L’école et la justice sociale. Une étude de cas autour de No Child Left Behind
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51186/journals/ed.2021.11-1.e394Keywords:
accountability, educational policies, equality of opportunity, loose coupling, No Child Left BehindAbstract
This article is based on a review of the literature on the American law No Child Left Behind (NCLB). By studying this law, its implementation and its effects on equity and school performance, this article aims to understand the extent to which an equity policy succeeds — or fails — in limiting school inequalities. After describing the instruments mobilized by NCLB, we explain the role of its implementation in the distribution of educational goods, asking what institutional principles organize this distribution and highlighting the mechanisms of decoupling between the intentions of NCLB and their realization. Our analysis shows that the law has perverse effects: poor and ethnically diverse schools are more likely to fail to comply with NCLB requirements and to be penalized, especially financially. Thus, the principle of “pressure without support” penalizes the most disadvantaged. Ultimately, the thesis supported in this article is that an educational policy of social justice can only be achieved if it is based on a fair vision of the sources of inequalities and if it considers all the actors in the educational process in an equitable manner.
References
Aktouf, O. (2010). L’éducation et les lois du marché. Education Canada, 42(4).
Barton, P. E., & Coley, R. J. (2010). The Black-White Achievement gap. When Progress Stopped (Policy Information Report). Princeton, NJ : Educational Testing Service.
Becker, R. (2013). Editorial. Inégalité et justice dans l’éducation en Suisse. Revue Suisse des sciences de l’éducation, 35(3), 415-423.
Bell, A. L., & Meinelt, K. A. (2011). A past, present, and future look at No Child Left Behind. Human Rights, 38(4), 11-14.
Byrd-Blake, M., Afolayan, M. O., Hunt, J. W., Fabunmi, M., Pryor, B. W., & Leander, R. (2010). Morale of teachers in high poverty schools: A post-NCLB mixed methods analysis. Education and Urban Society, 42(4), 450-472.
Coburn, C. E. (2004). Beyond Decoupling: Rethinking the Relationship Between the Institutional Environment and the Classroom. Sociology of Education, 77(3), 211–244.
Crahay, M. (2012). L’école peut-elle être juste et efficace : De l’égalité des chances à l'égalité des acquis. Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgique : De Boeck Supérieur.
Datnow, A., & Park, V. (2009). Conceptualizing policy implementation: Large-scale reform in an era of complexity. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider & D. N. Plank (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (1e éd., pp. 348-361). New York : Routledge.
Dee, T. S., & Jacob, B. (2011). The Impact of No Child Left Behind on Student Achievement. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(3), 418-446.
Department of Education. (2003). No Child Left Behind: A Parents Guide.
Dumay X., Cattonar B., Maroy C. (2013). Modalités de mise en œuvre des instruments d'évaluation externe et institutionnalisation de la régulation par les résultats dans les établissements scolaires. In Maroy, C. (Ed.), L’école à l’épreuve de la performance (pp. 123-140). Louvain-La-Neuve : De Boeck.
Felouzis G., & Charmillot S. (2012). Les enquêtes PISA. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France.
Felouzis G., Maroy C., & Van Zanten A. (2013). Les marchés scolaires. Sociologie d’une politique publique d’éducation. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France.
Felouzis G. (2020). Les inégalités scolaires. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France.
Foucault, M. (2017). « No child left behind »: entre espoir et déception. Administration & Éducation, 155(3), 29-33.
Gamoran, A. (2007). Standards-based reform and the poverty gap: Lessons for No Child Left Behind. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Gamoran, A. (2012). Bilan et devenir de la loi No Child Left Behind aux États-Unis. Revue Française De Pédagogie, 178(1), 13-26.
Hanushek E., & Rivkin G. (2006). School Quality and the Black-White Achievement Gap. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 12651.
Hassenteufel, P. (2011). Sociologie politique : l'action publique. Paris : Armand Colin.
Jencks C. (1979). L’inégalité. Paris : PUF.
Koppich, J. (2005). A Tale of Two Approaches: The AFT, the NEA, and NCLB. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(2), 137-155.
Ladd H. (2017). No Child Left Behind. A deeply flawed federal policy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 36(2).
Lahire B. (2019). Enfances de classe. Paris : Éditions du Seuil.
Lascoumes, P., & Le Galès, P. (2005). Gouverner par les instruments. Paris : Presses de Sciences Po.
Lavery L. (2016). What parents still do not know about No Child Left Behind and why it matters. Journal of Education Policy, 31(3), 343-361.
Lee, J. (2006). Tracking achievement gaps and assessing the impact of NCLB on the gaps: An in-depth look into national and state reading and math outcome trends. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
Lessard, C., & Carpentier, A. (2015). Politiques éducatives : La mise en œuvre. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France.
Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. Politics & Society, 10(1), 116–116.
Malet R. (2009). Former, reformer, transformer la main d’œuvre enseignante ? Politiques comparées et expériences croisées anglo-américaines. Sociétés contemporaines, 23(1), 91-122.
Maleyko, G., & Gawlik, M. (2011). No Child Left Behind: What We Know and What We Need to Know. Education, 131(3), 600-624.
Maroy, C. (2013). L’école à l’épreuve de la performance : Les politiques de régulation par les résultats. Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgique : De Boeck Supérieur.
McDonnell, L. (2009). A Political Science Perspective on Education Policy Analysis. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider, & D. N. Plank (Eds.), Hanbook of Education Policy Research (1e éd., pp. 73-86). New York: Routledge.
McMurrer, J. (2007). Choices, Changes, and Challenges: Curriculum and Instruction in the NCLB Era. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.
Meuret, D. (2012). Les effets de la régulation par les résultats (accountability) sur les politiques d'éducation aux États-Unis. Éducation et sociétés, 30(2), 75-87.
Montagutelli, M. (2009). L'école américaine dans la tourmente de No Child Left Behind. Revue française d’études américaines, 119(1), 94-105.
National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A Nation at Risk : The Imperative for Education Reform.
Palier, B., & Surel, Y. (2005). Les « trois I » et l'analyse de l'État en action. Revue française de science politique, 55(1), 7-32.
Organisation de coopération et de développement économique. (2006). PISA 2006. Volume 2 : date / données.
Porter, A. (2007). NCLB lessons learned : implications for reautorization. In A. Gamoran (Ed.), Standards-based reform and the poverty gap: Lessons for No Child Left Behind (pp. 45-88). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Porter, A.C., Linn, R.L., & Trimble, C.S. (2005), The Effects of State Decisions About NCLB Adequate Yearly Progress Targets. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(1), 32-39.
Rawls, J. (1987). Théorie de la justice. Paris : Éditions du Seuil.
Shelly, B. (2008). Rebels and Their Causes: State Resistance to No Child Left Behind. Publius, 38(3), 444-468.
Ullmo, S. (2009). L’école et l’(in)égalité des chances aux États-Unis : effets pernicieux du fédéralisme ou fondement idéologique de la démocratie américaine? Revue française d’études américaines, 1(1), 67-79.
Van Zanten, A. (2009). Choisir son école. Stratégies familiales et médiations locales. Paris : PUF.
Weick, K. (1976). Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1-19.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Some rights reserved 2021 The Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
