A Comparison of the School to Work Opportunities Act and the No Child Left behind Act; The Relationship Between School and Work

This Thesis compares and contrasts the ways in which the School to Work Opportunities Act of 1994 and the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 connect and/or sever the relationship between school and work. While both the School to Work Opportunities Act and the No Child Left Behind Act were enacted in order to improve education, close the achievement gap and enhance the economy, the School to Work Opportunities Act connects school to work while the No Child Behind Act severs notions of school with work. The No Child Left Behind Act focuses on standards and accountability while the School to Work Opportunities Act promotes building a connection between education and employment to help students realize their individual potential. The No Child Left Behind Act favors artificial learning while the School to Work Opportunities Act provides meaningful, real world experiences. The No Child Left Behind Act favors passive learning while the School to Work Opportunities Act utilizes active learning techniques. The School to Work Opportunities Act explicitly link education to work, while the No Child Left Behind Act makes no connection between school and work. This Thesis argues that there is a need for schools to invest more time in assisting students to see the connection between school and their future adult roles and makes recommendation for the inclusion of a career exploration program in every school's curriculum.