.

Bill Clinton Agenda - Goals 2000 Educate America Act

 
In the speech delivered at the ceremony occasioned
by the law signing, the president would note that ‘This is
the beginning. It is the foundation. Today we can say
America is serious about education’ (18, p.2). The law
was the outcome of the initiatives that President Clinton
had had since the period in which he had been governor
of Arkansas State, when together with the Secretary of
Education, Richard Riley, he had formulated the main
objectives of education that would be found in the Goals
2000 Educate America Act.
Referring to national standards, R. Reley said at the
same ceremony of signing the law: ‘Some people say
that high standards are not for all children... If we aim
high, the young people of this country will stretch’ their
minds’ (17, p. 3)
The most important objective of the law is the
improvement of the national economy, so that it may
become competitive in the international trade.
Development of human capital is another essential
objective of the law, being constituted as a starting point
for the permanent education of the labor force. As the Clinton administration had predicted,
programs were needed to be expanded from preschool education to continuous training of human
resources. In order to meet new economic requirements major attention was paid to skills
improvement and to career education. Robert Reich, the Secretary of Labor, pointed out that
there was a direct correlation between the type of education and placement in the labor market.
He expected that many graduates would get poorly paid jobs unless they did not improve their
skills and abilities. Bill Clinton believed that those who came from less affluent economic
backgrounds should benefit from increased opportunities to access to quality education and the
opportunity to attend higher education.
Although The Goals 2000 Educate America Act represented the central legislative related
to the preparation of human capital, another law came to complete it: The School-to-Work
Opportunities Act. This law offered the possibility of funding programs that combined school
education with work education. Signing the law, in May 1994, which, symbolically, was done at
a desk made by students, President Clinton claimed that the law is only ‘a small seed that I
believe will give us quickly a national network of school-to- work programs’ (18, p. 3).
This law did not only support labor force education, but also its correlation with the
graduates’ on placement in the labor market. The legislation offered an education centered on
forming a career, on creating study programs, which combined academic education with the
vocational one. The vocational training provided paid internships.

 8.1. Goals of the Law

 
Goals 2000 Educate America Act includes eight main directions:
1. All children will start school ready to learn:
 All children will be able to follow preschool programs of high quality to prepare them
for school;
 Any parent in the United States of America will be the first teacher of his child and
will have access to the support given by the state to all parents in this respect;
 Children will benefit from appropriate diet, physical training and medical care to
enter school healthy. (46, p. 165).
2. The percentage of high school graduates will be at least 90%. This would be achieved by:
 Reducing school dropouts, and 75% of those who abandon school to be reintegrated
and persuaded to complete their high school;
 Eliminating the discrepancy between the percentage of graduates from minority
groups and that from majority (46, p. 166).
3. Students will demonstrate competence in the main subjects.
 Graduates of 3rd, 8th and 12th grades will prove high competence in English,
Mathematics, Science, foreign languages, Civic Education, History and Geography
(46, p. 186).
4. American students will be the first in the world in Mathematics and Science (46, p. 187)
5. The Labor force will follow continuous training programs to achieve the abilities and skills
required by the new economic order:
 Each of the major American companies will strengthen the link between education
and work ;
 All workers will be able to acquire knowledge and skills needed, from the basic ones
to the technical ones to adapt themselves to the new technologies, working methods,
labor market by attending public and private, vocational, technical educational
programs and workplace specializations ;
 College graduates should develop critical thinking, the ability to communicate
appropriately and to solve problems effectively ;
 Schools, which implement programs for parents’ involvement in school problems,
will provide training programs for them, and opportunities for lifelong learning, so as
to achieve strengthened links between school and family (46, p. 189).
6. Drugs and violence will be eliminated from schools:
 All schools will eliminate drugs, violence, alcohol and weapons, to provide an
appropriate learning environment (46, p. 156).
7. Teachers’ training will be improved
 Teachers will have access to continuous training and opportunities to acquire general
skills to prepare American students;
 State governments and local school agencies will create integrated strategies to
attract, recruit, prepare, retain and permanently support teachers, school
administrators and educators, in order to form a talented and professional teaching
staff;
 Partnerships between National Agencies, Higher Education Institutions, parents,
companies, professional associations will be established to provide professional
development programs for teachers (46, p. 169).
8. Parents will be involved in school problems:
 Every school will promote partnerships, which will increase parents’ involvement and
participation in promoting their children’s social, emotional and intellectual
 development (46, p. 168).

 8.2. Necessity of Implementing the Goals

 
The appearance of the Goals 2000 Educate America Act was considered a real necessity.
Goal 1 was urgently required, since 45% of children had birth risk factors associated with
deficiencies of development, only 37% were immunized by 2 years old against childhood
diseases, only 53% of preschool children were enjoyed by their teachers daily readings and only
half of them talked about their family history and ethnic traditions.
Having been known that only 88% of young people graduated their high schools, the
second goal came into being to persuade those who had abandoned school to continue their
studies. Goals 3 and 5 were required, since less than 1/5 of the graduates of 4th and 12th grades
and 1/4 of those of 8th grade understood complex mathematical theories and could solve
problems.
On the background of increasing violence in schools, Goal 7 became a priority as a
consequence of the fact that only 50% of high school students felt safe in educational
institutions, and 18% of them were attracted to consume drugs in school.
Taking into account the degree of most people’s level of education, Goal 6 was considered
a necessity, because many Americans benefited only by one type of education, which had
developed their basic skills. Only 52% of them possessed the appropriate skills in Reading and
Arithmetic. Most people forming the adult population were considered as having a mediocre
level of education, which was not enough to cope with the modern economy (4, p.2).
The Goals 2000 Educate America Act is an example of how the Federal Government uses
the funds to mandate state governments to undertake a certain type of educational actions. The
legislation provides states funds to create reform plans. If the States accept the funds they must
voluntarily create a reform plan, including content standards, performance standards and learning
opportunities. All these standards must be certified by the National Education Standards and
Improvement Council.
National Standards are often international standards, because they are designed so as to
raise the labor force educational level in the United States at the level of other industrialized
countries, so that the United States becomes more competitive in the international market. In
fact, international standards mean the educational standards of developed countries in Europe
and Japan. To meet these standards, the U.S. Government is open for establishing a global
curriculum similar to that of all industrialized countries. This curriculum is, in fact, the
curriculum required by the international corporations.
The reform of education was necessary to allow the U.S. to face competition with other
countries. ‘Without the goals and standards that GOALS 2000 provides we won’t be able to
rebuild our educational system and begin competing in the worldwide market’ (4, p. 3).

 8.3. National Standards in Education

 
Since 1989, various organizations have formulated national standards for what a student
should know in a particular subject such as Mathematics, History, Arts, etc... These are content
standards. It raises, however, the issue of how well a student should know these contents. They
are called performance standards.
Establishing national contents and performance standards would lead to the possibility of
establishing a national curriculum. One of the issues that arose was that many schools had the
disadvantage that they might not ensure students the necessary opportunities to reach those
standards. A number of schools in the United States did not have adequate textbooks, qualified
teachers, and the establishment of national standards without improving learning opportunities
would have prevented the students from reaching the level of competence set by standards.
Consequently, educators asked for the national standards to contain some provisions, which
could ensure the possibility that all students would learn contents at the level required by
performance standards.

8.3.1 Opportunity to Learn Standards

In addition to the concern for performance standards and more rigorous scores
accountability, other concerns were justified, especially that of blaming students if they did not
reach high standards, because they had not received adequate learning opportunities. Therefore,
Goals 2000 Educate America Act specifies standards for providing learning opportunities. The
reason for stating these standards is clearly stated in the law. It is necessary for schools to be
responsible for their students’ achievements, and that responsibility must be measurable (46, p.
270).
The National Council on Education Standards and Testing states that ‘if not
accompanied by measures to ensure equal opportunities to learn, national content and
performance standards could help widen the achievement gap between the advantaged and
disadvantaged in our society’ (46, p. 256). Equity in education becomes questionable because
equity does not mean using the same methods for all students. For example, students with
disabilities should be treated differently when discussing Opportunity to Learn Standards. It is
often thought that the standards are disadvantageous for students who come from poor families
and from minority groups, who are at an impasse when increasingly high expectations and
increasingly difficult contents are imposed on them. The same burden falls on students with
disabilities if students with disabilities are not included when performance standards are
implemented, there is a risk that they will be regarded as second rank citizens, a fact for which
teachers are not responsible. Therefore, it is considered by some educators, that students with
disabilities and disadvantaged students should be offered more learning opportunities, rather than
having reduced expectations concerning their results. Schools must provide them qualitative
education as a way to help them achieve high standards.
■ How do we define Opportunity to Learn Standards?
Opportunity to Learn Standards depend, to a large extent, on how the term is defined and
how the standards are measured. In The Goals 2000 Educate America Act, Opportunity to Learn
Standards ar defined as ‘the criteria for, and the basis of assessing the sufficiency or quality of
the resources, practices and conditions necessary at each level of the education system to
provide all students with the opportunity to learn the material in voluntary national content
standards or state content standards’ (46, p. 236). National Opportunity to Learn Standards refer
to the following aspects:
 Curricula;
 Resources and teaching technology;
 Teachers’ professionalism;
 Alignment of curricula, instructional practices and assessment to content standards;
 The safety and security of the learning environment;
 Non-discriminatory curricula, policies and educational practices;
  Other factors which help students receive equal opportunities that enable them to
meet the requirements set by performance standards.
Learning opportunities may be seen from other perspectives:
1. Opportunity to Learn Standards as an equivalent of school standards. Both
Opportunity to Learn Standards and school standards protect students from being
considered responsible for their inability to reach the level required by content and
performance standards, without being provided adequate learning opportunities. School
standards provide criteria for the capacity and performance of the school to offer students
a quality education. Both Opportunity to Learn Standards and standards imposed by
school not only determine the ability of the school to provide learning opportunities, but
also the responsibility for results. For the two to be equivalent, both must be related to the
school environment, organizational characteristics and quality of school life.
2. Opportunity to Learn Standards as part of the reform. Learning
opportunities are not limited to a few criteria that are applied to the quality of instruction
and curriculum. They also promote teachers’ professional development and the
correlation between policies related to curriculum development, instruction and
assessment.
3. Opportunity to Learn Standards viewed from the perspective of allocated
funds. In order to provide learning opportunities, schools allocate funds for resources,
training and learning programs. In general, these funds are used for teachers’ continuous
training, teaching aids and teaching technology and for implementing the curriculum. The
content and quality of instruction are the essence of Opportunity to Learn Standards.
Though funds alone are not a sufficient variable for improving schools, without adequate
funding, they cannot offer a qualitative teaching of the content provided by the standards
of content. Therefore, the most effective use of them is required.
4. Opportunity to Learn Standards as variables of time. Teachers and students
are in a position to manage the time needed to conduct various stages of teaching –
learning process. Achievements are dependent on the time spent to form competencies in
relation to the time needed to reach a certain level of competence.
■ How to measure Opportunity to Learn Standards
To know whether students are offered opportunities to learn, these opportunities should be
measured. Measuring how well each school meets these standards, the risk of transforming these
standards into checklists of minimum quantities of content or types of resources and practices
could appear. Opportunity to Learn Standards cannot be measured by a simple reference to a
checklist of resources or amount of contents. These standards define the necessary conditions for
teaching and learning contents at the highest level. Expectations applied to all high school
students could cause a failure for schools where there are a great number of disadvantaged
students, who do not have adequate learning opportunities. School reform requires all students to
learn contents and acquire skills to solve complex problems. Reducing contents for
disadvantaged students to a basic curriculum and giving them a compensatory education would
deny the existence of learning opportunities. Therefore, where there are such cases, the level of
expectations should not be decreased, but the level of opportunities to learn should be increased.
These can be measured taking into account several parameters:
 Time spent on learning
 Measuring the time spent by students in school. There is a
considerable time that students spend in school taking part in non-
 instructional activities, and therefore not all the time spent in school is
relevant. A greater accuracy would be obtained by measuring the time
spent in instructional activities. But from the time spent in instructive
activities, it is important to observe students during classes and to
measure the time in which they are actively involved in their classes.
This is important because even during instructional activities, students
may not be actively involved in learning activities or giving answers
and, therefore, the measurement of time spent on active studying or
giving answers is of utmost relevance.
 Money spent on training. Money spent on training represents:
 School budget;
 Expenditure per students;
 Teachers' salaries,
And the spent money, quality and quantity of resources necessary for
training and the students’ achievements may be correlated.
 The degree of teachers’ preparation
The degree of teachers’ preparation must be reflected by the students’ results.
Therefore, it is necessary to reduce the number of teachers who teach outside
their expertise areas and to ensure their continuous training.
 Covered curriculum
 This information may be obtained by interviewing teachers or from
daily logs and this will measure how well curriculum is covered.
Coverage of the content is indicated by the topics covered in each class
and the importance given to each theme. Methods of instruction, type
of activities and teaching resources will be also relevant.

 8.3.2. Grants Offered for Opportunities to Learn.

 
The Secretary of Education is authorized to provide grants on competitive bases to
consortia and to organizations that develop national Opportunity to Learn Standards and offer a
list of model programs to be used on a voluntary basis by states with the purpose of:
 Providing all students the opportunity to learn;
 Assessing school capability and performance ;
 Promoting measures that should be taken if schools fail to reach these
standards.
 Consortia structure.
Each consortium will include the participation of:
 State decisional factors (governors, members of legislature, members of
schools management from that State);
 Local decisional factors, (administrators, members of school board, principals,
school inspectors),
 Teachers, especially teachers involved in the development of content
standards ;
 Parents with experience in promoting the programs of involving parents in
education,
 Business representatives
  Experts in technical and vocational education;
 Representatives of regional accreditation associations
 Experts in school financing, in the disadvantaged students’ education and in
teachers and administrators training ;
 Experts in reform and school curriculum;
 Representatives of civic organizations;
 Representatives of higher education;
 High school students. 
 Consortia responsibilities:
 Consortia will develop research projects related to the results obtained by
students and the necessary conditions for an effective teaching - learning
process.
 Each consortium, which expects to receive a grant, will send to the Education
Secretary a proposal and some comments and recommendations from some
well-known scientists acknowledged throughout the United States (46, p.
256).
The Section of Goals 2000 Educate America Act, which induces the most radical changes
in the American public schools, is related to the establishment of the National Education
Standards and Improvement Council.  

8.4. National Education Standards and Improvement Council.

8.4.1. Aims
The main purpose of this council is the elaboration and revision of the National Content
Standards and the National Performance Standards, as well as stating what students should know
and be able to do. It also certifies:
 Content standards and the performance standards developed by each state and
the extent by which they are comparable in rigor, quality and exigency with
national standards;
 Opportunity to learn standards offered by each state, and whether they are
comparable to the national ones;
 Assessments proposed by each state or groups of states and the way in which these
assessments correspond to the content standards certified by the Council,
examination of their relevance in terms of technical and professional national
standards. (46, p. 271).
 8.4.2. Structure
 
The Council members are appointed from specialists in educational problems, elementary
and secondary school teachers, pre-school teachers, administrators of educational agencies from
each state, representatives of business, of higher education and work agencies, representatives of
civil rights organizations, of persons with disabilities, of parents, civic leaders, of responsible
with state educational policies, including experts in evaluation, curriculum, school funding and
school reform. Board members should be representative for all areas of the United States and
should reflect the diversity of American society, in terms of race, ethnic origin, gender or
disabilities. No less than one third of those appointed must be experts in the problems of children
from economically disadvantaged backgrounds.
  8.4.3. Duties
 
In addition to certifying national content standards and national performance standards, the
Council has the duty to identify the areas where these need to be developed and to ensure their
regular reevaluation. Also, the council should identify and develop criteria for standards
certification.
The criteria include:
 The extent to which the proposed standards are nationally competitive and
comparable with the best international standards
 The level at which the content and performance standards reflect the best the
available knowledge in a field;
 The maximum level of the maximum efficiency of teaching contents;
 The level at which content and performance standards involve all relevant
actors (teachers, services of labor recruitment, experts in education,
employers, higher education institutions, curriculum specialists, parents, civic
organizations, students and general public).
The Council will also need to certify the national Opportunity to Learn Standards, which
will establish the foundations that will ensure all students with equal opportunities for the
acquisition of required knowledge and skills. To certify them, a number of relevant criteria will
be taken into consideration:
 The level of accessibility of all students to a qualitative curriculum, to
teaching resources, aids and modern technologies, and the possibility to attend
some form of distance learning;
 The level of teachers’ preparation with the purpose to promote a high-
performance training to meet all students’ learning needs, extended to all
content areas;
 The level at which teachers, principals, school administrators have access to
continuous professional development, including the acquisition of the best and
most effective teaching and learning methods;
 The level at which the curriculum, instruction and assessment are aligned to
national continent standards ;
 The level at which the school ensures a safe and secure environment for
developing instructive-educational process and provides libraries, laboratories
and other necessary resources to ensure learning opportunities;
 The level at which schools can use policies, curriculum and instructional
practices so that they may not be considered discriminatory.

8.4.3. Assessment
 
 Regarding assessment, the Council will certify the assessments organized by each state in
order to:
 Inform students, parents, teachers and services of labor force recruitment on all
students’ progress in accordance with the national standards;
 Improve educational level by increasing learning quality among all students;
 Exemplify to the students, parents and teachers the types and levels of
competence that are expected from all students;
  Improve educational performance by measuring achievements and motivating
students, schools, districts and states;
 Assisting responsible factors in establishing educational policies and effective
decision-making (46, p. 281).
Certification will be achieved only if the State sends the Council:
 A description of the purposes for which assessments were designed by the state ;
 The methodologies and procedures used for elaboration, selection, validation of
tests, the methods of using them and their copies;
 A description of the other methods that the state uses to assess students’
performance;
 Evidence that the tests, which are a part of the state process of evaluation, are
valid, measure the designed objectives, align to content standards and are able to
assess all students’ progress in education and that they are elaborated according to
the national technical and professional standards. (46, p. 293).

8.5. Reactions against the Goals 2000 Educate America Act

 
Many reactions have been expressed against The Goals 2000 Educate America Act: Many
people believed that this would lead to the Federal Government domination on local education
management. But in section 318 of the Law it is stated that: ‘Nothing in this Act shall be
construed to authorize an officer or an employee of the Federal Government to mandate, direct,
or control a State, local educational agency, or school’s curriculum, program of instruction, or
allocation of State or local resources or mandate a State or any subdivision thereof to spend any
funds or incur any costs not paid for under this Act’ (4, p. 280). The main purpose of the Act,
according to the Bill Clinton administration, was to encourage schools to solve their educational
problems, to help students to use their full potential, to increase parents’ involvement in school
problems and to improve teachers’ education.
In addition, reservations in regards to the foundation of a national educational body, which
may have controlled the management and the instructive practices in the classroom, were
expressed. The administration reacted considering that, in reality, the National Education
Standards and Improvement Council was created to revise in each state a whole series of
provisions outlined in the Goals 2000 Educate America Act. These provisions will also be found
on the President George W. Bush educational agenda, Bill Clinton’s successor at the White
House, agenda called according to the most known education law voted during his
administration: No Child Left Behind.
9. George W. Bush Agenda

The Law No Child Left Behind, signed on January 8,

2002, at Hamilton HS Ohio, reinforces a whole series of
federal programs with the declared purpose to improve
performance of American schools and to raise standards
and levels of assessment of states, school districts and
schools. It also offers parents more flexibility in
choosing schools attended by their children and also
insists on developing reading skills, reauthorizes the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965) and,
together with the Goals 2000, represents the latest
legislation, which launches educational reform based on standards.
In the introductory speech, which presents the educational policy of his administration,
President George W. Bush points out that in America there are too many children with low
expectations, lack of confidence in their own resources and an increased rate of illiteracy. In a
world that is in permanent change, in which there is an increasing demand for labor force training
that should provide evidence of increasingly more complicated skills, very few children are
offered the chance to progress and ‘are therefore left behind: If our country fails in its
responsibility to educate every child, we're likely to fail in many other areas. But if we succeed in
educating our youth, many other successes will follow throughout our country and in the lives of
our citizens (…) these reforms express my deep belief in our public schools and their mission to
build the mind and character of every child, from every background, in every part of America’
(13, p. 2) Most of the President George W. Bush educational Agenda may be found in No Child
Left Behind
A construction project intended to repair and restore the
building of U.S. Department of Education in 2002
required the installation of structures at all entrances of the
building in order to protect employees and visitors from
falling debris. The Department of Education would give a
different purpose to these structures, using them as a way
to promote the law – No Child Left Behind.
The Law involved transforming the role of the
Federal Government in education, so that no child would
be neglected and instead, would remain under its
protection.
It is remarked that, while America prepares to enter the 21st century full of hopes and
promises, most of its students are neglected. 70% of fourth grade graduates are unable to read
properly on the national reading tests. Nearly one third of those who want to attend a college
must follow preparatory courses to be able to be admitted. Students in senior years of high
school are behind students from Cyprus and South Africa on international mathematics tests.
Although education is primarily each state’s responsibility, the federal government can’t tolerate
such results any longer. Since 1965, when the government took the first initiative in education
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, federal policy has strongly influenced schools in
America. For years, the Congress has created hundreds of programs for educational problems,
which have been offered through 39 different federal agencies and cost about 120 billion dollars
per year. President Bush stated that ‘after spending billions of dollars on education, we have
fallen short in meeting our goals for educational excellence. The academic achievement gap
between rich and poor, Anglo and minority is not only wide, but in some cases is growing wider
still’ (13, p. 3) In response to these disappointing results, the President considered that the
federal government should intervene more efficiently on the system of education. Among the
primordial initiatives are:
 Increasing student performance evaluation. States, districts and schools which
improve their results are awarded and failures sanctioned. Parents receive
information about how their children learn and schools are evaluated to prove their
effectiveness by annual national tests in Mathematics and Reading at the 3 rd through
8th grade level.
 Funds offered by the Federal Government will be used to create effective
programs based on both research and practice to improve schools and teachers’
quality.
 Reducing bureaucracy and increasing flexibility. The George W. Bush
administration provides more flexibility to states, districts and local communities
in accessing funds.
 Increasing parents’ role. Parents have much more information about the quality of
the schools in which their children learn and students from schools with low
performance are given the opportunity to choose a better school.
These priorities are part of a general trend to reform the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act and they are meant to correlate federal funds to specific performance targets to
ensure further improvement of the educational results. Funds are directed toward disadvantaged
schools and districts, giving them the possibility to achieve expected results. Funds may be lost if
performance standards are not reached. No child in America should be neglected; each of them
must be educated at his/her maximum potential.

9.1. Educational Policy

 
 The educational policy of the George W. Bush administration, regarding reform consists in
a few key components (many of them being implemented during the re-authorization of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act).

9.1.1. Eliminating Discrepancies between Scores

 
 Evaluation and high standards. States, school districts and schools must be
evaluated to see to what extent all students, including those who are
disadvantaged, cope with high standards. States should develop a system of
sanctions and awards for districts and schools to improve results.
 Annual tests. Annual tests in Reading and Mathematics provide parents the
necessary information to know their children’s performance and to be informed
how school educates them. These data are a vital diagnostic tool for schools to
improve their activity continuously. Offering adequate time for planning and
implementation, each state may select and design tests of their choice. In
addition, a sample of students from each state is tested annually by National
 Assessment of Educational Progress. From 3rd grade through 8th grade, the
students will be tested in Reading and Mathematics.
 Schools that fail to achieve adequate yearly progress for disadvantaged students
are helped in a first phase, and if they do not restore their situation, corrective
measures will be taken. If they cannot obtain an adequate yearly progress for
three consecutive years, disadvantaged students may move to a public or private
school with higher performance, or they will be provided additional educational
services by a provider of their choice. These providers must meet qualitative
standards imposed by the Federal Government.
 Improving reading by setting it as a first priority emphasizing the following
aspects:
 The importance of reading in primary grades. States that establish
comprehensive reading programs, based on scientific research,
applicable from kindergarten to the 2nd grade are eligible to obtain
funds from the Reading First program.
 Reading as a means of preschool instruction. States participating to the
Reading First program will also have the opportunity to access funds
through Early Reading First program, which develops preschool
reading methods.

9.1.2. Increasing Flexibility and Reducing Bureaucracy

 
 More schools can access programs from Title I and have the possibility of
combining federal funds with local ones to improve the quality of the entire
school, if bureaucracy is reduced, which will provide a greater flexibility in
granting funds.
 Funds allocated to improve school technology are increased, in particular those
needed for electronic equipment and technology, being distributed to schools
according to their necessity, through states and school districts.
 Programs which overlap are combined into a single integrated program that is
more easily accessible, reducing bureaucracy in this way.
 Options flexibility is ensured through a charter of options for states and districts
engaged in the process of evaluation and reform. Some requirements will be
optional for the member states of the charter, but instead they should ratify a five
year agreement with the Secretary of Education and will be subject to some very
rigorous evaluation standards.

 9.1.3. Rewarding Success and Sanctioning Failure

 
This is a way of encouraging competition. States may be awarded for:
 Diminishing the gap between scores. States with increased performance which
minimize discrepancies between the scores of students from different economic
backgrounds are awarded.
 Assessment. Each state is offered a bonus if it accomplishes the conditions of a
rigorous assessment for two consecutive years, including annual assessments for
3rd through 8th grades.
  Disadvantaged students’ progress. Schools which make real progress in
improving disadvantaged students’ score will be rewarded with the ‘No Child
Left Behind’ prize.
Secretary of Education is authorized to reduce federal funds for administrative expenses of
those schools, which do not reach their performance objectives and do not demonstrate some
learning results in accordance with actual standards. 
9.1.4. Promoting Parents’ Informed Choice.
 
 Parents may choose which school their children will attend, having access to
school reports which record the scores of students belonging to all
categories.
 Innovative programs which facilitate parents’ informed choice and promote
research on this topic will receive funds from the Secretary of Education, to
extend choice possibilities and research on the effects of informed choice.
9.1.5. Improving Teachers’ Quality.
 
 The act of teaching should be done by teachers of high quality. States and
school districts benefit from flexibility in using federal funds, so they can
improve teachers’ quality. It is expected that states provide teaching done by
qualified and efficient teachers.
 Providing funds for improving the actual practice in classroom. High
standards for teachers’ professional development are established in order to
ensure that federal funds will promote more effective practices in
classrooms and quality research in this area.
 Improving the study of Mathematics and Science. The study of Mathematics
and Science is improved through the development of partnerships between
state and higher education institutions to educate more effectively and to
enrich curricula.
9.1.6. More Safety in Schools in the 21st Century
 
 Teachers’ protection. Teachers have the authority to remove from classroom
students who are violent and turbulent.
 Promoting safety in schools. Increased funds are allocated to schools to
promote safety and to prevent drug use during and after classes. States are
allowed to provide funds to religious organizations and to any organizations
which initiate action on these issues after classes.
 Saving students from unsafe schools. Victims of violence, which
took place in schools and students, who learn in schools in which
they expose themselves to different dangers are offered the
possibility to choose other schools in which to be safe. States must
announce publicly, and especially the parents if a school is unsafe.
 Supporting education for character formation. Additional funds are
granted to support classes for character training, modeling behavior
and to ensure teachers the methods needed to teach such classes.
9.2. 'No Child Left Behind'
 
All these policies will be found in the following seven titles representing the priorities of No
Child Left Behind:

I. Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged

II. Preparing, Training, and Recruiting High Quality Teachers
III. Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students
IV. 21st Century Schools;
V. Promoting Informed Parental Choice and Innovative Programs
VI. Flexibility and Accountability;
VII. Impact Aid Program

 9.2.1. TITLE I - Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged

9.2.1.1. Eliminating the Gap between Scores Obtained by Disadvantaged Students.
 
 General view
The Federal Government can and must help to eliminate the gap between the results of
disadvantaged students and those of their colleagues. For achieving this objective, federal
subsidies from Title I must be spent efficiently and with great responsibility. States, districts and
schools will receive funds from Title I to ensure that all categories of students reach required
performance standards. Schools must have clear, measurable objectives, focused on basic skills
and essential knowledge. Annual state testing in Reading and Mathematics in grades 3 to 8 will
ensure that objectives are accomplished by every student, every year. Annual testing provides
teachers, parents, the decision makers with the information they need to ensure that students will
have success.
 Schools which fail to progress get special assistance. Students should not attend a school
that continues to be below established standards. They are free to attend appropriate schools.
Under this plan, students will not be asked to sacrifice education and their future for the sake of
preserving the status quo. To eliminate the existing gap between disadvantaged students and
their colleagues, more support and flexibility in implementing standards is offered in exchange
for a more rigorous assessment.
 There are established standards. Most states have established standards for
what students should learn in Mathematics and Reading. It is also necessary
that states establish standards that promote attractive content in History and
Science.
 Establishing annual tests in grades 3rd through 8th grades. Annual tests in
Reading and Mathematics provide parents with the necessary information
for knowing their children’s progress and school’s concern for their
education. Planned in advance and implemented properly, tests may be
selected and developed in each state. The only requirement would be that
the results will be comparable from one year to another. States will have
three years for producing and applying the tests. Federal funds will cover the
necessary costs of such tests. ‘The progress of all students will be measured
annually in reading and math in grades 3 through 8 and at least once
 during high school. By the end of the 2007-2008 school year, testing will
also be conducted in science once in grades 3-5, 6-9 and 10-11/’ (75, p. 35).
 Progress reports on each category of students. States are required to report
the test results to the public. ‘In order to hold schools accountable for
improving the performance of all students, these results must also be
reported to the public disaggregated by race, gender, English language
proficiency, disability, and socio-economic status’(75, p. 42).
 Annual progress of disadvantaged students and of the overall student
population is expected. ‘Districts must determine whether each Title I
school is making adequate yearly progress based on whether its students
are meeting state content and performance standards[…] adequate yearly
progress must apply specifically to disadvantaged students, as well as to the
overall student population’ (75, p. 60). Schools and districts must become
responsible for improving the performance of disadvantaged students and
for communicating to teachers and parents if the gap between results was
reduced.
The Law No Child Left Behind requires states to create a system, which monitors the
results, the graduation rate, yearly progress and other performance indicators. Schools must
register an adequate annual progress and increase students’ achievements on categories: African-
Americans, Native Americans, Hispanics, those from low income families, those with disabilities
so that they reach the level of performance set by each state. All students will have reached that
level of performance by the end of the school year 2013-2014. Each state will establish levels of
performance for its students. If one category of students fails to reach the required performance,
the entire school will be regarded as having unsatisfactory results.
 
 Implementing methods
Offering States the necessary assistance to overcome low performance.
Federal funds will be given to states and districts to support their efforts to provide
adequate facilities and necessary assistance to schools identified as having needed improvement.
States, which receive these funds, must carry out scientific research. The collocation of the term
‘scientific research’ is found 111 times in the text of the Law `No Child Left Behind`. Schools are
required to use scientific research strategies, both to improve both class efficiency and the
professional development of teaching staff. It is necessary that education research relies on
quantitative studies, uses control groups, as opposed to qualitative partial research or
ethnographic studies and is implemented through methodologies, which may lead to different
strategies for effective teaching and assure teachers’ continuous professional development.
 Increased flexibility for obtaining schools grants so that more schools may
receive federal funds to improve the quality of their activity. The flexibility
of obtaining grants will be increased after lowering the poverty level from
50% to 40%.
 Corrective actions against poorly performing schools and districts. When
schools do not achieve a corresponding annual progress during a school year
and are identified by the district or state as needing assistance, immediately
after identification, they will receive the necessary support to improve their
performance.
 If assisted schools do not achieve appropriate annual progress for 2 years,
 states and school districts will need to take corrective action and offer
students the opportunity to choose another school (75, p. 99).
 Students from schools, which fail to progress adequately, may use funds
from Title I to transfer themselves to more efficient public or private schools
or will receive additional educational services from a provider of their
choice. All providers, which are not part of the public system, should be
subjected to evaluation standards, while receiving federal grants (75, p.
105).
 Students may continue attending a school of their choice during that time in
which they would have attended the school that has not achieved the
required progress. The possibility of choosing another school will take two
more years after a school has been considered as having need of assistance.
(75, p. 108).
 The consequences of failure.
States, which have not recorded appropriate progress regarding disadvantaged students,
will lose a part of administrative funds. The sanctions will be applied to states which have failed
to reduce the discrepancy between the results of disadvantaged students and their peers and will
not make adequate progress in Mathematics and Reading in grades 3-8. Progress will be
confirmed by the results of each annual state testing conducted on student samples from grades 3
through 8, according to the national evaluation of progress in education. Assisted schools are
required to offer parents the opportunity to choose another school in the same district and
develop recovery plans which will be approved by districts.
If the school fails to reach its objectives the following year educational, supplementary
services such as tutorials, consultations, after school programs will be available to all students
who come from disadvantaged backgrounds, regardless of their performance.
If a school continues to need assistance the following year, it will require drastic corrective
measures: a new curriculum, consultation of experts outside the school, extending the program or
the school year, restructuring the internal organization.
In the case of schools, which do not fulfill the requirements for granting federal subsidies,
they will lose funding and the school board will be fired and replaced.
 States and schools that make significant progress to reduce discrepancies between the
results of disadvantaged students and their colleagues will be given prizes from No Child Left
Behind award and from the Achievement in Education fund.
 
9.2.1.2. Improving Literacy by Putting Reading First.
 
 General view
 
Administration will ensure that every child will be able to read properly by third grade. In
order to achieve this objective a new program, Reading First, is launched.
The Reading First program offers states both the funds and the necessary tools to eliminate
deficiencies in reading.
Results of scientific research in this area, during the time, are available to all schools in the
United States to be applied in classrooms. National Reading Panel issued a report in April 2000
after reviewing 100,000 studies on how students learn to read. The Panel concluded that effective
training, in terms of reading, consisted in teaching children separation of sounds, representation
of sounds by letters, and then combining them to form words, ‘having them practice what they
have learned by reading aloud with guidance and feedback (guided oral reading), and applying
reading comprehension strategies to guide and improve reading comprehension’ (75, p. 2)
The Reading First program promotes training programs in reading, scientifically based and
applied to primary schools. Being concerned that more and more children receive effective
reading instruction, the Federal Government wants to ensure that they will be helped to read
correctly in their first cycle of training. Thus, much of the assistance, which would be given later
by the government to students who will need further training, will be reduced, because they have
learned to read in the first school years.
 
 Implementing methods
 
For these goals, complex programs will be created at the level of each state to ensure that
every child will have been able to read properly by grade 3.
States and local districts will have access to funds from the Reading First program for
implementing comprehensive reading methods, scientifically based, applicable from
kindergarten to 2nd grade. The Reading Excellence Act enhanced by the Reading First
program and by The Even Start family literacy program will become a part of these larger
initiatives, while continuing to fund family literacy programs throughout the nation (75, p. 112)
States participating in the Reading First program will be able to access funds from the
Early Reading First program which will implement reading classes in preschool education. The
purpose of these programs is to illustrate on a larger scale the results of recent research,
according to which children should acquire reading and math skills since preschool, to achieve
much better results once entering school.  

9.2.2. Title II Preparing, Training, and Recruiting High Quality Teachers  

9.2.2.1. Grants for Improving Teacher Quality  
 
 General view
 
Since teachers’ preparation is reflected in students’ results, the law No Child Left Behind
demanded that by the end of the 2005-2006 school year, ‘all teachers will be highly qualified’.
As defined in the law, a highly qualified teacher ‘is one who has fulfilled the state’s certification
and licensing requirements’ (75, p. 201). To work in an educational system teachers should meet
the following conditions:
 To possess at least a bachelor’s degree;
 To pass a state test to demonstrate their competence in their field;
 To possess necessary skills for teaching English, Reading, Writing, Arts,
Mathematics and other basic fields of the elementary school curriculum, to be
allowed to teach in this kind of schools ;
 To pass a test for each subject they teach and to obtain a master’s degree in their field
or its equivalent, to be allowed to teach in high schools (75, p. 206).
Teacher preparation and recruitment are based on the principle according to which the level
of teacher preparation is important for improving student’s results. The U.S. General Accounting
Office confirms the existence of 28 programs in the Department of Education, which allocate
significant funds for training teachers. There are a total of 81 programs, which help improve their
preparation. Federal Funds from The Class Size Reduction program and The Eisenhower
Professional Development program will be combined to provide grants for professional
development on the basis of achieved performance. These funds should help improve
educational achievements by training high quality teachers, based on scientific research in the
field.
 
 Implementing methods
 

 Funds allocated for professional development

 

To help States in their efforts to prepare and recruit high-quality teachers, the Eisenhower
Professional Development program and the Class Size Reduction program will be consolidated
into more flexible teacher quality grants for states and local districts.
States and local districts will have the right to use these funds to improve teachers,
principals, and administrators’ authority in public schools. Further on, they will have to ensure
that federal funds will promote scientific research and actual classroom practice (75, p. 215)
 Promoting reforms and initiatives focused on teacher
In addition to funds used for professional development, states and school districts will be
free to use federal funds to promote innovative programs such as reforming teacher certification
or licensure requirements, and a performance system based on teachers merits, differential and
bonus pay for teachers who teach subjects of great need: Reading, Mathematics and Science, and
for teachers who teach in schools from poor districts and for mentoring programs.
o Improving teacher’s quality
o ‘States will be accountable for ensuring that all children are taught by effective
teachers’ (75, p. 222).
o Awards for excellence in teaching
A percentage of funds from this program is available to the Secretary of Education for
awarding states which develop teacher assessment systems to measure teachers’ performance as
a premise for improving students results (75, p. 231).
 Teachers’ protection
Teachers, principals and academic board members will be protected and supported in their
efforts to maintain school discipline. (75, p. 236).
 Tax deductions for teachers
Teachers will benefit from tax deductions up to 400 dollars for expenses spent for
purchasing books, supplies, programs for professional development and for training (75, p. 241).
 Information offered to parents about teachers’ quality.
Parents have the right to know if their children’s teachers are effective and whether they
have proper qualifications. Districts are required to make public this information about teacher’s
quality that should be communicated to parents as well. (75, p. 246).