No child left behind in art education policy: A review of key recommendations for arts language revisions

Arts Education Policy Review

Volumn 111, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 8-15

  Grey, Anne C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Art education; Art education policy; NCLB revisions; No child left behind

Indexed keywords

EID: 84898648552     PISSN: 10632913     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10632910903228132     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. 2008. The new president, the 111th Congress, and the education agenda. http://www. aacte.org/index.php?/Press-Center/Feature-Articles/the-new-president- the-111th-congress-and-the-education-agenda.html (accessed January 2, 2009).
2. Americans for the Arts. 2008. No Child Left Behind: The impact of the latest federal education legislation on the arts. http://www.artsusa.org/networks/arts_education/arts_education_015.asp# (accessed February 7, 2009).
3. Asmar, M. 2007. Huckabee touts arts education: Candidate talks to, jams with students. Concord Monitor, October 21. http://www.concordmonitor. com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date = 20071020 (accessed October21,2007).
4. Broder, D. 2009. Thanks to the recession, education has resources for change. Orlando Sentinel, March 10, 2009, A9.
5. Chapman, L. H. 2004. No child left behind in art? Arts Education Policy Review 106 (2): 3-17.
6. Chapman, L. H. 2005. Status of elementary art education: 1997-2004. Studies in Art Education 46 (2): 118-37.
7. Chapman, L. H. 2007. Update: NCLB hearings schedule not yet set. NAEA News 14 (2): 1-3.
8. Coile, Z. 2007. No Child Left Behind Act faces overhaul, political donnybrook. San Francisco Chronicle. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi- bin/article.cgi?f = /c/a/2007/09/09/MNA5S0CNB.DTL (accessed October 9, 2007).
9. Colwell, R. 2005. Whither programs and arts policy? Arts Education Policy Review 106 (6): 19-29.
10. Diket, R., S. Burton, S. McCollister, and F. R. Sabol. 2000. Taking another look: Secondary analysis of the NAEP Report Card in the Visual Arts. Studies in Art Education 41 (3): 202-07.
11. Dr. P. Phillips Orlando Performing Arts Center (DPAC). 2009. Defining ourmission. http://www.orlandopac.org/about_us/our_mission/ (accessed February 8, 2009).
12. Efland, A. D. 1990. The history of art education: Intellectual and social currents in teaching the visual arts. New York: Teachers College Press.
13. Fehr, D. 2009. The National Education Task Force and No Child Left Behind. NAEA News 51 (1): 1-24.
14. Goodwin, M. 1994. Let the debate begin: But only to the extent that the debate leads to a shared vision of education excellence. NAEA Advisory. http://www.arteducators.org/olc/filelib/NAEA/cpages/9006/Library/12. Debate.pdf (accessed March 26, 2009).
15. Gov Track.us. 2007. No Child Left Behind Improvements Act of 2007. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill = h110-648 (accessed Feb 8, 2009).
16. Gov Track.us. 2008. NCLB Recess Until Reauthorization Act. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill = h110-6239&tab = summary (accessed Feb 8, 2009).
17. Hamblen, K. 1995. Beyond the public face of policy making. Arts Education Policy Review 96 (3): 28-33.
18. Howell, W. G., M. R. West, and P. E. Peterson. 2007. What Americans think about their schools. Education Next 7 (4): 12-26.
19. Knight, M. 2009. What a difference a president can make? Orlando Arts Magazine 12 (1): 20.
20. Lips, D. 2009 Keyquestionsfor Arne Duncan, nominee for Secretary for U.S. Department of Education. Heritage Foundation. http://www.heritage.org/ research/education/upload/wm_2200.pdf (accessed February 8, 2009).
21. Mennello Museum of American Art. 2009. Mennello Museum of American Art events. http://www.mennellomuseum.org/events.html (accessed April 14, 2009).
22. Meyer, L. 2004. The complete curriculum: Ensuring a place for the arts and foreign languages in America’s schools. Arts Education Policy Review 106 (3): 35-39.
23. National Center for Educational Statistics. The nation’s report card: The arts. http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/arts/ (accessed April 14, 2009).
24. National Education Taskforce. 2007. Catching the children left behind: Proposals for NCLB reauthorization. http:www.natedtaskforce.org/ NCLB_responses/Arts_response_1.htm (accessed November 19, 2007).
25. National Education Taskforce. 2009. Arts legislative language committee. http://www.artsusa.org/pdf/networks/arts_education/nclbrecommendations.pdf (accessed February 5, 2009).
26. Pederson, P. 2007. What is measured Is treasured: The impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on nonassessed subjects. The Clearing House 80 (6): 287-91.
27. Project Zero. 2009. Quality of qualities study. http://www.pz.harvard.edu/ Research/Quality.htm (accessed April 14, 2009).
28. Quaid, L. 2009. Education: Pick a shoo-in? Orlando Sentinel, January 14, 2009, A4.
29. Roberts, C. 2007. Educators charge arts lag under No Child Left Behind. Minnesota Public Radio, March 13, 2007. http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2007/03/13/nclbandarts (accessed October 21, 2007).
30. Rothstein, R. 2008. Leaving “No Child Left Behind” our no. 1 education program is incoherent, unworkable, and doomed. But the next president still can have a huge impact on improving American schooling. American Prospect 50 (4). http://find.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.ucf.edu/ it/start.do?prodid = ITOF (accessed January 1, 2009).
31. U.S. Department of Education. 2004. Key policy letters signed by the education secretary or deputy secretary. http://www.ed.gov/print/policy/ elsec/guid/secletter/040701.html (accessed October 9, 2007).
32. U.S. Department of Education. 2007. Building on results: A blueprint for strengthening the No Child Left Behind Act. http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/nclb/ buildingonresults.html (accessed January 2, 2009).
33. Winner, E., and L. Hetland. 2000. The arts and academic achievement: What the evidence shows. Journal of Aesthetic Education 34 (m3e/4n)t.: What the evidence shows. Journal of Aesthetic Education 34