Education is the most important thing we can offer to our children and the generations to come, yet it is one of the topics that we struggle with the most. With the choices between local, state and federal authorities, who should have control over education? It is my belief that the control should lie with the federal authorities because they are able to maintain a complete situational picture over all the states. Many of our founding fathers of the United States feared that leaving education in the hands of private families, churches, local communities or philanthropic societies would not guarantee the survival of a democracy. (Pulliam & Van Patten, 2007, p. 122). In this paper I am going to defend my opinion of why the federal authorities should have control of education. How programs they have developed have flourished, and even how some of their programs could be run better. I currently serve as an instructor for the Navy teaching junior Sailors how to do their job better thus protecting the ship for harm, however; I am not the only one who teaches these classes, so to ensure that all Sailors are taught the same information all of our learning sites fall under one controlling entity.
The education of our youth should be run the same, and if education was to be allowed to be completely run by local or even state entities, then the education opportunities may not be the same throughout the cities and even states. One of the best programs I have seen is the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2002. NCBL is a United States Act of Congress that was originally proposed by the administration of President George W. Bush immediately after taking office. The House of Representatives passed the bill on May 23, 2001, and United States Senate passed it on June 14, 2001. President Bush signed it into law on January 8, 2002. NCLB is the latest federal legislation that enacts the theories of standards-based education reform, which is based on the belief that setting high standards and establishing measurable goals can improve individual outcomes in education. The Act requires states to develop assessments in basic skills to be given to all students in certain grades, if those states are to receive federal funding for schools.
The Act does not assert a national achievement standard; standards are set by each individual state.(“No Child Left Behind Act of 2001“, 2006) Not only does the NCLB Act standardize learning for the students it also is used for standardization of teacher qualifications. For decades, local policymakers and school officials turned a blind eye to a set of vexing problems in public education. In practice, there was a situational definition of teacher quality. No one thought anything about, as one principal said, scheduling “a physical education teacher to fill in for one class of history.” It was a common practice for middle school principals to employ elementary certified teachers because it provided the principals maximum flexibility in assigning teachers to classes, whether or not the teachers were qualified to teach those classes. (Hayes , 2003)
As stated earlier, I believe that all children should not only have the same opportunity to get an education, but should also be entitled to the same education as every other child. If control of our educational system was given to the local or even state authorities this would probably not be the case as each state would want to do it “their way”. The No Child Left Behind Act ensures that all children no matter race, religion, or financial status is given the same opportunities for education, and educated children are our future.
Hayes , M. (2003). NCLB: Conspiracy, Compliance, or Creativity?. Retrieved from http://www.middleweb.com/HMnclb.html No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. (2006). Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2006/02/02062006.html Pulliam, J. D., & Van Patten, J. J. (2007). History of Education in American (9th Edition). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Columbus, Ohio.