Stebbins and Knitzer (2007) note that early childhood offer a great opportunity to children to develop readiness to school. Therefore, it is important for the state and policymakers to develop policies that put into consideration the welfare of early childhood education.
The reason why early childhood policy matters is the it stimulates early child learning opportunities and ensures that all children get education especially those categorized as low income earners (Stebbins & Knitzer, 2007). The current paper is an attempt to explore the No Child Left Behind of 2001 which was passed into law in 2002.
Interview findings
Five structured questions where used to interview 4 early childhood educators about the NCLB act is respect to early childhood education. The results are represented in the table below
Table 1: Interview results.
Explanation of the policy
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) 2001 was passed by the congress under president Bush administration and made into a law in 2002. This was part of educational reforms which were being carried to promote the quality of education in U.S. According to Chen (2007), NCLB major objective is to ensure that all students despite the socio-cultural, economic or racial backgrounds would be given the opportunity to enjoy solid education.
The state policy was initiated with the help of different stakeholders who had in mind the increased job qualification requirements at international level and demand for Mathematics and English literacy.
According to Hyun (2003), the policy’s contains four basic reform principles are they are “stronger accountability for “guaranteeing” results, increased flexibility and local control, expanded options for parents, and an emphasis on teaching methods that have been “quantitatively” proven to work” (p.119). In respect to early childhood education, the NCLB act does not directly address early childhood education but it has been observed to have an impact on most of the early childhood programs (Grogan, Haglund & Thompson, 2006).
Some of the major elements that have impact on early childhood education include recruitment of highly qualified teachers as required by the NCLB (Grogan, Haglund and Thompson, 2006). The teachers are supposed not only be qualified but also appropriately licensed. This would ensure accountability from the teachers in respect to young children performance.
Testing is another component of NCLB which requires that the progress of each student needs at ECD be documented based on test outcomes. Both testing and employment of highly qualified early childhood teachers leads to improved students learning.
In addition, NCLB allows every child to learn in a diversified learning environment although it may negatively affect children with special needs (Grogan, Haglund and Thompson, 2006). Hyun (2003) note that the most critical aspect of the four basic education reform principles is accountability because it ensures the progress of each student is monitored and each school and teachers are held accountable for poor students’ performance.
A timeline of the evolution of NCLBA
To begin with, the No Child Left Behind of 2001 was signed into a law on 8 January 2002 by President George W. Bush and later transformed to No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA). This gave the federal government a role to play in kindergarten to 12th grade education (Hyuan, 2003).
Before the enactment, efforts had been carried to change the education system in US. This has been supported by Cross (2005) who note the NCLB of 2001was on an improvement of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act which was enacted in 1965 under President Lyndon Johnson. Prior the NCLB 0f 2001, the ESEA had undergone five amendment and reauthorization in between 1967 and 1994 (Cross, 2005).
In 1981, the National Commission on Excellence in Education was commissioned under the 20 U.S.C. 123a to carry a review on scholarly literature and available data on the quality of the education, teaching, and learning that was being carried in national schools and universities (Jorgensen & Hoffmann, 2003).
Later in 1994, Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994 (IASA) was passed which reauthorized the ESEA and worked in collaboration with the Goals 2000: Educate America Act (Jorgensen & Hoffmann, 2003). The later was to ensure that education was made available to all students and the levels of accountability stepped up.
All states were required to follow performance and content standards, assess students, and schools and teachers be held accountable for students (Hyuan, 2003). Therefore, the NCLB Act of 2001was the latest change and amendment on the U.S educational system and is currently under heavy criticisms.
Evolution of NCLBA in regard to church and state
The success of the NCLB Act which is a national/state policy has been shaped by series of factors and events such as state and the religion/church (Cross, 2005). The issue of race has been under scrutiny since the Second World War and the church/religion has been able to play a great role.
For example, in 1950s the church fought hard to ensure that the issue of race and educational aid programs were addressed (Cross, 2005). This was followed by numerous attempts to advocate for the educational aid funding on parochial and non public schools although in vain.
However, in 1965, the ESEA policy was passed to enhance federal education legislation in the U.S. On the other hand, the state under the leadership of Lyndon Johnson saw the break of the logjam to allow federal support on non-republic education. The “child benefit theory” saw the adoption of the ESEA which necessitated the allocation of funds and books to children not based on the school ownership, but on the fact that a child needed education.
Even today, the church/religion has continued to play a great role in championing for education for all (EFA). On the side, the state continued to fund education and design policies like Educate America Act and Clinton Goals 2000 bill, where accountability, testing, and measurement standards were developed which are significantly important to early childhood education.
Reference List
Chen, G. (2007). Understanding no child left behind. Public School Review. Web.
Cross, C. (2005). The evolving role of the federal government in education. Web.
Grogan, T., Haglund, J., & Thompson, M. (2006). Voices from the field: Wisconsin early childhood education and care considers “No Child Left Behind.” Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. Web.
Hyun, E. (2003). What does the “No Child Left Behind Act” mean to early childhood teacher educators?: a call for a collective professional rejoinder. Early Childhood Educational Journal, 31(2), 119.
Jorgensen, M. A., & Hoffman, J. (2003). History of the “No Child Left Behind Act” of 2001(NCLB). Assessment Report. Pearson Education, Inc.
Stebbins, H., & Knitzer, J. (2007). Highlights from the improving the odds for young children project: State early childhood policies. National Center for Children in Poverty. Web.