51³Ô¹ÏÍøºÚÁÏ

The Obama administration had plans to overhaul the nation's education system when they took office, but budget battles, health care, and other priorities took center stage. Now, it appears that education will quickly be moving to the forefront as the current year's test scores from around the country show that the large majority of schools in the United States are missing their mark and headed for failure. With the No Child Left Behind Act created by the Bush administration now headed to the chopping block, the quality of education in this country is set to get another look by Congress this spring.

What is the No Child Left Behind Act?

According to a report at the , the No Child Left Behind Act was a signature educational initiative that originated with President George W. Bush in 2001. The goal of the legislation, which received bipartisan support at the time of signing, was to require schools to bring 100 percent of their students to proficiency in math and reading by the year 2014. Proficiency would be evaluated through annual exams given to students in third through eighth grade and one additional test during high school.

This 2001 video shows President Bush promoting his "No Child Left Behind" act.

Reforming the No Child Left Behind Act has been a focus of the Obama administration because the current

Social promotion, the act of promoting children to the next grade even when their test scores don't support such a move, is a regular practice in many schools today. Educators that support social promotion point to data that suggests that students who are retained, or held back a grade, are more likely to develop behavioral problems and drop out of school before graduation. But is social promotion a viable alternative? There are many experts on both sides of the issue, making it difficult to ascertain the best way to handle students who are falling behind – or falling through the cracks.

Why Social Promotion?

Social promotion allows students to advance to the next school grade, even when their test scores and overall academic achievement don't prove a student's preparedness for the next academic year. According to a recent report in , social promotion was adopted as the way to deal with struggling students because many education experts believed social promotion favored the child's social and psychological well-being. They argued that holding students back from repeating a grade had a negative impact on their educational experience without providing many benefits.

How Social Promotion Can Hurt Students

On the other side of the coin, research also suggests that social promotion does little to advance a child's academic career. Opponents of the practice claim that social promotion merely hides the failures of

Michelle Rhee has a conflicting legacy that she is leaving to the Washington D.C. public school system. On the one hand, Rhee has been touted for her efforts to revive a failing school system in the documentary film, "Waiting for Superman." On the other, Rhee has been portrayed as an abrasive personality that has set out to transform education without much research or anecdotal evidence to back up her efforts. Since Rhee has no plans to leave education (she is now launching a non-profit organization to transform education across the country) and her ideas appear to be on par with other innovative educators rising to the forefront, it is worth looking at her legacy more closely to see how it could change the face of education in the future.

In this video, FRONTLINE examines the legacy of Michelle Rhee, former Chancellor of Washington, D.C. public schools.

Rhee's Teaching History

Rhee came to Washington D.C. in 2007 to serve as chancellor under Mayor Adrian Fenty. Prior to this post, Rhee had spent time teaching at a school in the Baltimore City Public School District, Harlem Park. According to a report at the , Rhee was in a team-teaching assignment at the school. During her tenure at Harlem Park, Rhee cited test results of her students that demonstrated her superb teaching ability. However, questions have been raised about these

Most adults remember standardized testing, used to assess how well students were learning and retaining the core material taught to them. Today, schools still require students to take assessment tests each year, which serves as a benchmark for the performance of teachers as well as students. However, the assessments conducted today vary from state to state, since it is the state government’s responsibility to develop an appropriate evaluation process for their own schools.

However, state-governed evaluations may soon come to an end. The Obama administration would like to provide national education standards that all states would be required to follow, according to a report on . These national standards would offer continuity in education throughout the country and help students compete more effectively in a global economy, according to proponents of the initiative.

On the other side, opponents assert that more government involvement will not necessarily translate into higher quality education.

Let us delve into both sides of the debate to determine the pros and cons of sending educational assessments to the national level. This video offers a brief explanation.

Introducing Common Core State Standards

To address the issue of standard deviations between states, the initiative was established. This state-led effort was coordinated by the National Governor's Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers.

The standards were developed

A new trend in public education is sweeping the country: the introduction of teacher-led schools that put teachers in the driver's seat of both the classroom and the daily operations of the schools at large. Teacher-led schools have begun operating in cities across the country, including Los Angeles, Denver, Boston, and Milwaukee. Recently, a new teacher-led school was introduced in Detroit as well, according to an article in Detroit Free Press.

Bye-Bye Bureaucracy

The concept of teacher-led schools started with the idea that teachers were better equipped to meet the needs of students than administrators ever could be. Teachers work with children and curriculum every day, but in traditional campuses, still need to get modifications and new programs approved by principals and school supervisors before they can put them into action. By eliminating school administration, teachers put themselves in the position of adjusting curriculum and adding programs to meet the specific needs of the students in their schools.

Many of the teacher-run schools starting today have been located in low-income neighborhoods, where students already have many socioeconomic hurdles to overcome. For example, teacher-governed schools in Minnesota and Wisconsin consist of a high number of low-income Latino students, and one school in the area boasts a 100% Native American population. Another serves gay and lesbian students who were bullied in mainstream schools, according to a report at The Free Library.

This video reports on schools without principals.