Education, Social Reform, and the State: ESEA and Federal Education Policy in the 1960s
American Journal of Education
Vol. 100, No. one (Nov., 1991)
, pp. 47-83 (37 pages)
Published Past: The Academy of Chicago Printing
Read Online (Gratuitous) relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Back up. Nosotros’ll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
With a personal account, you lot can read up to
articles each month for
Already have an account?
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every commodity
- Download up to x article PDFs to save and keep
- Admission everything in the JPASS drove
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 120 article PDFs to relieve and go along
Purchase a PDF
Purchase this commodity for $fourteen.00 USD.
How does it work?
- Select the buy option.
Bank check out using a credit card or bank business relationship with
- Read your article online and download the PDF from your email or your account.
This essay examines the history of federal education policy in the 1960s. Focusing on the ideological context and the political and institutional framework that shaped the history of the Simple and Secondary Didactics Act of 1965, it argues that federal educational activity policy in the 1960s was informed by widely shared assumptions about the nature of poverty and about the relationship of the country to the economy. These assumptions made educational reform central to Bang-up Society policies designed to eliminate poverty and equalize economical opportunity. Even so considering the Dandy Lodge was reluctant to claiming existing institutional arrangements and was constrained by the makeup of the Democratic political party coalition and the federal authorities’south capacity to control local educational practices, it was unable to make the didactics of disadvantaged students a tiptop priority of local school districts, fifty-fifty though information technology successfully institutionalized the federal commitment to improving didactics for economically disadvantaged children.
Current issues are now on the Chicago Journals website. Read the latest consequence. The American Journal of Teaching seeks to span and integrate the intellectual, methodological, and substantive multifariousness of educational scholarship and to encourage a vigorous dialogue between educational scholars and policy makers. Information technology publishes empirical inquiry, from a wide range of traditions, that contribute to the development of knowledge across the broad field of education.
Since its origins in 1890 as one of the iii main divisions of the University of Chicago, The University of Chicago Press has embraced as its mission the obligation to disseminate scholarship of the highest standard and to publish serious works that promote education, foster public understanding, and enrich cultural life. Today, the Journals Segmentation publishes more than 70 journals and hardcover serials, in a wide range of academic disciplines, including the social sciences, the humanities, educational activity, the biological and medical sciences, and the physical sciences.
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, delight refer to our
American Journal of Teaching © 1991
The University of Chicago Press
What Education Reform Did Kennedy Successfully See Passed