Relationship between Policy Making Process and Societal Changes : A Case Study of NCLB Act in the United States
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper is to examine how social changes can construct social policies. A nation’s educational policy is affected by social transitions, such as paradigms, ideologies, and political regime shifts. In this way, how can policy become organized and formed? Specifically, what kind of social changes affect educational policies? It is a good example in which to find causes of policy reform as a result of social changes, and its changes originate from equality, efficiency, and liberty as fundamental features of policy. The primary purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between social changes and change of educational policy in American society. It focuses on three main points: change from perspectives of equality, efficiency, and liberty; influences of social change on changing education policy, and influences of political regime changes on education policy—as a case study of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Looking into the results of this research, it hopes to address new lessons for enforcing public education in the United State. Most readings emphasize the importance of finances and their appropriate distribution for education. The success or failure of a universal access approach can be explained as an effort to promote the public good by the government. Modern society should be shaped as a market-oriented society, and it adopts “winner takes all” capitalism. Public education can also get involved in the logic of the market. Public education is a democratic asset that shares the value of society and the role of members. Also, it is an area of responsibility of the government and a public good that forms the foundation of society. Because of this, it is time for educational policy to seek an alternative to protect the essence of public education against the Neo-liberalism. As an exploratory research, it suggests an examination on educational policy and its case in the United State. However, we also have the limit of curriculum evaluation and actual effect analysis.
Abstract
This paper is to examine how social changes can construct social policies. A nation’s educational policy is affected by social transitions, such as paradigms, ideologies, and political regime shifts. In this way, how can policy become organized and formed? Specifically, what kind of social changes affect educational policies? It is a good example in which to find causes of policy reform as a result of social changes, and its changes originate from equality, efficiency, and liberty as fundamental features of policy. The primary purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between social changes and change of educational policy in American society. It focuses on three main points: change from perspectives of equality, efficiency, and liberty; influences of social change on changing education policy, and influences of political regime changes on education policy—as a case study of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Looking into the results of this research, it hopes to address new lessons for enforcing public education in the United State. Most readings emphasize the importance of finances and their appropriate distribution for education. The success or failure of a universal access approach can be explained as an effort to promote the public good by the government. Modern society should be shaped as a market-oriented society, and it adopts “winner takes all” capitalism. Public education can also get involved in the logic of the market. Public education is a democratic asset that shares the value of society and the role of members. Also, it is an area of responsibility of the government and a public good that forms the foundation of society. Because of this, it is time for educational policy to seek an alternative to protect the essence of public education against the Neo-liberalism. As an exploratory research, it suggests an examination on educational policy and its case in the United State. However, we also have the limit of curriculum evaluation and actual effect analysis.
참고문헌 (28)
- Archbald, D., "School Choice, Magnet Schools, and the Liberation Model: An Empirical Study", Sociology of Education, 77, pp.283~310 (2004)
- Belfield, C, "The Effects of Competition between Schools on Educational Outcomes: A review for the United States", Review of Educational Research, 72(2), pp.279~341 (2002)
- Bierlein. A., "The American Educational System; How Has it Come to Be? Controversial Issues in Educational Policy", pp.1~15 (1993), Sage
- Bierlein. A., "Who is in Charge and How Equal Are We? Controversial Issues in Educational Policy", pp.16~35 (1993), Sage
- Blau, P, "The American Occupational Structure" (1967), Wiley
- Cohen, D, "Designing Coherent Education Policy: Improving the System", pp.33~95 (1993), Jossey-Bass
- Cohen. D., "Policy and Practice: The Dilemma", American Journal of Education, 113, pp.515~543 (2007)
- DeBray, E., "The Federal Role in School Accountability: Assessing Recent History and the New Law", Voices in Urban Education, 1, pp.56~64 (2003)
- Hickok, E., "Changing the Terms of Our National Discussion about Education", Basic Education, 47(2), pp.12~25 (2003)
- Ingram, H., "Constructing citizenship: The subtle messages of policy design", Public policy for democracy, pp.68~94 (1993)
- Fusarelli, L., "The Potential Impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on Equity and Diversity in American Education", Educational Policy, 18(1), pp.71~94 (2004)
- Fusarelli, L., "The Political Construction of Accountability: When Rhetoric Meets Reality", Education and Urban Society, 33(2), pp.157~169 (2001)
- Holiday, I., "Productivist Welfare Capitalism: Social Policy in East Asia", Political Studies, 48, pp.706~723 (2000)
- Lauren, D., "Opportunity for All? The Hidden Causes and Consequences of School Choice in Chicago", Doctor, pp.2006
- Lauren, D., "False Promises. In Sadvonic, A. Sociology of Education: A Critical Reader" (2007), Routledge
- Lindhorst, T., "The Social and Economic Impact of Sanctions and Time Limits on Recipients of Temporary Assistance to Needy Families", Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 33(1), pp.93~114 (2003)
- Mathis, W., "No Child Left Behind: Costs and Benefits", Phi Delta Kappan, 84(9), pp.679~686 (2003)
- Murley, R. M., "Toward Improved Inclusion Practices: A Program Evaluation of Differentiated Instruction in three sixth-grade Classes", pp.2010
- School Choice Doing it the Right Way Makes a Difference, "National Working Commission on Choice in K-12 Education", Brooking Insitution, ~ (2003)
- Salamon, L., "Social Origins of Civil Society: Explaining the Nonprofit Sector Cross-Nationality", International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 9(3), pp.213~248 (1998)
- Salamon, L., "The tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance" (2002), Oxford University Press
- Saltman, K., "The Right-Wing Attack on Critical and Public Education in the United States: From Neoliberalism to Neoconservatism", Cultural Politics, 2(3), pp.339~358 (2006)
- Saporito, S., "Private Choices, Public Consequences: Magnet school Choice and Segregation by Race and Poverty", Social Problems, 50(2), pp.181~203 (2003)
- 손웅비, "An Exploratory and Comparative Research of the Policy Reform between two Countries : Case Study of Temporary Assistance for Needed Family (TANF) and National Basic Living Security Act (NBLSA)", GRI연구논총, 18(2), pp.15~45 (2016), 경기개발연구원
- Teske, P., "What Research Can Tell Policymakers about School Choice", Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(4), pp.609~631 (2001)
- UNESCO, , International Review of Education, 44(2) (1998)
- Leadership Team Actions That Manifest Collective Autonomy and Their Impact on Student Growth and Curriculum, "Wegley, B. K", ~ (2012)
- Wilenski, H., "The Welfare State and Equality" (1971), University of California Press