SHIELDS M. Carolyn3.pdf

landmark Supreme Court cases. They focus on activities in addition
to, not to the exclusion, of traditional academics ( 2).
She concluded by saying that although she and the author disagree on many
things, they “agree that access to rigorous academic opportunity is necessary—
especially for poor children.”
Although the details and vocabulary differ, it is obvious that both the
principal and Stern want the best possible education for children, perhaps
especially for children from impoverished homes. In general, I believe this to be
true. Policy makers, scholars, and practitioners all want the best for children.
There are certainly differences interpretations about what constitutes “the best.”
Sometimes there are sharp differences about how this might be accomplished.
But in general, whether one uses the language of social justice or not, there are
underlying concerns about equity and opportunities for success. Moreover, even
though some may trace some theoretical influences to socialists, there are few
social justice educators who advocate the institution of Marxist political systems.
Perhaps for this reason, the intensity of the debates is surprising. They do little to
unite researchers and practitioners who are sometimes pitted against each other,
but they do influence perceptions of both the general public and of legislators.
Kennedy (1997) explains:
The connection between research and practice is not one in which
research influences practice, as many researchers might hope, nor
one in which practice influences research as many hope, but rather
one in which both research and practice are influenced by and are
perhaps even victims of the same shifting social and political
context (pp. 9-10),
In the United States, this shifting context is largely framed by the 2002
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary legislation, commonly known
as No Child Left Behind (NCLB). As described by the U.S. Department of
Education,
Under the act's accountability provisions, states must describe how
they will close the achievement gap and make sure all students,
including those who are disadvantaged, achieve academic
proficiency. They must produce annual state and school district
report cards that inform parents and communities about state and
school progress. Schools that do not make progress must provide
supplemental services, such as free tutoring or after-school
assistance; take corrective actions; and, if still not making adequate
yearly progress after five years, make dramatic changes to the way
the school is run. (No child.., 2).
It is not the need to close the achievement gap that causes difficulties for
educators, but the fact that the lofty goals expressed above are too frequently
interpreted only in terms of students’ mean scores and improvement points as
measured by authorized standardized tests at every grade level.
Shields, Social Justice, CCEAM, 8/29/2006, p. 2