Library Catalog
Amazon cover image
Image from Amazon.com

An Education in Politics : The Origins and Evolution of No Child Left Behind / Jesse H. Rhodes.

By: Material type: TextTextSeries: American Institutions and SocietyPublisher: Ithaca, NY : Cornell University Press, [2012]Copyright date: ©2014Description: 1 online resource (264 p.) : 1 table, 4 charts/graphsContent type:
Media type:
Carrier type:
ISBN:
  • 9780801464195
Subject(s): DDC classification:
  • 379.73 23
LOC classification:
  • LC89 .R47 2016
Other classification:
  • online - DeGruyter
Online resources:
Contents:
Frontmatter -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction: Explaining the Development of American Education Policymaking -- 1. The Structure of American Education Policy before 1980 -- 2. A New Direction in American Education Policy, 1980–1988 -- 3. Federal School Reform Builds Momentum, 1989–1992 -- 4. A New Federal Role Is Born, 1993–1994 -- 5. The Road to No Child Left Behind, 1995–2002 -- 6. “Yes We Can” Improve America’s Schools? From No Child Left Behind to President Obama’s Education Initiatives, 2003–2011 -- Conclusion: Institutionally Bounded Entrepreneurship and the Future of American Education Policymaking -- List of Abbreviations -- Notes -- Index
Summary: Since the early 1990s, the federal role in education—exemplified by the controversial No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)—has expanded dramatically. Yet states and localities have retained a central role in education policy, leading to a growing struggle for control over the direction of the nation's schools. In An Education in Politics, Jesse H. Rhodes explains the uneven development of federal involvement in education. While supporters of expanded federal involvement enjoyed some success in bringing new ideas to the federal policy agenda, Rhodes argues, they also encountered stiff resistance from proponents of local control. Built atop existing decentralized policies, new federal reforms raised difficult questions about which level of government bore ultimate responsibility for improving schools.Rhodes's argument focuses on the role played by civil rights activists, business leaders, and education experts in promoting the reforms that would be enacted with federal policies such as NCLB. It also underscores the constraints on federal involvement imposed by existing education policies, hostile interest groups, and, above all, the nation’s federal system. Indeed, the federal system, which left specific policy formation and implementation to the states and localities, repeatedly frustrated efforts to effect changes: national reforms lost their force as policies passed through iterations at the state, county, and municipal levels. Ironically, state and local resistance only encouraged civil rights activists, business leaders, and their political allies to advocate even more stringent reforms that imposed heavier burdens on state and local governments. Through it all, the nation’s education system made only incremental steps toward the goal of providing a quality education for every child.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number URL Status Notes Barcode
eBook eBook Biblioteca "Angelicum" Pont. Univ. S.Tommaso d'Aquino Nuvola online online - DeGruyter (Browse shelf(Opens below)) Online access Not for loan (Accesso limitato) Accesso per gli utenti autorizzati / Access for authorized users (dgr)9780801464195

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction: Explaining the Development of American Education Policymaking -- 1. The Structure of American Education Policy before 1980 -- 2. A New Direction in American Education Policy, 1980–1988 -- 3. Federal School Reform Builds Momentum, 1989–1992 -- 4. A New Federal Role Is Born, 1993–1994 -- 5. The Road to No Child Left Behind, 1995–2002 -- 6. “Yes We Can” Improve America’s Schools? From No Child Left Behind to President Obama’s Education Initiatives, 2003–2011 -- Conclusion: Institutionally Bounded Entrepreneurship and the Future of American Education Policymaking -- List of Abbreviations -- Notes -- Index

restricted access online access with authorization star

http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec

Since the early 1990s, the federal role in education—exemplified by the controversial No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)—has expanded dramatically. Yet states and localities have retained a central role in education policy, leading to a growing struggle for control over the direction of the nation's schools. In An Education in Politics, Jesse H. Rhodes explains the uneven development of federal involvement in education. While supporters of expanded federal involvement enjoyed some success in bringing new ideas to the federal policy agenda, Rhodes argues, they also encountered stiff resistance from proponents of local control. Built atop existing decentralized policies, new federal reforms raised difficult questions about which level of government bore ultimate responsibility for improving schools.Rhodes's argument focuses on the role played by civil rights activists, business leaders, and education experts in promoting the reforms that would be enacted with federal policies such as NCLB. It also underscores the constraints on federal involvement imposed by existing education policies, hostile interest groups, and, above all, the nation’s federal system. Indeed, the federal system, which left specific policy formation and implementation to the states and localities, repeatedly frustrated efforts to effect changes: national reforms lost their force as policies passed through iterations at the state, county, and municipal levels. Ironically, state and local resistance only encouraged civil rights activists, business leaders, and their political allies to advocate even more stringent reforms that imposed heavier burdens on state and local governments. Through it all, the nation’s education system made only incremental steps toward the goal of providing a quality education for every child.

Mode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.

In English.

Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 26. Apr 2024)

Previous
Back to results
Next
Close