task #1
1. What do states get from the federal government under this act?
The states that meet the requirements receive funding in the form of grants. The funding is intended to help the states meet the requirements, however the federal government only has so much money to be investing in this, so it is highly competitive between states. The funding is not sufficient to meet all the state's needs, not to mention their own individual lack of finances. All together the educational system is lacking money and this act isn't going to help significantly.
2. What are some of the things states have to do in order to get the federal money?
-administer state testing every year to measure the student's learning and the teacher's ability
-meet the needs of the minority, migrant, and low income students
-all schools must send out "report cards" to inform parents of their student's progress
-Requires the states to use "scientifically based research" to help children's understanding of the material
-lessen the gap between high and low performing students
-addressing more concern to those who are disabled and/or whose English is not proficient
3. On what does the National Education Association base its criticism of the No Child Left Behind Act? They state that they stand behind the motives for this act, but the way the NCLB act is written, it wouldn't work efficiently. The NEA clearly outlined where Congress needed to pay more attention and what would make their act better. They addressed Congress, "...provide more flexibility, empower educators, and focus on ESEA’s original promise of equity and fairness for students." Specific concerns they have are the weight given to "high stake tests", private school vouchers, and "collective bargaining protections" which ensures the best working conditions for teachers.
4. Is the No Child Left Behind Act an unfunded mandate? Explain
It is funded by the federal government because they are giving grants to those who meet regulations; regardless of the fact that the money provided is hardly sufficient enough to accomplish their goals.
The states that meet the requirements receive funding in the form of grants. The funding is intended to help the states meet the requirements, however the federal government only has so much money to be investing in this, so it is highly competitive between states. The funding is not sufficient to meet all the state's needs, not to mention their own individual lack of finances. All together the educational system is lacking money and this act isn't going to help significantly.
2. What are some of the things states have to do in order to get the federal money?
-administer state testing every year to measure the student's learning and the teacher's ability
-meet the needs of the minority, migrant, and low income students
-all schools must send out "report cards" to inform parents of their student's progress
-Requires the states to use "scientifically based research" to help children's understanding of the material
-lessen the gap between high and low performing students
-addressing more concern to those who are disabled and/or whose English is not proficient
3. On what does the National Education Association base its criticism of the No Child Left Behind Act? They state that they stand behind the motives for this act, but the way the NCLB act is written, it wouldn't work efficiently. The NEA clearly outlined where Congress needed to pay more attention and what would make their act better. They addressed Congress, "...provide more flexibility, empower educators, and focus on ESEA’s original promise of equity and fairness for students." Specific concerns they have are the weight given to "high stake tests", private school vouchers, and "collective bargaining protections" which ensures the best working conditions for teachers.
4. Is the No Child Left Behind Act an unfunded mandate? Explain
It is funded by the federal government because they are giving grants to those who meet regulations; regardless of the fact that the money provided is hardly sufficient enough to accomplish their goals.
task #2
1. Where does the power and authority rest in this situation? Justify that constitutionally.
Technically the power rests with the states because it is not required that they adopt this act, they choose whether to participate or not. However, that decision is heavily swayed by money from the federal government. In this way, the federal government finds a way to still control education in the states, because of the states do not follow the regulations of Race to the Top, they will not receive the funding. So technically speaking, this is constitutional, only because the federal government has found a loophole and it appears as though the states have the power, when really they're being controlled.
2. According to the Constitution, which level of government do you think should have the power and authority in this situation? Explain.
I definitely think that the states should hold the power in this situation. It's clear that that's how it should be, otherwise the federal government wouldn't be looking for loopholes in order to gain control. If the Constitution stated that they should have control, then they would. However, it clearly says that education is up to the states.
3. Who should decide what matters ought to be governed mainly or solely by national laws? Explain.
I think that the Supreme Court should decide what matters should be goverend mainly or solely since they have the power of judicial review. It's up to them to interpret these things.
4. Equality and participation are the two competing values at stake in federalism. It is virtually impossible to have more of one of these values without having less of the other. How are these values demonstrated in this issue?
Where the states are supposed to have power over education in their borders, the federal government is definitely participating and influencing the states decisions. However, this does increase the particiaption of the states. One of the main focuses behind this act is equality; that every student has an equal opportunity for an equally enriching education. Also, by bribing the states, the federal government is maintaining more equality between states.
Technically the power rests with the states because it is not required that they adopt this act, they choose whether to participate or not. However, that decision is heavily swayed by money from the federal government. In this way, the federal government finds a way to still control education in the states, because of the states do not follow the regulations of Race to the Top, they will not receive the funding. So technically speaking, this is constitutional, only because the federal government has found a loophole and it appears as though the states have the power, when really they're being controlled.
2. According to the Constitution, which level of government do you think should have the power and authority in this situation? Explain.
I definitely think that the states should hold the power in this situation. It's clear that that's how it should be, otherwise the federal government wouldn't be looking for loopholes in order to gain control. If the Constitution stated that they should have control, then they would. However, it clearly says that education is up to the states.
3. Who should decide what matters ought to be governed mainly or solely by national laws? Explain.
I think that the Supreme Court should decide what matters should be goverend mainly or solely since they have the power of judicial review. It's up to them to interpret these things.
4. Equality and participation are the two competing values at stake in federalism. It is virtually impossible to have more of one of these values without having less of the other. How are these values demonstrated in this issue?
Where the states are supposed to have power over education in their borders, the federal government is definitely participating and influencing the states decisions. However, this does increase the particiaption of the states. One of the main focuses behind this act is equality; that every student has an equal opportunity for an equally enriching education. Also, by bribing the states, the federal government is maintaining more equality between states.