EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 1
External Influences on Education Timeline
Quan H. Nguyen
School of Education, Liberty University
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 2
Abstract
As a reflection of the shifting values and influences of the country, educational development has
mirrored these periods of change. These times of educational change were strongly influenced by
three main contributors: advocacy groups, business groups, and political organizations. The
timeline of education in America is rife with advancements and setbacks led by these three
sources. Education began as a right only to white sons of property owners, but through the years
of effort by advocacy groups the country progressed, the right to education was expanded to
include all children, white, nonwhite, disabled, regardless of background or condition. Business
groups took advantage of the opportunity to promote their products or services in schools
resulting in cases of both successful and regretful decisions by education leaders. Political
organizations have worked with the public to determine educational reform, and some of the
greatest shifts in education were the consequence of these powerful groups. Throughout history,
the US education system has redefined who is a student and the rights and privileges of students,
shifted the goals of the education system, and worked to protect schools and its members. To
understand the current educational climate, it is imperative we look at the forces that have helped
shape it into what it has become today.
Keywords: education, timeline, educational reform, advocacy group, business group,
politics, civil rights, Common Core State Standards
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 3
External Influences on Education Timeline
First Event: 1954
External Influence: Advocacy Group
Summary of the Event
In May 1954, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas ended racial segregation
in public schools. The previous 60 years were governed by the “separate but equal” precedent
ruled in Plessy v. Ferguson. Brown v. Board of Education found the practice unconstitutional
and that it infringed upon the 14th Amendment rights of nonwhite students. This case was
largely organized by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
(NAACP), an advocacy group dedicated to fighting racial injustice. The group recruited the
thirteen plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit and provided legal representation through NAACP
chief counsel Thurgood Marshall. A year and a half after the first argument in the case, the
Supreme Court sided with the Browns in a unanimous 9-0 decision allowing students to attend
public schools regardless of racial background (Yell, 2022).
Impact on Education
The decision took place in 1954, but its full implementation was not achieved until more
than 10 years later. As the school systems changed, white and nonwhite students were becoming
increasingly integrated. This led to much higher academic achievement for nonwhite students as
the disparity between white and nonwhite students became less drastic. This improvement has
not completely bridged the gap, as recent studies find progress in desegregation is stagnating
(United States Government Accountability Office, 2022). Brown v. Board dramatically shifted
the educational outlook of millions of Americans, becoming a huge milestone in the fight for
racial equality in schools.
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 4
Personal Thoughts on Influence
The importance of Brown v. Board cannot be understated. The legal precedent meant that
state governments could no longer overtly exclude nonwhite Americans, and were mandated to
provide equal access to schools. This decision was an acknowledgment that the implementation
of schools and the practices of local governments were unjust. Actions rooted in racial inequality
could no longer wield legal authority to perpetrate its ends. In an ideal world, this decision would
lead to perfect integration and communities nationwide would work harmoniously to achieve it.
However this is not the case, and those uninterested in integration continue to work to find ways
to give preferential treatment to their group of choice. Brown v Board was a monumental first
step, but it cannot be the final step if we want to truly ensure education for all students.
Second Event: 1998
External Influence: Business Group
Summary of the Event
Beginning in the 1980s the heightening corporate rivalry between Coca Cola and Pepsi
was dubbed the “Cola Wars.” This battle between soft drink competitors found its way into
American public schools. Coca Cola and Pepsi began to pay schools to have their products on
school campuses, most often in the form of sodas in vending machines. By 1998, over a hundred
schools were in business with one of the two companies and were paid in excess of $100 million
for the privilege. A contract with one company meant the school would receive funds in
exchange for exclusive rights to provide soft drinks to that school or district (Nestle, 2000). By
the end of the early 2000s many school districts began to end the practice and banned the sale of
soft drinks.
Impact on Education
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 5
In a move to obtain more funding, schools allowed these beverage companies to operate
on campuses nationwide. These contracts improved the well-being of the school in the short-
term, but major health concerns were raised about the effect the drinks would have on the health
of the student population (Hawkes 2010). Students were subject to concerted efforts to advertise
unhealthy choices, backed by their own school. The schools became more and more dependent
on these companies for funding, reaching a point where a student was even suspended for
wearing “Pepsi” memorabilia to their school’s “Coke Day.” Education was becoming
commercialized at a steady rate, and commercial interests became more ingrained in school
culture.
Personal Thoughts on Influence
In my opinion, this event highlighted two main flaws in the US system of education. The
first being that schools did not have the resolution to keep unhealthy choices off campus, but
instead chose to accept them in return for funding. Schools needed that funding, and when it was
offered, they took the opportunity. The second flaw being that there was no oversight to protect
children from the marketing efforts of commercial interests. Children are especially susceptible
to advertising strategies which may lead them to make decisions impulsively that have longer-
reaching consequences that they can not yet account for. One of the core responsibilities of a
school is to keep the children safe, and allowing these companies into schools was a great
disappointment. I can understand why the schools made the choice they did, but it ultimately was
a choice sacrificing the long-term health of students for a short-term gain.
Third Event: 1990
External Influence: Advocacy Group
Summary of the Event
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 6
The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) was enacted by the 101st United
States Congress to ban discrimination on the basis of disability. This had far-reaching
consequences including ensuring disabled people had an equal opportunity for employment and
state and local government services. Schools fell under public services and thus were subject to
the changes called for by the ADA (Essex-Sorlie 1994). Schools around the country were tasked
with improving accessibility for students with disabilities which resulted in changes to building
functionality, access to academic content, and other school services. The ADA is still in effect,
and school systems are responsible for keeping their schools ADA compliant.
Impact on Education
Previously, schools were subject to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA) which mandated all students have access to a free and appropriate education. This
included students with disabilities. The ADA was put in place partially to reinforce the
responsibility of public entities to provide appropriate accommodations, especially to allow
students to disabled students to accomplish the necessary activities required of a student. The
ADA did not have a strong impact on the expenditure of school districts (Gius, 2005) despite its
apparent call to invest in school infrastructure. Students with disabilities have seen increased
academic involvement and achievement as the ADA continues to affect school accessibility.
Personal Thoughts on Influence
This civil rights act was a key step in the continuing efforts of activists to ensure equal
rights for people with disabilities. Ideally, IDEA would ensure that students of all molds would
be given the same access to learning opportunities, but the wide scope of accommodations
proved to need the reinforcement of the ADA. I believe this is an ongoing fight to provide
students with disabilities a quality education. The difficulties of people with disabilities have
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 7
been lying undetected by the majority of Americans, but acts like the ADA bring to the forefront
our responsibility to our members of our greater community. The ADA was a strong step in the
right direction to treat students with respect and dignity and is a good model for our students in
how to support one another.
Fourth Event: 2002
External Influence: Political
Summary of the Event
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 was passed on January 8, 2002. This act
increased the federal government’s presence in public education. Schools were mandated to test
every student and determine their level of academic achievement. These assessments came in the
form of standardized testing originally based on mathematics and reading standards but
eventually included science standards. The federal government became the monitor of school
achievement and would check schools against their adequate yearly progress (AYP). If the
school does not meet their AYP for two consecutive years, the government would mark them for
Program Improvement (PI) (California Department of Education, 2024).
Impact on Education
The NCLB Act caused a wide-sweeping change in education as it was implemented
throughout America. The student population as a whole showed signs of improving academic
achievement, but the positive trends did not hold in all subpopulations and some continued to be
underserved (Husband & Hunt, 2015). It should be noted, that the causation between the NCLB
Act and these improvements could not be robustly established. In response to the NCLB Act,
teacher hiring practices and professional development shifted towards their education levels and
certifications and away from their knowledge of the local community and school. School
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 8
administrators have placed a higher emphasis on data analysis to better satisfy the NCLB Act
and have taken on larger roles in the instructional leadership of teachers. The NCLB Act shifted
the priorities of schools nationwide and had long lasting effects on the goals and implementation
of education.
Personal Thoughts on Influence
The NCLB Act was well-intentioned when it was drafted and voted into law. The aim
was to ensure every student was achieving some level of academic success through the
monitoring of their standardized test scores. Although the goal was good, the plan to achieve it
had serious limitations and unintended consequences. As higher emphasis was placed on test
scores, the pressure to “teach to the test” began to outweigh other considerations. Creative and
active learning went into the background as school systems were incentivized to do well on those
tests. The educational trend has since begun to swing back from focusing on standardized testing
and onto developing higher-order thinking. Tests are a good way of determining understanding,
but they can not be the end-all be-all of learning. This teaches the wrong message, that the final
score is all that matters. I believe the overall development of critical thinking is the long-lasting
effect education professionals should strive for. The NCLB Act was done in earnest, but missed
the mark in implementation.
Fifth Event: 2010
External Influence: Political
Summary of the Event
The Common Core State Standards Initiative (Common Core) began in 2010 as a means
to improve cohesion of state standards across America. This movement was headed by the
National Governors Association, a political organization, and the Council of Chief State School
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 9
Officers, an organization of leaders of school systems in the US. The development of the
standards began in 2008 with the express aim to provide clear, globally relevant standards to
improve the educational success of students throughout the country (Au, 2013). After many
drafts and input form teachers, researchers, administrators, and other members of the educational
system, the standards were formalized and published. In 2010, 41 states adopted Common Core
English and mathematics standards.
Impact on Education
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) have resulted in the standardization of
standards in a vast majority of the country. In general, states affirmed that the CCSS has raised
the level of rigor in their school systems. They have also stated that resources were inadequate
for full implementation of the CCSS (Kober & Rentner, 2012), and so implementation may have
been delayed. Most research into the effectiveness of the math standards have demonstrated
limited improvement (Allensworth et al., 2021). There has been pushback against the CCSS as
some educators have cited opposition to the perceived unilateral decision making of national
entities and the reduced role of local educators in developing content standards (Tampio, 2018).
Personal Thoughts on Influence
As a student who graduated in 2012, I have not experienced the teaching methods based
on the CCSS. My overwhelming experience with the CCSS has been with bewildered parents
and teachers at the seemingly unnecessary change to how math and english are taught in schools.
This gave me the impression that the CCSS were a decision made by powerful people who were
so used to seeing the big picture that they failed to notice the effects of their leadership at the
local level. However, as I took a closer look at what the standards were trying to achieve, I could
see the benefits. Math and English became less about memorization and more about having
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 10
strong reasoning. This can seem foreign to those who are not accustomed to that emphasis, but I
believe the CCSS are a step in the right direction. It is far from perfect, as I do agree that there is
value in having some skills grounded in memorization such as basic mathematical operations,
but the underlying critical thinking needed to be highlighted more than it had in the past.
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 11
References
Allensworth, E., Cashdollar, S., & Gwynne, J. (2021). Improvements in Math Instruction and
Student Achievement Through Professional Learning Around the Common Core State
Standards in Chicago. AERA Open, 7. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420986872
Au, Wayne. (2013). Coring social studies within corporate education reform: The Common Core
State Standards, social justice, and the politics of knowledge in U.S. schools. Critical
Education 4(5). http://ojs.library.ubc.ca/index.php/criticaled/article/view/182278
CalEdFacts (2024). No Child Left Behind - CalEdFacts. California Department of
Education.https://www.cde.ca.gov/nclb/sr/pc/cefnclb.asp#:~: text=On%20January
%208%2C%202002%2C%20the ,education%20more%20prominent%20than%20ever .
Essex-Sorlie, D. (1994) The Americans with Disabilities Act: I. History, summary, and key
components. Academic Medicine 69(7), 519-524.
Gius, Mark. (2005). The Effect of the American with Disabilities Act on Public Education
Expenditures. Journal of Social Sciences. 1(3), 162-165.
Hawkes C. (2010). The Worldwide Battle Against Soft Drinks in Schools. American Journal of
Preventive Medicine (38)4. 457-461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2010.01.011.
Husband, T. & Hunt, C. (2015). A Review of the Empirical Literature on No Child Left Behind
from 2001 to 2010. Planning and Changing, 56(1/2), 212-254.
Kober, N. & Rentner D. S. (2012). Year Two of Implementing the Common Core State
Standards: States’ Progress and Challenges. Center on Education Policy.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED528907.pdf
Nestle, M. (2000). Soft drink "pouring rights": marketing empty calories to children. Public
Health Rep. 2000 Jul-Aug;115(4):308-19.
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON EDUCATION TIMELINE 12
Tampio, N. (2018). A Democratic Critique of the Common Core English Language Arts
(ELA) Standards. Democracy and Education, 26(1), Article 4.
https://democracyeducationjournal.org/home/vol26/iss1/4
United States Government Accountability Office. (2022). K-12 EDUCATION Student population
has significantly diversified, but many schools remain divided along racial, ethnic, and
economic lines [Report to the Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor, House of
Representatives]. United States Congress. https://www.gao.gov/assets/730/721613.pdf
Yell, M. (2022). Brown v. Board of Education and the Development of Special Education.
Intervention in School and Clinic, 57(3), 198-200.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512211014874
