” K-12 education is “religious” so government funding for private schools is “entanglement”o See again “Lemon Test” (D&M 16:555 – 56) Secular purpose Neither advance nor inhibit No excessive