Restricted choices, limited options: Implementing choice and supplemental educational services in No Child Left behind

Educational Policy

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 132-154

  Fusarelli, Lance D ^a  

^a NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Implementation; No Child Left Behind; School choice; Supplemental educational services

Indexed keywords

EID: 33846532906     PISSN: 08959048     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0895904806297579     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Bolick, C. (2006, September 7). Four million children left behind. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved September 12, 2005, from www.opinionjournal.com/ cc/?id=110008906
2. Center on Education Policy. (2006). From the capital to the classroom: Year 4 of the No Child Left Behind Act. Washington, DC: Author.
3. Chute, E. (2006, August 30). Back to school: Education booms into a $850 billion enterprise. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Retrieved August 31, 2006, from www.post-gazette.com/pg/06242/717293-298.stm
4. Cohen, J. H. (2006, May 24). "Supplemental services": Theory vs. practice. Education Week, 25 (38). 34-35.
5. Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). From "separate but equal" to "no child left behind": The collision of new standards and old inequalities. In D. Meier & G. Wood (Eds.), Many children left behind: How the no child left behind act is damaging our children and our schools (pp. 3-32). Boston: Beacon.
6. Davis, M. R. (2006, April 12). Report: Schools could improve on NCLB tutoring, choice. Education Week, 25 (31). 31-31.
7. Dillon, S. (2006, July 25). Most states fail demands in education law. The New York Times. Retrieved July 26, 2006, from www.nytimes.com/2006/07/25/ education/25child.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
8. Dobbs, M. (2003, December 22). School choice, limited options. Washington Post. Retrieved January 4, 2004, from www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/ A20185-2003Dec21.html
9. Feller, B. (2006, July 26). Education department expands tutoring. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved July 28, 2006, from www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/ politics/wire/sns-apno-child-tutoring,1,4275232.story?coll=sns-ap-politics- headlines&ctrack=1&cset=true
10. Finn, C. E., Jr., & Hess, F. M. (2004). On leaving no child behind. The Public Interest, 157, 35-56.
11. Fusarelli, L. D. (2003). The political dynamics of school choice: Negotiating contested terrain. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
12. Fusarelli, L. D. (2004). The potential impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on equity and diversity in American education. Educational Policy, 18 (1). 71-94.
13. Gewertz, C. (2005a, April 20). Critics question use of offshore firms for online tutoring. Education Week, 24 (32). 14-14.
14. Gewertz, C. (2005b, October 26). Fewer Chicago pupils receive NCLB tutoring. Education Week, 25 (9). 9-9.
15. Gewertz, C. (2005c, November 2). State bars company from NCLB tutoring in 5 Chicago schools. Education Week, 25 (10). 2-2.
16. Gewertz, C. (2006, August 30). More students seen to get NCLB tutoring. Education Week, 26 (1). 19-19.
17. Goertz, M. E. (2005). Implementing the no child left behind act: Challenges for the states. Peabody Journal of Education, 80 (2). 73-89.
18. Government Accountability Office. (2006, August). No child left behind: Education actions needed to improve local implementation and state evaluation of supplemental educational services. Washington, DC: Author.
19. Gross, J. (2003, August 29). Free tutoring reaches only fraction of students. New York Times. Retrieved August 29, 2003, from www.nytimes.com/2003/ 08/29/nyregion/29TUTO.html
20. Hacker, H. K. (2006, August 21). Timing of school ratings puts parents in a bind. Dallas Morning News. Retrieved August 22, 2006, from www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/education/columnists/hhacker/stories/ DN-edcol_21met.ART.North.Edition1.3dfa3de.html
21. Hendrie, C. (2005, April 20). NCLB transfer policy seen as flawed. Education Week, 24 (32). 1-15.
22. Hess, F. M., & Finn, C. E., Jr. (2004). Conclusion. In F. M. Hess and C. E. Finn Jr. (Eds.), Leaving no child behind? Options for kids in failing schools (pp. 287-303). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
23. Hess, F. M., & Petrilli, M. J. (2006). No child left behind primer. New York: Peter Lang.
24. Hoff, D. J. (2006a, March 29). Complaint targets NCLB transfers in Calif. Education Week, 25 (29). 5-17.
25. Hoff, D. J. (2006b, September 27). House panel studies ways to boost tutoring under NCLB. Education Week, 26 (5). 23-23.
26. Jacobson, L. (2005, November 2). Leveling the playing field. Education Week, 25 (10). 27-30.
27. Lim, J. J. (2006). Fax to Chief Deputy Superintendent Gavin Payne, California Department of Education. National Public Radio. Retrieved July 10, 2006, from www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=553853
28. Lopez, T. E. (2006, July 19). IPS offers students transfer option. Indianapolis Star. Retrieved July 20, 2006, from www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ article?AID=/20060719/NEWS01/607190440/1006/NEWS01
29. Mellon, E. (2006). Few at HISD's failing schools utilize free tutors, transfers. Houston Chronicle. Retrieved September 29, 2006, from www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4220276.html
30. Neill, M. (2004). Leaving no child behind: Overhauling NCLB. In D. Meier & G. Wood (Eds.), Many children left behind: How the No Child Left Behind Act is damaging our children and our schools (pp. 101-119). Boston: Beacon Press.
31. North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (2006, August). NCLB News. Raleigh: Author.
32. Olson, L. (2005a, March 16). NCLB choice option going untapped, but tutoring picking up. Education Week. Retrieved July 10, 2006, from www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2005/03/16/27nclb.h24.html?qs= No+Child+Left+Behind&levelId=2300
33. Olson, L. (2005b, September 7). NCLB waiver lets Virginia offer tutoring before choice. Education Week, 25 (2). 26-26.
34. Quittner, J. (2006, Fall). Trends: Not left behind. Business Week. Retrieved September 18, 2006, from www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_38/ b4001829.htm
35. Richard, A. (2005, December 7). Supplemental help can be hard to find for rural students. Education Week, 25 (14). 1-1, 22-22.
36. Robelen, E. W. (2006, May 24). Choice, SES would flip under plan. Education Week, 25 (38). 1-1, 29-29.
37. Robertson, J. (2006, March 6). Thousands not getting free tutoring program. Kansas City Star. Retrieved March 8, 2006, from www.kansascity.com/mld/ kansascity/news/14026956.html
38. Roche, W. F., Jr. (2006, October 22). Bush's family profits from "No Child" act. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved October 27, 2006, from www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/lana-ignite22oct22,0,4402778.story?coll= la-story-footer
39. Romano, L. (2006, July 19). GOP unveils school voucher plan. Washington Post. Retrieved July 20, 2006, from www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ article/2006/07/18/AR2006071801305.html
40. Rose, L. C., & Gallup, A. M. (2006, September). The 38th annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll of the public's attitudes toward the public schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 41-53.
41. Sanchez, C. (2006, July 10). California schools could lose aid over "No Child" law. National Public Radio. Retrieved July 10, 2006, from www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=553853
42. Sunderman, G. L., Kim, J. S., & Orfield, G. (2005). NCLB meets school realities: Lessons from the field. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
43. Teske, P., Wolf, P., & Hill, P. (2006, April 19). Poor parents can be good choosers. Education Week, 25 (32). 44-44.
44. Torres, B. (2005, July 24). Tutoring becomes a hot commodity. Baltimore Sun. Retrieved July 26, 2005, from www.baltimoresun.com/news/education/bal-bz. tutoring24jul24,1,5540988.story?coll=bal-business-headlines&ctrack= 1&cset=true
45. Wong, K. K., & Nicotera, A. C. (2004). Toward stronger accountability in federal Title I: Fiscal implications in the implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act. In K. DeMoss and K. K. Wong (Eds.), Money, politics, and law: Intersections and conflicts in the provision of educational opportunity (pp. 89-100). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.