Skip to Main Content

Education Case Study Teacher Supports

Teacher Supports for Education Case Study

  • Overview of Primary Sources
    • The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson
    • The No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, President George W. Bush
    • The Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, President Barack Obama
  • External links for additional support
  • Discussion Questions

Overview of Primary Sources

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA)

Central Question: Does the federal government have a constitutional role in shaping education policies and standards, and why?

Following his resounding victory in the 1964 presidential election, President Lyndon Johnson swiftly proposed sweeping changes to federal education policy, culminating in the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. In 1965, Congress and President Johnson made significant changes to the federal government’s role in the American education system with nine education laws. One of these laws was the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). This law aimed to give money from the government to schools to attempt to improve education and expand equal educational opportunity. As a cornerstone of Johnson’s “War on Poverty,” this legislation was a pivotal federal intervention in education.

The ESEA allocated federal funding for primary and secondary education, encompassing provisions for professional development, educational materials, resources, and enhanced parental involvement. It was aimed at equal educational access, seeking to bridge achievement disparities among students by offering federal aid to schools with students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds.

The law was aimed at helping to fight poverty by increasing opportunity for all. Schools where more than 40% of students came from lower-income families received extra government funding. This measure was meant to make educational opportunities fairer and give children from families with fewer resources a better chance in school.

Connection to Federalism:

The ESEA is one of the most far-reaching pieces of federal education legislation ever passed by the U.S. Congress.

The ESEA brought significant federal funding to public schools for the first time. Essentially, the ESEA aimed to assist all public school districts, focusing on providing more funding to districts where a high number of students came from low-income families. As with many Great Society programs, local authorities managed the ESEA even though federal money was involved. Federal funding also meant increased federal regulation and control over this local institution.

 

No Child Left Behind (2001)

Central Question: What are the advantages and disadvantages of the federal government providing financial aid linked to national testing standards versus letting each community decide what the best way is to address its own needs?

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) renewed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Despite some controversy, the law passed in Congress with bipartisan support. Critics frequently highlighted the rise in federal oversight and mandates under NCLB as a threat to local control over community schools to support federalism. On January 8, 2002, President George W. Bush signed NCLB into law.

NCLB promoted education reform based on setting high standards and clear goals. The idea was that education would improve if students had to meet these standards. The law mandated that states create tests to check basic skills. To receive federal school funding, states were required to administer these assessments to all students at certain grade levels.

The law did not set one national achievement standard. Instead, each state made its own standards. Yet NCLB resulted in the federal government becoming more involved in public education because the law included requirements such as annual testing, academic progress, report cards, and teacher qualifications.

Around 2015, both Democrats and Republicans found fault with various aspects of the No Child Left Behind policy, including its emphasis on standardized testing, concerns about its effectiveness in improving educational outcomes, criticism of its rigid accountability measures, and dissatisfaction with its impact on teaching practices and school funding. So, a bipartisan coalition in Congress worked to remove the parts of No Child Left Behind with burdensome federal mandates. They replaced NCLB with Every Student Succeeds Act, which delegated more control to individual states.

Connection to Federalism:

NCLB embodies the principles of federalism by demonstrating the interplay between national standards and local execution in education, with the federal government setting broad educational standards and accountability measures while leaving the specifics of implementation to states and local districts. This approach highlights ongoing debates about the balance of power between federal and state authorities in managing educational policies.

Every Student Succeeds Act (2015)

Central Question: Should the federal government be involved in holding states accountable for public education, and why?

Congress passed Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in December 2015. Like the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), ESSA reauthorized the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This law expanded the federal government’s involvement in public education and sought equal educational opportunities for all students. But ESSA brought about some significant changes.

One notable shift was in standardized testing. While testing remains a crucial part of education, ESSA gives states more control over assessing students. Instead of a “one-size-fits-all” approach dictated by the federal government, each state chooses its methods for evaluating student performance in key subjects like reading, math, and science, but the focus remains on testing.

Another significant change brought by ESSA is the increased role of states and districts in setting academic standards subject to federal control. Under ESSA, states are responsible for submitting their goals and standards to the U.S. Department of Education, which reviews and provides feedback. This process gives states more control over their education systems while remaining accountable to the federal government’s educational regulations.

Connection to Federalism:

ESSA provided large amounts of federal funding for public education. Like the NCLB, it continued federal involvement by tying federal funds to annual testing, academic progress, and teacher qualifications. While it sought to devolve some power back to the states, they remain subject to federal control.

External Links for Additional Support

Discussion Questions

  • You may use the following questions when discussing the education case studies with your students. Here are suggestions on how to lead discussions in your classroom: Discussion Protocols
    • How does the concept of federalism relate to education and schools in the United States?
    • How has the federal government’s involvement in education increased over time, from the Morrill Land Grant College Act to more recent laws like No Child Left Behind and Every Student Succeeds Act? How has the character of that involvement changed?
    • What are the arguments for and against increased federal intervention in local schools, particularly in areas such as curriculum development and testing standards?
    • How have teachers, local school districts, and communities reacted to national education standards and testing requirements imposed by the federal government? What are their concerns and objections?
    • How does the principle of federalism balance the desire for national education standards with the need for flexibility and responsiveness to local communities and individual students?
    • How can disparities in education across different states and districts affect students’ future opportunities and outcomes? How can federalism address or exacerbate these disparities?
    • What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of a “one-size-fits-all” approach to educational standards versus a more localized approach that considers the specific needs of individual communities?
    • Should education be a national or a local level responsibility?
    • How does the debate over federalism and education relate to the broader question of how government should balance national and local interests in various policy areas?
    • Reflect on your own experience in school. What evidence of influence do you see in local, state, or national control in education? Which level of government do you think is best suited to set guidelines for your education? Explain.
    • What civic virtues are needed to ensure a healthy balance of federal, state, and local power in education? How do your actions as a student and citizen affect this debate? Explain.