Education Case Study Primary Sources

Remarks in Johnson City, Texas, Upon Signing the Elementary and Secondary Education Bill (excerpt)

Building Context: In 1965, Congress and President Lyndon B. Johnson made significant changes to the role of the federal government in education by passing and signing nine education laws. One of these laws was the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. This law aimed to provide greater federal funding to state and local education agencies to better provide materials and resources to students across the United States. This primary source is from Johnson’s remarks upon signing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. He signed it in Johnson City, Texas, on April 11, 1965.

Vocabulary:

• jarring: to be incongruous (not in harmony) in a striking or shocking way; clashing
• acrimony/acrimonious: to be (typically, of speech or debate) angry and bitter
• stalemate: a situation in which further action or progress by competing parties seems impossible
• tenant farmer: a person who farms rented land

 

Caption: President Lyndon B. Johnson

President Lyndon B. Johnson Remarks in Johnson City, Texas, Upon Signing the Elementary and Secondary Education Bill, April 11, 1965

Original Source

Ladies and gentlemen:

I want to welcome to this little school of my childhood many of my former school mates and many who went to school to me at Cotulla and Houston and San Marcos, as well as some of my dear friends from the educational institutions of this area…

So I have chosen this time and this place for two reasons.

First, I do not wish to delay by a single day the program to strengthen this Nation’s elementary and secondary schools…

Second, I felt a very strong desire to go back to the beginnings of my own education-to be reminded and to remind others of that magic time when the world of learning began to open before our eyes…

From our very beginnings as a nation, we have felt a fierce commitment to the ideal of education for everyone. It fixed itself into our democratic creed.

Over a century and a quarter ago, the President of the Republic of Texas, Mirabeau B. Lamar, proclaimed education as “the guardian genius of democracy . . . the only dictator that free men acknowledge and the only security that free men desire.”

But President Lamar made the mistaken prophecy that education would be an issue “in which no jarring interests are involved and no acrimonious political feelings excited.” For too long, political acrimony held up our progress. For too long, children suffered while jarring interests caused stalemate in the efforts to improve our schools. Since 1946 Congress tried repeatedly, and failed repeatedly, to enact measures for elementary and secondary education.

Now, within the past 3 weeks, the House of Representatives, by a vote of 263 to 153, and the Senate, by a vote of 73 to 18, have passed the most sweeping educational bill ever to come before Congress. It represents a major new commitment of the Federal Government to quality and equality in the schooling that we offer our young ‘people. I predict that all of those of both parties of Congress who supported the enactment of this legislation will be remembered in history as men and women who began a new day of greatness in American society…

By passing this bill, we bridge the gap between helplessness and hope for more than 5 million educationally deprived children.

We put into the hands of our youth more than 30 million new books, and into many of our schools their first libraries.

We reduce the terrible time lag in bringing new teaching techniques into the Nation’s classrooms.

We strengthen State and local agencies which bear the burden and the challenge of better education.

And we rekindle the revolution–the revolution of the spirit against the tyranny of ignorance.

As a son of a tenant farmer, I know that education is the only valid passport from poverty.

As a former teacher–and, I hope, a future one–I have great expectations of what this law will mean for all of our young people.

As President of the United States, I believe deeply no law I have signed or will ever sign means more to the future of America…

We have established the law. Let us not delay in putting it to work.

Comprehension and Analysis Questions:

• Why did President Johnson sign this bill at his former school?
• President Johnson included a quote that education is the “guardian genus of democracy.” Do you agree with this claim? Why?
• According to President Johnson, how will the funding of this bill help “educationally deprived children”?
• Compare this speech with President Bush Discusses No Child Left Behind, January 8, 2002, and President Barack Obama at the Every Student Succeeds Act Signing Ceremony, December 15, 2015. How are they similar? How are they different? To what extent does each policy mark a continuity or a change in education policy in the United States?
• Does Johnson’s speech support the principle of federalism? Explain your answer.

 

President Bush Discusses No Child Left Behind, January 8, 2002 (excerpt)

Building Context: The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) renewed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The law passed in Congress with support from both parties in a shared concern about what were deemed failing schools. On January 8, 2002, President George W. Bush signed it into law at Hamilton High School in Hamilton, Ohio. The primary source below are his remarks before signing the act into law.

Vocabulary

 

• methodologies: a system of methods used in a particular area of study

Caption: President George W. Bush

President George W. Bush visits Hamilton High School in Hamilton, Ohio to speak on the “No Child Left Behind” education reform bill entering Congress. January 8, 2002

Original Source

…I want to thank all who have come to witness this historic moment.  For those of you who have studied the history of our government, you know most bills are signed at the White House.  But I decided to sign this bill in one of the most important places in America — a public school.

…{the bill] contains some very important principles that will help guide our public school system for the next decades.

First principle is accountability.  Every school has a job to do.  And that’s to teach the basics and teach them well.  If we want to make sure no child is left behind, every child must learn to read.  And every child must learn to add and subtract. So in return for federal dollars, we are asking states to design accountability systems to show parents and teachers whether or not children can read and write and add and subtract in grades three through eight…

No longer is it acceptable to hide poor performance… One of the interesting things about this bill, it says that we’re never going to give up on a school that’s performing poorly; that when we find poor performance, a school will be given time and incentives and resources to correct their problems.  A school will be given time to try other methodologies, perhaps other leadership, to make sure that people can succeed.  If, however, schools don’t perform, if, however, given the new resources, focused resources, they are unable to solve the problem of not educating their children, there must be real consequences.  There must be a moment in which parents can say, I’ve had enough of this school.  Parents must be given real options in the face of failure in order to make sure reform is meaningful.

And so, therefore, this bill’s second principle is, is that we trust parents to make the right decisions for their children.  Any school that doesn’t perform, any school that cannot catch up and do its job, a parent will have these options — a better public school, a tutor, or a charter school.  We do not want children trapped in schools that will not change and will not teach.

The third principle of this bill is that we have got to trust the local folks on how to achieve standards, to meet the standards.  In Washington, there’s some smart people there, but the people who care most about the children in Hamilton are the citizens of Hamilton.  The people who care most about the children in this school are the teachers and parents and school board members.  And therefore, schools not only have the responsibility to improve, they now have the freedom to improve.

The third principle of this bill is that we have got to trust the local folks on how to achieve standards, to meet the standards.  In Washington, there’s some smart people there, but the people who care most about the children in Hamilton are the citizens of Hamilton.  The people who care most about the children in this school are the teachers and parents and school board members.  And therefore, schools not only have the responsibility to improve, they now have the freedom to improve.

…And, first of all, we’ve got to thank all the teachers who are here…  And by saying we trust local folks, we’re really saying we trust you.  We trust you.  We want you to have as much flexibility as possible to see to it that every child that walks in your classroom can succeed.  So thank you for what you do.

The federal government will not micromanage how schools are run.  We believe strongly — we believe strongly the best path to education reform is to trust the local people.  And so the new role of the federal government is to set high standards, provide resources, hold people accountable, and liberate school districts to meet the standards.

…And, first of all, we’ve got to thank all the teachers who are here…  And by saying we trust local folks, we’re really saying we trust you.  We trust you.  We want you to have as much flexibility as possible to see to it that every child that walks in your classroom can succeed.  So thank you for what you do.

And a fourth principle is that we’re going to spend more money, more resources, but they’ll be directed at methods that work.  Not feel-good methods, not sound-good methods, but methods that actually work. Particularly when it comes to reading.  We’re going to spend more on our schools, and we’re going to spend it more wisely.

If we’ve learned anything over the last generations, money alone doesn’t make a good school.  It certainly helps… we’ve spent billions of dollars with lousy results.  So now it’s time to spend billions of dollars and get good results.

…The money is now available, and it’s up to each local district to make sure it happens.  It’s up to you, the citizens of Hamilton, to make sure no child is left behind.  And the federal government can spend money and we can help set standards, and we can assist upon accountability.  But the truth of the matter is our schools will flourish when citizens join in the noble cause of making sure no child is left behind.

This is the end of a legislative process.  Signing this bill is the end of a long, long time of people sitting in rooms trying to hammer out differences.  It’s a great symbol of what is possible in Washington when good people come together to do what’s right.  But it’s just the beginning of change.  And now it’s up to you, the local citizens of our great land, the compassionate, decent citizens of America, to stand up and demand high standards and to demand that no child — not one single child in America — is left behind.

Thank you for letting us come.  May God bless.

Comprehension and Analysis Questions

• Why did President George W. Bush sign the bill in a public school?
• Summarize the four major principles behind the No Child Left Behind Act.
• Does Bush’s speech support the principle of federalism? Explain your answer.

 

Remarks by the President at Every Student Succeeds Act Signing Ceremony (excerpt)

Building Context: The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was passed in December 2015. Like the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), ESSA reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The ESSA replaced its predecessor, the NCLB. It modified but did not eliminate the provisions relating to standardized tests. The primary source below is from President Barack Obama’s remarks upon signing the Every Student Succeeds Act. He signed it in Washington, DC on December 15, 2015.

Vocabulary

• achievement gap: term used to describe the differences in academic performance comparing characteristics of groups of students, such as by race, gender, or family income
• bipartisan: involving the agreement or cooperation of the two major political parties that usually oppose each other’s policies
• ideological: based on or relating to a system of ideas and ideals, especially concerning economic or political theory and policy
• testament: something that serves as a sign or evidence of a specified fact, event, or quality
• grandstanding: the action of behaving in a showy manner in an attempt to attract favorable attention from spectators or the media
• posturing: the action of behaving in a showy manner in an attempt to attract favorable attention from spectators or the media

 

Caption: President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama at Every Student Succeeds Act Signing Ceremony at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, DC on December 15, 2015

Original Source

The goals of No Child Left Behind, the predecessor of this law, were the right ones: High standards. Accountability. Closing the achievement gap. Making sure that every child was learning, not just some. But in practice, it often fell short. It didn’t always consider the specific needs of each community. It led to too much testing during classroom time. It often forced schools and school districts into cookie-cutter reforms that didn’t always produce the kinds of results that we wanted to see. And that’s okay — sometimes reform efforts require you try something, it doesn’t work, you learn some lessons, and you make modifications.

…And that’s why, for years, I have called on Congress to come together and get a bipartisan effort to fix No Child Left Behind.

And I just want to point out that it’s not as if there weren’t some significant ideological differences on some of these issues. No, there were, but I think this is really a good example of how bipartisanship can work. People did not agree on everything at the outset, but they were willing to listen to each other in a civil, constructive way, and to work through these issues, compromise where necessary, while still keeping their eye on the ball. And I think it’s really a testament of the four leaders of the respective committees that they set that kind of tone. And that’s something that we don’t always see here in Washington. There wasn’t a lot of grandstanding, not a lot of posturing — just a lot of really good, hard work. So I just want to, again, thank them for the outstanding work that they did…

…First, this law focuses on a national goal of ensuring that all of our students graduate prepared for college and future careers. It builds on the reforms that have helped us make so much progress already, holding everybody to high standards for teaching and learning, empowering states and school districts to develop their own strategies for improvement, dedicating resources to our most vulnerable children. And this law requires states to invest in helping students and schools improve, and focusing on the lowest-performing schools and closing those big achievement gaps.

…First, this law focuses on a national goal of ensuring that all of our students graduate prepared for college and future careers. It builds on the reforms that have helped us make so much progress already, holding everybody to high standards for teaching and learning, empowering states and school districts to develop their own strategies for improvement, dedicating resources to our most vulnerable children. And this law requires states to invest in helping students and schools improve, and focusing on the lowest-performing schools and closing those big achievement gaps.

Second, this bill makes long-overdue fixes to the last education law, replacing the one-size-fits-all approach to reform with a commitment to provide every student with a well-rounded education. It creates real partnerships between the states, which will have new flexibility to tailor their improvement plans, and the federal government, which will have the oversight to make sure that the plans are sound.

It helps states and districts reduce unnecessary standardized tests — something we talked about a couple of months ago, because what we want to do is to get rid of unnecessary standardized tests so that more teachers can spend time engaging in student learning while, at the same time, making sure that parents and teachers have clear information on their children’s academic performance.

And finally, this bill upholds the core value that animated the original Elementary and Secondary Education Act signed by President Lyndon Johnson — the value that says education, the key to economic opportunity, is a civil right. With this bill, we reaffirm that fundamental American ideal that every child, regardless of race, income, background, the zip code where they live, deserves the chance to make out of their lives what they will.

…we’re going to have to be engaging with the schools and communities all across the country, educators, school leaders, families, students, elected officials, community leaders, philanthropies — all to make the promise of this law reality.

There’s nothing more essential to living up to the ideals of this nation than making sure every child is able to achieve their God-given potential. And I could not be prouder of the people on this stage and those of you in the audience who helped us take just one step closer to that reality.

So with that, let me sign this bill.

Comprehension and Analysis Questions

• What is President Barack Obama’s criticism of No Child Left Behind? What are two ways that ESSA proposes to fix No Child Left Behind?
• President Obama asserts that education is a civil right. Do you agree? Why or why not?
• Does Obama’s speech support the principle of federalism? Explain your answer.
• Compare the Johnson, Bush and Obama speeches presented here. How are they similar? How are they different? To what extent do they mark a continuity or a change in education policy in the United States?
• How do these three speeches represent different interpretations of the role of the national government in education policy?