美国NCLB法案框架下规则制定与调整的政策分析
|
摘要
NCBL颁布之后,美国国会授权教育部执行该法案,教育部通过制定规则,完善法案的细则,并提供补充条款;在执行的过程中,根据需要修订规则。国会指定了两种规则制定:谈判式、通知和评论式。这两个规则制定过程采用不同程度的形式和结构。"谈判式"更为正式,它依靠负责机构召集有关各方的代表来谈判并制定规则。谈判式规则制定用于确定NCLB下的标准和评估要求,通知和评论规则制定程序则用于所有其他问题。当联邦教育部要解决的所定义的问题的框架较为宽泛时,谈判式可能是合适的。联邦政府不定期使用传统的通知和评论式程序,并利用这些更熟悉的机制回应来自该领域的需求。NCLB的规则多次修订均是联邦政府与利益相关者讨价还价的过程。
After the NCBL was enacted, congress authorized the ministry of education to implement the act. The ministry of education established the rules to improve the details of the act and provided supplementary provisions. Rules can also be revised as needed during implementation. Congress specifies two types of rulemaking: negotiated, informed and commented. These two rulemaking processes take different forms and structures. "Regulatory negotiation" is more formal, relying on the responsible body to convene representatives of the parties involved to negotiate and set the rules. Negotiated rulemaking is used to determine standards and assessment requirements under NCLB, and notification and comment rulemaking procedures are used for all other issues. Regulatory negotiations may be appropriate when the framework for the problems defined by the federal department of education is broader. The federal government does not routinely use traditional notification and comment procedures and uses these more familiar mechanisms to respond to requirements from the field. Multiple revisions to NCLB's rules have been a process of bargaining between the federal government and stakeholders.
After the NCBL was enacted, congress authorized the ministry of education to implement the act. The ministry of education established the rules to improve the details of the act and provided supplementary provisions. Rules can also be revised as needed during implementation. Congress specifies two types of rulemaking: negotiated, informed and commented. These two rulemaking processes take different forms and structures. "Regulatory negotiation" is more formal, relying on the responsible body to convene representatives of the parties involved to negotiate and set the rules. Negotiated rulemaking is used to determine standards and assessment requirements under NCLB, and notification and comment rulemaking procedures are used for all other issues. Regulatory negotiations may be appropriate when the framework for the problems defined by the federal department of education is broader. The federal government does not routinely use traditional notification and comment procedures and uses these more familiar mechanisms to respond to requirements from the field. Multiple revisions to NCLB's rules have been a process of bargaining between the federal government and stakeholders.
引文
[1]Vinovskis,M.A..Do federal compensatory education programs really work?Abrief historical analysis of Title I and Head Start[J].American Journal of Education,1999,107,(3):187-209.
[2]Sunderman,G.L..The politics of school reform:The educational excellence movement and state policymaking[J].Chicago:The University of Chicago,Chicago,1995.5.
[3][5]Rosenbloom,D.H..Administrative law for public managers[M].Boulder,CO:Westview,2003.61.
[4]Philip J.Harter,Negotiating Regulations:A Cure for Malaise[J].The Georgetown Law Journal 1982,71,(1):18-19.
[6]20 U.S.C.§6571(a)(Supp.III 2003).
[7]Holley-Walker,D..The importance of negotiated rulemaking to the no child left behind act[J].Nebraska Law Review,2006-2007,(85),1015-1057.
[8]Ronald H.Heck and Jana Chang.Examining the Timing of Educational Changes Among Elementary Schools After the Implementation of NCLB[J].Educational Administration Quarterly,2017,53(4).649-694.
[9]U.S.Department of Education..LEA and school improvement:Non-regulatory guidance[EB/OL].http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/schoolimprovementguid.Pdf,2006-12-09.
[10]U.S.Government Accountability Office..No child left behind act:States face challenges measuring academic growth that education’s initiatives may help address.(PublicationNo.GAO-06-661).[EB/OL].http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06661.pdf,2006-07-08.
[11]U.S.Department of Education..Growth models:Non-regulatory guidance.[EB/OL].http://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/growthmodel/index.html,2009-09-20.
[12]U.S.Department of Education.(2005,November 18).Secretary Spellings announces growth model pilot,addresses chief state school officers'annual policy forum in Richmond[EB/OL].http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/growthmodel/proficiency.html,2005-12-09.
[13][18][28]Katherine E.Furgol and Lelia B.Helms.Lessons in Leveraging Implementation:Rulemaking,Growth Models,and Policy Dynamics Under NCLB[J].Educational Policy,2012,26(6)777-812
[14]Spellings,M.Secretary Spellings announces growth model pilot,addresses chief state school officers'annual policy forum in Richmond[EB/OL].http://www.ed.gov/print/news/pressreleases/2005/11/11182005.html,2005-11-18.
[15]Gail L.Sunderman Foreword.The Unraveling of No Child Left Behind:How Negotiated Changes Transform the Law[R].Cambridge,MA:The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University,2006.6-60.
[16]U.S.Department of Education.Secretary Spellings invites eligible states to submit innovative models for expanded growth model pilot[EB/OL].http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/growthmodel/proficiency.html,2007-12-07.
[17]Title I-Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged,34 C.F.R.§200(2008b).
[19]U.S.Department of Education.(2009a,January 9).Secretary Spellings approves additional growth model pilots for 2008-2009school year[EB/OL].http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2009/01/01082009a.html,2009-08-10.
[20]Hoffer,T.B.,Hedberg,E.C.,Brown,K.L.,Halverson,M.L.,Reid-Brossard,P.,Ho,A.D.,&Furgol,K..Final report on the evaluation of the growth model pilot project.Washington,DC:U.S.Department of Education[EB/OL].http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/disadv/growth-model-pilot/gmpp-final.pdf,2011-12-08.
[21][24]Dee,Thomas S.,Brian A.Jacob,and Nathaniel L.Schwartz.“The Effects of NCLBon School Resources and Practices”[J].Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,2012,20(10):1-28.
[22]Hanushek,Eric A.and Margaret E.Raymond..“Does School Accountability Lead to Improved Student Performance”[J].Journal of Policy Analysis and Management.2005.24.297-327.
[23][25]Michael S.Hayes The Differential Effect of the No Child LeftBehind Act(NCLB)on States’Contributions toEducation Funding in States with Binding School District Tax and Expenditure Limitations[J].Public Budgeting&Finance,2015,(1):49-72.
[26]陈艳萍,洪明.美国联邦政府基础教育改革的重大调整[J].外国中小学教育,2014,(4).
[27]闫双,薛国凤.美国“不让一个孩子掉队法”州弃权政策探析[J].世界教育信息,2014,(6).
[29](美)托马斯·戴伊,孙彩红译.理解公共政策[M].北京大学出版社,2008.46.
[2]Sunderman,G.L..The politics of school reform:The educational excellence movement and state policymaking[J].Chicago:The University of Chicago,Chicago,1995.5.
[3][5]Rosenbloom,D.H..Administrative law for public managers[M].Boulder,CO:Westview,2003.61.
[4]Philip J.Harter,Negotiating Regulations:A Cure for Malaise[J].The Georgetown Law Journal 1982,71,(1):18-19.
[6]20 U.S.C.§6571(a)(Supp.III 2003).
[7]Holley-Walker,D..The importance of negotiated rulemaking to the no child left behind act[J].Nebraska Law Review,2006-2007,(85),1015-1057.
[8]Ronald H.Heck and Jana Chang.Examining the Timing of Educational Changes Among Elementary Schools After the Implementation of NCLB[J].Educational Administration Quarterly,2017,53(4).649-694.
[9]U.S.Department of Education..LEA and school improvement:Non-regulatory guidance[EB/OL].http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/schoolimprovementguid.Pdf,2006-12-09.
[10]U.S.Government Accountability Office..No child left behind act:States face challenges measuring academic growth that education’s initiatives may help address.(PublicationNo.GAO-06-661).[EB/OL].http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06661.pdf,2006-07-08.
[11]U.S.Department of Education..Growth models:Non-regulatory guidance.[EB/OL].http://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/growthmodel/index.html,2009-09-20.
[12]U.S.Department of Education.(2005,November 18).Secretary Spellings announces growth model pilot,addresses chief state school officers'annual policy forum in Richmond[EB/OL].http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/growthmodel/proficiency.html,2005-12-09.
[13][18][28]Katherine E.Furgol and Lelia B.Helms.Lessons in Leveraging Implementation:Rulemaking,Growth Models,and Policy Dynamics Under NCLB[J].Educational Policy,2012,26(6)777-812
[14]Spellings,M.Secretary Spellings announces growth model pilot,addresses chief state school officers'annual policy forum in Richmond[EB/OL].http://www.ed.gov/print/news/pressreleases/2005/11/11182005.html,2005-11-18.
[15]Gail L.Sunderman Foreword.The Unraveling of No Child Left Behind:How Negotiated Changes Transform the Law[R].Cambridge,MA:The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University,2006.6-60.
[16]U.S.Department of Education.Secretary Spellings invites eligible states to submit innovative models for expanded growth model pilot[EB/OL].http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/growthmodel/proficiency.html,2007-12-07.
[17]Title I-Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged,34 C.F.R.§200(2008b).
[19]U.S.Department of Education.(2009a,January 9).Secretary Spellings approves additional growth model pilots for 2008-2009school year[EB/OL].http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2009/01/01082009a.html,2009-08-10.
[20]Hoffer,T.B.,Hedberg,E.C.,Brown,K.L.,Halverson,M.L.,Reid-Brossard,P.,Ho,A.D.,&Furgol,K..Final report on the evaluation of the growth model pilot project.Washington,DC:U.S.Department of Education[EB/OL].http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/disadv/growth-model-pilot/gmpp-final.pdf,2011-12-08.
[21][24]Dee,Thomas S.,Brian A.Jacob,and Nathaniel L.Schwartz.“The Effects of NCLBon School Resources and Practices”[J].Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,2012,20(10):1-28.
[22]Hanushek,Eric A.and Margaret E.Raymond..“Does School Accountability Lead to Improved Student Performance”[J].Journal of Policy Analysis and Management.2005.24.297-327.
[23][25]Michael S.Hayes The Differential Effect of the No Child LeftBehind Act(NCLB)on States’Contributions toEducation Funding in States with Binding School District Tax and Expenditure Limitations[J].Public Budgeting&Finance,2015,(1):49-72.
[26]陈艳萍,洪明.美国联邦政府基础教育改革的重大调整[J].外国中小学教育,2014,(4).
[27]闫双,薛国凤.美国“不让一个孩子掉队法”州弃权政策探析[J].世界教育信息,2014,(6).
[29](美)托马斯·戴伊,孙彩红译.理解公共政策[M].北京大学出版社,2008.46.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |