Three Arms of Authority Controlling the Public Education Systems - Case Study Example

Three Arms of Authority Controlling the Public Education SystemsIntroductionUnited States of America has a distinctive provision of the public education system. The education structure is a documentation of a right provided in the 10th amendment. The unique features of the education system allocate freedom of an establishment of a state’s public education structure. This legal interpretation exhibits minimal jurisdiction to matters related to the formulation of a given public education configuration.

Content The federal government engages the three arms of authority as influential references controlling the public education systems. NCLB is a representative organization that enforces education laws and structures among administrators. NCLB is a foundation project that serves as a federal intervention within the various states in America (Kowalski, 2004, P1, L6). This paper provides insight into the operation structure of the NCLB with specific case study of individual Superintendents within various public education systems.

Strengths of the superintendents The case study involved between Dr. Stacy and Billy Pratt yielded various responses with effect to the introduction and implementation of the NCLB act. Dr. Stacy Barstow is instrumental in enforcing instructional improvement and engaging staff development. This is a positive approach as stated in the NCLB act where an education superintendent is significant curriculum personnel. Dr. Stacy also engaged positive approaches by supporting the NCLB objectives through positive remarks during a meeting with school heads.

According to the case study, Superintendent Billy Pratt refutes the NCLB act, claiming that the law appeared inconsistent and incompetent (Kowalski, 2004, P3, L9). His arguments draw justification from the provided programs of the special education and other bilingual students. His arguments also criticized ignorance by the federal government on matters of local control. Billy Pratt’s justification may serve as an indicator to demand government careful involvement in future acts and educational policies.

Weakness of the superintendentsSuperintendent Dr. Stacy’s decision to avoid negative remarks towards the NCLB act shows an unrealistic approach to sensitive educational matters. As such, the move triggered differences among other secondary principals and elementary principals. The decision by Dr. Stacy also signifies an unreliable personality trait that would question individual leadership attributes. Billy Pratt decision to publicly criticize NCLB policies shows disrespect to a given law (Kowalski, 2004, P3, L10).

This is a negative approach that would ignite conflict of interest among other curriculum leaders and policy makers. This view is justification of his behavior when he suggested immediate amendments to the act before compliance. Personal experienceA federal intervention into the public is not a violation of the local control. As a personal view, Superintendent Pratt underestimates the involvement of the federal government in enacting NCLB. The act operates in light to effectively implement educational policies with objectives to improve the quality of education.

Pratt instead formulates excuses that manipulate ideologies by the federal government to handle local control (Kowalski, 2004, P6, L12; Valenzuela, 2007). Pros and cons of NCLB NCLB focuses on improving educational performances for the deaf students by mandating the provision of higher educational resources. The NCLB act employs unrealistic objectives and demands for the principals within the special educations. As such, the structure is a disadvantage for the involved educational professionals who struggle with the deaf students.

Advantages and disadvantages of Barstow’s strategyBarstow’s strategy is a significant motivation model that easily unites principals in accordance with the educational policies. Her strategy effectively provides immediate plans for the implementation of the educational policy. Barstow’s strategy reviews NCLB in a positive dimension citing future change. However, Barstow’s strategy limits criticism from other educational officials with reference to local control (Kowalski, 2004, P4, L17; Dee & Jacob, 2010).

This aspect of her strategy would hinder amendments or future developments. SummaryThe United States of America is a unique country with a developed public education system. The federal government encourages creativity and incongruent formulation of the given systems with relevant opportunities. The case study involved between Dr. Stacy and Billy Pratt is an exemplary case study to analyze the introduction and implementation of the NCLB act. NCLB has both effective and limiting aspects of educational policies that interfere with principals, curriculum officials and students.

ReferencesDee, T., & Jacob, B. (June 01, 2010). Evaluating NCLB. Education Next, 10, 3, 54-61.Kowalski, T. (2004). Case studies on educational administration (4th ed.). Michigan: Allyn & Bacon.Valenzuela, Angela. (January 01, 2007). No child left behind (NCLB) and minority youth: What the qualitative evidence suggests.Top of FormBottom of Form