Career and technical education (CTE) is faced with numerous forces that may impact its future. A variety of forces directly or indirectly affect CTE, ranging from the persisting stigma or negative image of career and technical education, the schools' curricular structure and requirements, along with federal laws such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Perkins. Federal laws guide administrators' decisions at the local level that affect CTE. With NCLB goals for all students to improve academic achievement, reach high standards, and graduate from high school (HS), much pressure is placed on schools. NCLB emphasizes increased academic rigor and progress on students' state assessments, holding schools accountable to annual yearly improvement. With more accountability, more emphasis is being placed on core academics that may in turn reduce or eliminate elective career and technical education programs. With continued negative perceptions associated with career and technical education, reinforced by curricular tracks and coupled with the impact of NCLB, CTE is left in a precarious position. Some of these forces may have deleterious effects upon CTE depending upon decisions and reactions of local administrators. <br>A quantitative survey research study was completed with Pennsylvania administrators from CTE schools and HSs. HS principals and CTE directors were surveyed as to how they perceived the effects of NCLB on role, image, and curriculum changes affecting career and technical education. Surveys were mailed to the directors of shared-time CTE schools and their respective sending HS principals. <br>The results of the study revealed the perceptions of HS and CTE administrators concerning the ramifications of No Child Left Behind as it relates to CTEs image, the effects on curriculum, and CTEs role in helping schools meet the goals of NCLB. There were significant differences found between CTE directors and HS principals regarding their perceptions of the role and image of CTE as affected by NCLB. In addition, there were no significant differences found between administrators regarding their perceptions of curriculum changes affected by NCLB. Finally, there were no significant differences in perceptions found across settings or regions. / School of Education; / Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program for Education Leaders (IDPEL) / EdD; / Dissertation;

When Democrats and Republicans crafted the 2002 No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the bipartisan reauthorization of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), they did so with the best of intentions: Close our nation’s staggering achievement gap with federal leadership, accountability, flexibility, and choice. But a over a decade later, many argue the law’s flaws have outweighed its successes to detriment of our public education system, schools, teachers, and most importantly, our students. In accordance with ESEA’s traditional reauthorization cycle, NCLB was signed into law in 2002 and expired in 2007. It is now 2013, and our nation’s education policy still has yet to be reauthorized. In examining how this can be accomplished, this paper first demonstrates how our tradition of local school control developed into one of dual jurisdiction. It then examines the executive and legislative battle that produced NCLB in the 107th Congress. Next, this paper analyzes the intended and unintended consequences of NCLB, which include conflicting conservative and liberal mechanisms, perverse incentives, narrowing and homogenizing education, inadequate resources, ignoring community issues, and seeking annual educational profit over qualitative learning. The paper concludes with an outlook on reauthorization–how NCLB should be substantively improved, as well as, the political context in which this reauthorization will occur.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) requires the use of scientifically based research (SBR) to guide the selection of appropriate educational interventions. Although NCLB does not stipulate the use of scientifically based research specific to special education, its provisions influence the education of all children. The implementation of scientifically based research is complex and relies on the knowledge and beliefs of practitioners in general and special education. In order to utilize scientifically based research, there is a need to know the level of knowledge and attitudes of practitioners relative to scientifically based research. This study examines the relationship between practitioners' beliefs and actions taken when implementing scientifically based research. The theoretical framework of Argyris and Schön (1974) provides a conceptual framework for the interpretation of the data. Connections between scientifically based research, school leadership, practitioners, and students, including those with disabilities, are also examined. Information and results extracted from survey responses of 403 middle school teachers from a large, urban school district in Texas shed light on how knowledge and beliefs can influence the understanding and the implementation of scientifically based interventions. The results indicate that teachers are somewhat knowledgeable about scientifically based research and interventions. However, their responses to three open-ended questions provide increased insight into their actual knowledge and understanding. The results indicate that initially teachers are in need of more knowledge about scientifically based research and what constitutes quality research. Their responses also indicate that teachers are lacking concise information that would help them understand what makes an effective scientifically based intervention. Teachers could through college or university classes be better prepared to use scientifically based interventions in the classroom. In the classroom, teachers need administrative support, continuous mentoring and coaching, and effective professional development in order to implement interventions with fidelity. Both general and special education teachers need increased knowledge to use scientifically based interventions effectively to increase student learning. / text

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (2002) mandated that every teacher be highly qualified by the close of the 2005-2006 school year. However, the means by which newly certified teachers are prepared has been questioned. In addition to understanding how teachers enter the field, researchers have indicated a vested interest in examining who comes into the field. More specifically, the characteristics and experiences of pre-service and in-service special educators are of great interest (McKlesky & Ross, 2003; Rosenberg & Sindelar, 2001). The present study examined the characteristics of six teachers in the final internship phase of a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) program in Varying Exceptionalities at a Research I/Research Extensive University in the Southeast.This study was conducted using both quantitative and qualitative methods, employing a concurrent triangulation mixed-methods design for data collection and analysis. The quantitative phase included descriptive statistics gleaned from pre-existing Haberman Urban Teacher Selection Interview data, results from the Teacher's Sense of Efficacy Scale self-report survey, and an adapted Pathwise Classroom Observation System protocol. The qualitative data collected for complementarity included thick, rich case descriptions, descriptive data from semi-structured interviews with mentors and a focus group interview with participants.Results showed that the participants entered the program with a variety of experiences and backgrounds. Also, the participants demonstrated and reported a range of variability in terms of their classroom effectiveness and their sense of efficacy. Further, the participants discussed several factors that they perceived as contributing to or impeding their professional success. The findings have implications for teacher preparation programs, school districts, and educational policymakers.

ABSTRACT BENEFITS OR HARMS OF NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND by Judy Block The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 reauthorizes and extensively amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and establishes control over the majority of federal programs and spending that affect public education. Embedded in the Act are various requirements that states and schools must adhere to as a condition of receiving federal education funds as well as harsh sanctions for failing to meet the requirements. No Child Left Behind notably shifts federal education policy by expanding its role into the areas of standards and assessment, accountability, curricula, discipline and administration, and providership. The Act also exacerbates tensions and blurs the line between competing ideologies of the role and nature of public education. NCLB's dominant reliance on proven research methods and statistical data, and its provisions regarding student assessment, failing schools, and parental choice open the schoolhouse door to commercial marketteers, further transforming public education into a consumer good, classrooms into marketplaces, and students and teachers into immaterial byproducts. No Child Left Behind's requirements often have more than one result, with some results doing more harm than the Act's stated good. The principle of double effect (PDE) provides a lens to evaluate instances where there are two effects of a single act; that is,PDE can explain the permissibility of an action that causes an undesired or harmful effect secondary to promoting some good end. By using philosophical analysis generally, and the principle of double effect specifically, this dissertation examines No Child Left Behind’s implementation requirements, specific programs, and their effects to determine the Act's benefits or harms. The dissertation proceeds with a review of NCLB's historical context and key features, an introduction to the principle of double effect, and a discussion of democratic and market ideologies and their relationship with education. This dissertation recognizes the various populations affected by the Act, but focuses specifically on students with disabilities and the relationship of the principle of double effect to the implications of NCLB. Chapter Four extends the principle of double effect to NCLB's implementation requirements and specific programs to identify their consequences or effects. The dissertation concludes with a synthesis of the questions and problems presented by NCLB and the implications for students, teachers, public education, and our communities.

This study focuses on public opinion of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). The act is a federal reform act, therefore politicians will pay attention to voters’ opinions of the law when considering if they should pass future legislation like it. Data were collected from a sample population of United States citizens by the Princeton Survey Research Associates International. People’s educational views, political views, group interests, and authoritarian views were all used to measure which groups have a positive attitude toward NCLB. Logistic regression was used to test several models to predict which groups have the strongest opinion of the law. The results indicate people’s views toward standardized testing, Republicans, and parents are the groups most likely to have a positive view of the law, followed closely by people with authoritarian attitudes.

The purpose of this study was to gain insights into the educational system in Finland, where art seem to be valued, and America, where it seems to struggle. I first studied how policies that promote a business-like ideology and standardized testing in schools have impacted art education in the United States. Then I investigated Finland’s educational system, which does not rely on standardized testing to monitor student learning and teachers. During my research I noticed that Finland uses a noncompetitive approach to education, which I assumed was connected to the art Folk School that originated in Denmark and moved throughout Europe. Based upon this information, I anticipated that art education was valued more in Finland than in the United States. I also anticipated that Finland’s educational success had a connection to its non-competitive system and its inclusion of the arts. In order to explore this idea, I investigated Finland’s approach to art education by interviewing Finnish professionals in the art education field.

The purpose of the study was to determine the impact, if any, of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on middle level characteristics (e.g. interdisciplinary teams, common planning time, heterogeneous grouping, interdisciplinary curriculum, and advisory programming) in Indiana middle level schools as assessed by building principals, and if those characteristics have increased, decreased, or remained consistent as a result of NCLB. The research also included demographic information (e.g. age of respondents, years in administration, years in current position), university/certification training on the specific needs of young adolescents, current Adequate Yearly Progress status under NCLB, improvement in mathematics and/or language arts as measured by ISTEP, and adjustments to the daily schedule to provide more time for mathematics and/or language arts classes. In addition, respondents were surveyed regarding the increase in remediation classes, both in place of elective and core classes, and the expansion of grade retention.The population for the study included all Indiana public schools that include grade seven as reported by the 2006-2007 Indiana Department of Education School Directory. The sample did not include principals of Indiana Department of Correction schools or alternative schools. The survey instrument was mailed to 420 principals. At the close of the survey window, 274 surveys had been returned for a 65 % return rate.The findings indicate a greater level of implementation of middle level characteristics as a result of No Child Left Behind in all areas with the exception of wide participation in exploratory activities. Data also indicates a narrowing of the curriculum for young adolescent students as more students are removed from core classes and exploratory classes to spend extended time in mathematics and/or language arts classes, There has also been a dramatic increase in schools utilizing grade retention as a result of NCLB. / Department of Educational Leadership

Goals 2000 and No Child Left behind have developed a new timeline for language acquisition, have promoted the practice of teaching to the test rather than the understanding of content, and High School Exit Exams have led to the widening of the achievement gap between ELL students and their Non-ELL counterparts. In additions, the policies’ narrow definition of success leads to federal sanctions that penalize schools with ELL student populations further contributing to the widening of the gap.

The purpose of this study was to determine if teachers and administrators hold differing beliefs about grade retention. School districts in Northeast Tennessee participated in this study. Participants in eight school districts took an online survey designed to collect data on beliefs about grade retention. The survey consisted of two sections. Section A inquired about beliefs about grade retention. Section B collected demographic information and also included an openended response question. Respondents were also asked to choose a factor that has the strongest influence on their belief. Responses from 205 surveys were analyzed and informed the results of this study. A quantitative study was conducted to determine if significant differences about grade retention existed between teachers and principals. Overall belief scores were measured to determine if teachers and administrators favor grade retention as an effective intervention strategy. Independent variables in this study included: type of system, grade level, years of experience, and type of degree. Factors that had the strongest influence on beliefs about grade retention included: other people’s opinions, principal’s opinion, research, experience with a retained student, or other. Respondents choosing other were asked to explain their answer. 3 Findings from the study indicated that there is not a significant difference in beliefs about grade retention between teachers and administrators in a city school system versus a county school system. Additional analysis did not show significant differences in beliefs about grade retention between teachers in grades kindergarten through fourth grade (K-4) versus teachers in grades fifth through eighth (5-8). A teacher’s or administrator’s number of years of experience did not indicate significant differences in beliefs about grade retention. The type of degree held by teachers and administrators did reveal a significant difference in beliefs about grade retention between the two degree types (graduate or bachelor’s). Results from this test indicated that teachers with a graduate degree significantly favor retention over teachers who hold a bachelor’s degree. Additionally, an overall belief score for all respondents was calculated for significance. Overall belief scores showed that, in spite of the research showing retention as a negative practice, both teachers and principals are significantly in favor of grade retention as an effective intervention strategy.