Search

Looking at the evolution of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) over the last 50 years, this paper argues that many of the racial, social, and economic inequities of 1965 that President Johnson was hoping to address have only been accelerated. It's not only time for a modern rethink on educational equity, but also a much broader set of metrics for policymakers to consider for determining the progress of students, families, educators and school systems. Some of these indicators include equitable resources, multiple measures of inputs and outputs, professional competence, meaningful measures of success, responsive parental engagement and a system of shared responsibility inside and outside of schools to foster student learning.

Over the last several years, government and philanthropic studies have been drawing attention to declining postsecondary attainment in the United States. With soaring college costs, many high school graduates are carefully weighing whether to attend college at all. High school students today face a pivotal decision: if they decide to enroll in college, they are likely to do so without the guarantee of a job after graduation at a time when student loan debt has already surpassed a trillion dollars. The prospect that future jobs will rely less on traditional bachelor's degrees has muddled the "college-for-all" message and the notion that educational attainment leads to successful careers. The opportunity for students to take advantage of CTE is not accessible in its current state. First, after decades of poor course offerings and an image of vocational education as the second-rate program for students tracked out of a four-year college, reframing and rebranding is needed. Second, a clear gap has emerged between the academic skills students lack and the skills most CTE instructors have been trained to provide. Third, CTE must have stronger partnerships between the private and public sectors so that students who graduate from four-year colleges or CTE pathways can earn similar salaries regardless of the institution they attended. Finally, to attract students and meet labor market demands, we must reinvest in CTE to provide up-to-date course offerings, curricula, and campuses.

The only thing that more testing will tell us is what we already know: The schools that disadvantaged children attend are not being given the supports necessary to produce achievement gains. Students cannot be tested out of poverty, and while NCLB did take us a step forward by requiring schools to produce evidence that students were learning, it took us several steps backward when that evidence was reduced to how well a student performed on a standardized test. Why not give parents the right to opt out of tests when they realize states have not done the work of guaranteeing their children are being adequately prepared?