Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2017
The year 2015 is as far away in chronological time from 1965 as 1965 was from World War I. In other words, Lyndon Baines Johnson and ESEA are as remote and distant to our students as Archduke Ferdinand was to us in our school days. What seems to some of us like yesterday, or the start of a recent era, is in fact now a distant and remote time, seemingly unconnected from our present educational predicaments—at least in the eyes of our students. Or, to put it another way, ESEA is now fit for historical study.
1 Orren, Karen and Skowronek, Stephen, The Search for American Political Development (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 Weick, Karl E., “Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems,” Administrative Science Quarterly 21, no. 1 (March 1976): 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 I define public education simply as the provision of schooling to children at public expense.Google Scholar
4 Huetteman, Emmarie and Rich, Motoko, “House Votes to Restore Local Autonomy in Revising No Child Left Behind,” New York Times, 3 December 2015, A25; and Davis, Julie Hirschfeld, “Revamping of No Child School Act Is Signed,” New York Times, 11 December 2015, A22.Google Scholar
5 Reed, Douglas S., Building the Federal Schoolhouse: Localism and the American Education State (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 King, Desmond and Stears, Marc, “How the U.S. State Works: A Theory of Standardization,” Perspectives on Politics 9, no. 3 (September 2011): 505–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7 Rosenberg, Gerald, The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991).Google Scholar
8 Rothman, Robert, Something in Common: The Common Core Standards and the Next Chapter in American Education (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press, 2011).Google Scholar
9 Gamson, David A., McDermott, Kathryn A., and Reed, Douglas S., “The Elementary and Secondary Education Act at Fifty: Aspirations, Effects, and Limitations,” Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences 1, no. 3 (December 2015): 21.Google Scholar