Public policy is full of rhetorical messages, and the ways in which politicians use rhetoric shapes the mindset of a society. This is especially true when it comes to federally mandated policy written in regard to America’s public education system.
The No Child Left Behind Act is by far the most controversial education reform artifact ever published due to its insistence punishing non-compliant schools. This system of surveillance, coupled with other issues that will be discussed herein, have caused most educators to loudly criticize the bill, while the Bush administration under which it was enacted refuses to back off on its insistence that the act will work.
In the field of communication studies, in order to gain a rhetorical perspective on discourse, it is vital to look at the relationship between historical events and the rhetoric surrounding them. Thus, in this dissertation I provide a rhetorical analysis of NCLB and how it measures in a rhetorical and historical context with other modern educational reform artifacts. I make the argument that an act cannot be successful on its name alone, but that is exactly the logic supporters of the No Child Left Behind Act are using.