From A Nation at Risk to No Child Left Behind: National Education Goals and the Creation of Federal Education Policy

Citation

Aguilar, J.A. (2010), "From A Nation at Risk to No Child Left Behind: National Education Goals and the Creation of Federal Education Policy", Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 118-120. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231011015458

Federal participation in comprehensive school reform in the US began nearly 45 years ago with the first Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 1965. The act established the Title I program. In 1983, The National Commission on Excellence in Education influentially, and controversially, reported that the United States was at risk due to its inadequate education system. They noted (p. 1):

… that while we can take justifiable pride in what our schools and colleges have historically accomplished and contributed to the United States and the well‐being of its people, the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people. … If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.

Since then, many millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of work‐hours have been expended, and yet little meaningful progress has been made. How can the limited success of so much thoughtful and well‐intended effort be explained? In an authoritative and essential history, Maris A. Vinovskis accomplishes just that in his book From A Nation at Risk to No Child Left Behind: National Education Goals and the Creation of Federal Education Policy. In the process, Vinovskis expertly informs and explains the uniquely American tension between local, state, and federal control of education. Further, while this history can indeed be disheartening, Vinovskis infuses clarity into the inevitably disappointing (and disappointingly inevitable) cycle of federal involvement in US public schools.

Otto von Bismarck is famously supposed to have averred that laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made. This is perhaps true – the chronology of education legislation that Vinovskis traces here, from roughly 1983 to 2008, is certainly unlovely, but his erudition on the subject is appreciated and tremendously enlightening. As a long‐time insider at the federal level in education circles, Vinovskis was able to draw from many sources, including the published and unpublished works of individuals and agencies, as well as research from (p. 5) “all eight of the presidential libraries from John F. Kennedy to Bill Clinton”. Additionally, Vinovskis conducted informal in‐depth interviews with members of the four most recent presidential administrations. He also cites generous cooperation from key policymakers and their staffs. Together, the body of sources may constitute an unprecedented repository of artifacts related to the recent history of national education policy in the USA.

The focus of this history is on retracing the establishment and development of, first, national educational goals, and then the various attempts at national and state standards for education, along with their attendant programs. In light of the present powerful influence of content standards and standardized testing on teaching and schools, it is striking to note how recent these efforts really are. The nation's governors made the first steps toward national education goals in the late 1980s, in part as a response to A Nation At Risk, and influenced by the Charlottesville Education Summit of 1989.

The chapters begin treating federal education policy in detail with the George H.W. Bush's administration and his stated desire to be (p. 22) “the education president”. Vinovskis explains that how the administration crafted six national education goals that were intended to be met by the year 2000 and how these were presented at the 1990 State of the Union Address. It is jarring to see them now and recognize how far we have to go in order to meet them. Or, are they unattainable? Were they ill‐considered in their inception?

The analysis of the Clinton years focuses on ways in which the president's political fortunes shaped education policy. While Clinton had played a prominent role as a governor in the creation of national education policy, his presidential vision for education (as in other policy areas) was constrained by the midterm Republican sweep of Congress during his first term, and the subsequent legal and political challenges of his second term. Vinovskis gives Clinton credit for modest but innovative accomplishments by the end of his presidency.

Vinovskis is refreshingly unbiased in his report while simultaneously raising such critical questions. More importantly, his nuanced accounting sheds light on the impact of the ongoing bipartisan struggles upon education policy. He forefronts the real questions that are often hidden behind political posturing, such as, what level of control should the federal government have over children's curricula, teachers' working conditions, accountability systems and the like? And, threaded throughout these discussions, what has formed the bases for the most persuasive arguments – scientifically based research in program design, congressional horse‐trading, political ideology, or a mixture of those?

The center piece of the education policy George W. Bush presidency was No Child Left Behind (NCLB), and Vinovskis dedicates significant space to tracing its development and implementation. Indeed, the book closes with a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the bill, posing the question (p. 231) Can No Child Left Behind really succeed? Vinovskis suggests that (p. 233):

Perhaps it is time for both political parties and their presidential candidates to adopt more realistic education objectives rather than promising results that cannot be achieved within the next decade or two.

And while one can detect a perhaps wistful sadness in the closing sections, Vinovskis remains both optimistic about the future and committed to the project of public education.

The primary audience for the book appears to be as diverse as the political landscape of public education. Policy makers and education leaders at all levels can reference chapters that increase their understanding of the nature of many controversial education issues with specific reference to No Child Left Behind and A Nation at Risk. If educators and policy makers are intent on better understanding the complexity of these two policies this book presents a useful lens to view the interaction of both. The book would also be a valuable ancillary text for courses on educational policy and politics – especially for researchers who operate within the political arena of public education and scholars who study political issues in education.