46 Education Reform Act in the U. S. &
　　a proposal of education in Japan

The new bill of the education reform which is the most important policy in the United States
was passed respectivley in the House of Representative and Senate and both Houses are
now conferring on some issues together.

As for the bill, I took some articles, news and other information from the references described
at the end of this monograph, and submitted the summary of these to my site on WWWs
in Japanese and have already got some evaluation of it from other Japanese educators.

Here, I will also describe some key points of the bill for Japanese educators in English.
However, at the first, I will propose some issues of education in Japan as the following:

1. Prefectural governments will conduct annual tests ( math, reading, science, social studies and
　 English, but optionally by the prefucture ) for students in grades three to eight ( Junior high
　student 2nd grade ).

2. Such academic standard tests will be designed by the prefectural government in consultation
　 with Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Technology.

3. Senior high school students will be tested once in their school career.

4. Charter schools will be founded.

5. A more flexible system of school management and the school financial issues will be
　 designed at local level and national level in stead of the accountability of the school boards
　 and the schools.

Key points: Accountability, Flexibility, Local control, Greater choices for parents
1. The bipartisan coalition passed the bills " the No Child Left Behind Act " in May and in June
　 2001.

2. Federal government's role in education by requiring states to conduct annual math and read-
　 ing tests for students in grade three to eight and holding accountable those schools that fail
　to make progress.

3. The bill, which renews the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, dealing mostly with
　 low income students, would channel more money to the worst schools, and it would also give
　 children in them new options. Children in failing schools would be able to transfer to another
　 public school after one year and could use some federal funds to pay for transportation.

　If the schools continue to fail, after three years, children could use federal funds to get help
　through services like private tutoring. After the fourth year, if not enough progress is made, the
　school would have to reconstitute, either by becoming charter schools, forcing the state to
　take them over or hiring a new staff to manage the school.

4. And, the House has called for a block-grant system that would allow states to use their federal
　 education dollars as they see fit, as long as they sign pledges guaranteeing that state test
　 scores will demonstrate a steady upward trend.

5. Under a Straight A's compromise in the Senate, up to seven states and 25 districts could
　 consolidate funding from several major programs into a block grant in exchange for negotiat-
　 ing five year performance agreements with the Education Department.
　【Comment】 So, two Houses will discuss about this issue.

6. Other thorny issues include how to define " adequate yearly progress " for schools.

7. The Voucher plan did not obtain the votes to pass.
　 In lieu of vouchers, the House and Senate bills would allow students in failing schools to use
　 federal funding to pay for private tutoring of transfer to othe public schools.

One of the key topics of discussion for the House-Senate conference ensuring that federal
education spending is refocused on the goal of helping disadvantaged students learn basic skills.
While the House bill helps students and schools by streaming the federal education bureacracy
and reducing red tape, the Senate bill expands the overall number of Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA) program significantly, from 55 to 89.
The House bill reduces the overall number of program to 47, according to a Congressional
Research Service analysis.

1. Should public school students be required to pass a standardized test in order to
　 be promoted to the next grade, or not?
　　　　　Yes, should be .......... 77%
　　　　　No, should not ...........20%
　　　　　No opinion ................3%

2. In your opinion, is there too much emphasis on achievement testing in the public
　 schools in your community, not enough emphasis on testing, or about the right amount?
　(2000)　too much emphasis........ 30%
　　　　　　 Not enough emphasis....23%
　　　　　　 About the right amount.43%
　　　　　　 Don't know..............4%

3. How about the public schools in the nation as a whole? What grade would you give
　 the public schools nationally -- A, B, C, D, or FAIL ?　　　　　(National totals 2000)
　　　A.....2% 　　B....18% 　C...47% 　　D.... 14% 　FAIL... 5% 　　Don't know ....14%　　　　　　

The House bill: As part of the broad effort to make schools safer, H.R. 1 allows teachers to
remove violent and persistently disruptive students from the classroom without fear of legal
repercussions.

1.The New York Times on the Web, May 24,2001, by Lizette Alvarets
　CNN.com: July 13,2001
2. CNN Washington Bereau, June 16,2001, by Jan Christopher McCaleb
3. HOME SCHOOL LEGAL DEFENSE ASSOCIATION, HSLDA News, May 10. 2001
4. Education Week, June 20. 2001, by Erik W.Robelen
5. The Detroit News, May 24.2001
6. GALLUP POLL ANALYSES. June 18, 2001
7. The Committee on Education and the Workforce, July 19. 2001

From Education Week, No Child Left Behind, Updated: October 9, 200
The 哲o Child Left Behind・Act of 2001, signed into law by President Bush on Jan. 8, 2002,
At the core of the No Child Left Behind Act are a number of measures designed to drive broad
gains in student achievement and to hold states and schools more accountable for student progress.
They represent potentially significant changes in the education landscape.
●Annual testing. ●Academic progress. ●Report cards. ●Teacher qualifications.
●Reading First. ●Funding changes.

From No Child Left Behind newsletter - Oct. 15, 2002
●New ED Offices to Support Parent Involvement　●The Freedom to Choose'
●Reading First　●New Program! News You Can Use 　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Thank you, Linda Leddick