1
[Type here]
Case Study # 2
Lucretia Strathman
PUA 440
Spring 2017
University of Las Vegas
2
[Type here]
Who is the decision maker in this case, and what is their position and responsibilities?
The ultimate decision maker in the No Child Left Behind Act was President George W.
Bush. In 2001 he put into action a position that was to be overseen by the Secretary of
Education. The responsibilities of the Secretary of Education were to increase the accountability of the schools that were underperforming, allowing parents to have a more informed choice on where their child attended school, and to increase the test scores of low performing schools.
When President Bush put the act into effect his hope was to improve the gap between white and
minority …show more content…
What appears to be the issue (concern, problem, challenge, or opportunity) and its significance for the organization?
The concern with the No Child Left Behind Act was that it took away from the state and local government to fix the issues within its own school districts. There was concern in first and foremost the amount of funding that was distributed. There was also the concern that the states and local school districts could not handle the children that parents were trying to send to schools that were performing higher, then the zoned schools. The various problems that the NCLBA was to fix, was the very reason why the program was proving to no be successful. It in a way failed the children that it was intended to help. The Department of Education was concerned with 7 different areas: 1. Accountability, 2. Parental involvement, 3. Resources, 4. Reporting of qualified teachers, 5. Districts notifying parents if their child attend an underperforming school,
6. Making sure that minority students were not disproportionately assigned to unqualified teachers, and 7. Providing diagnostic reports for all students. (Stephens, Wikstorm, 2007, p.115) …show more content…
While the motive behind the No Child Left Behind Act was a good one, it didn’t seem to be well thought out.It also seemed to take the power from the state and local government and give it to the federal government for a one solution fix all. Which is an issue, when you do not consider the individuality of the issues that each state has. The decision make is now involved because changes needed to be made to NCLBA in order due what is was supposed to do, and that’s to decrease the educational gap between whites, and poor minorities. The decision maker that is responsible for revamping the NCLBA would be the President and the Secretary of
Education whomever that is at the time the issues arise.
When does the decision maker have to decide, resolve, act or dispose of the issue? What is the urgency to the situation?
The decision maker must act when the first notice that there are flaws in the concept. It is the responsibility of the Secretary of Education to see that the program is running smoothly and that any issues that the individual states and local government has, are addressed in a timely manner to ensure that it continues to benefit the children. The urgency is as soon as you see
[Type here]
Case Study # 2
Lucretia Strathman
PUA 440
Spring 2017
University of Las Vegas
2
[Type here]
Who is the decision maker in this case, and what is their position and responsibilities?
The ultimate decision maker in the No Child Left Behind Act was President George W.
Bush. In 2001 he put into action a position that was to be overseen by the Secretary of
Education. The responsibilities of the Secretary of Education were to increase the accountability of the schools that were underperforming, allowing parents to have a more informed choice on where their child attended school, and to increase the test scores of low performing schools.
When President Bush put the act into effect his hope was to improve the gap between white and
minority …show more content…
What appears to be the issue (concern, problem, challenge, or opportunity) and its significance for the organization?
The concern with the No Child Left Behind Act was that it took away from the state and local government to fix the issues within its own school districts. There was concern in first and foremost the amount of funding that was distributed. There was also the concern that the states and local school districts could not handle the children that parents were trying to send to schools that were performing higher, then the zoned schools. The various problems that the NCLBA was to fix, was the very reason why the program was proving to no be successful. It in a way failed the children that it was intended to help. The Department of Education was concerned with 7 different areas: 1. Accountability, 2. Parental involvement, 3. Resources, 4. Reporting of qualified teachers, 5. Districts notifying parents if their child attend an underperforming school,
6. Making sure that minority students were not disproportionately assigned to unqualified teachers, and 7. Providing diagnostic reports for all students. (Stephens, Wikstorm, 2007, p.115) …show more content…
While the motive behind the No Child Left Behind Act was a good one, it didn’t seem to be well thought out.It also seemed to take the power from the state and local government and give it to the federal government for a one solution fix all. Which is an issue, when you do not consider the individuality of the issues that each state has. The decision make is now involved because changes needed to be made to NCLBA in order due what is was supposed to do, and that’s to decrease the educational gap between whites, and poor minorities. The decision maker that is responsible for revamping the NCLBA would be the President and the Secretary of
Education whomever that is at the time the issues arise.
When does the decision maker have to decide, resolve, act or dispose of the issue? What is the urgency to the situation?
The decision maker must act when the first notice that there are flaws in the concept. It is the responsibility of the Secretary of Education to see that the program is running smoothly and that any issues that the individual states and local government has, are addressed in a timely manner to ensure that it continues to benefit the children. The urgency is as soon as you see