School Leaders and the Challenge of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1960-1968.

Abstract

The 1965 passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) changed the landscape of American public education. For the first time in history the federal government made a massive foray into education, and did so in a way that emphasized the needs of disadvantaged children. Extant literature has discussed the enactment process, implementation and evaluation of ESEA but does not talk about school administrators, who played a vital role in the planning, implementation and evaluation of ESEA school initiatives. Despite their importance, studies of ESEA have paid very little attention to administrators’ role in ESEA. This dissertation focuses on the impact that ESEA had on school administrators. The main research questions are: When ESEA was initially enacted, and in subsequent reauthorizations, what were legislators’ intentions for administrator practice in the execution of ESEA? How did ESEA impact school administrators? What changes in the work of school administrators came about as a result of the passage of this massive federal aid-to-education legislation?

Using articles and advertisements from two major education journals aimed at school administrators, Educational Leadership and School Management Magazine, this study examines the kinds of information editors of those journals provided to administrators about ESEA, and how that information changed over time. Findings were three-fold. First, in a very short time period, federal aid-to-education legislation went from being hotly contested to something that was accepted and expected by legislators and school administrators. Second, although in 1965 legislators specifically refrained from specifying how federally provided funding should be spent, by 1967 legislators began to provide specifics, including priority lists that school administrators had to follow. Finally, ESEA’s passage brought about a major change in the way education was viewed in the United States. This was particularly true in terms of justifying the federal government’s role of working with school leaders in trying to rectify the discrepancies caused by poverty and the resultant disadvantages suffered by poor children. After the passage of ESEA, administrators and other educators paid increasing attention to the needs of these children.