1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Nezavi [6.7K]
2 years ago
12

What was the primary focus of the No Child Left Behind Act?

History
2 answers:
dexar [7]2 years ago
4 0
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) was a U.S. Act of Congress that reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act; it included Title I ...
MariettaO [177]2 years ago
3 0

Answer: No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is part of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). NCLB sets high standards and accountability for student achievement to make sure that all children are caught up to 21st century learning.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
"In the late 1800s and early 1900s the federal government supported the efforts of the labor movement."
Katena32 [7]

Answer:

The Pullman Strike and Loewe Vs Lawlor

Explanation:

The Pullman Strike was an organised strike by the American Railway Union against the Pullman Company. The strike closed off many of the nations railroad traffic. Workers of the Pullman company had gone on strike in response to a reduction in wages and when this was unsuccessful, they increased their efforts and with the help of the AFU took it nationwide. They refused to couple or move any train that carried a Pullman car. At its peak the strike included  250,000 workers in 27 states.The federal government's response was to obtain an injunction against the union and to order them to stop interfering with trains. When they refused, President Cleveland sent in the army to stop strikers from interfering with the trains. Violence broke out and the strike collapsed. The leaders were sentenced to prison and the ARU dissolved.

Loewe V Lawlor was a Supreme Court decision that went against the rights of the labour movement. D. E. Loewe & Company had been subjected to a strike and a boycott as a result of it becoming an 'open shop'. The nationwide boycott was supported by the American Federation of Labor and persuaded retailers, wholesalers and customers not to buy from Loewe. This boycott cost him a large amount of money and he sued the union for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act (Another piece of legislation subsequently used to attack unions).

The case was sent to the US Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut, which found that the lawsuit was out of the scope of the Sherman Act. However, upon appeal it then went to the Supreme Court, who ruled in favour of Loewe. The courts decision was important for two reasons. Firstly it allowed individual unionists to be held personally responsible for damages arising from the activities of their unions. Secondly, it effectively outlawed secondary boycott (Where members of different companies boycott in solidarity with the affected workers) as a violation of the Sherman Act. Both of these limited the ability of the unions to bring about change through striking and boycott.

Read more on Brainly.com - brainly.com/question/13463190#readmore

3 0
3 years ago
People now know all the mysteries of God's plant creation.<br> True<br> False
svetoff [14.1K]

Answer:

False

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Each tribe of early Arabs was led by a
MA_775_DIABLO [31]

Answer:

sheikh

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which country switched sides from the Central to the Triple Entente in 1915
Vanyuwa [196]

Answer:  Italy !!!!!

Italy was the European country that entered WWI as part of the Central powers but later switched sides to the Allies in 1915.

Explanation:

Have great day amazing person!!  :)

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Why did manufacturers hire children to work in their factories?
vekshin1

Answer:

A - Factory owners could pay children less money than they paid adults.  

Explanation:

Whenever a business/production line proprietor can lessen his/her expense with respect to paying laborers, they will take. This is the situation with children laborers. Not paying these youngsters indistinguishable wages from grown-ups enable the processing plant proprietors to keep more money for themselves or they can utilize that capital for other expenses.

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Is it important that a single person have authority to rule so that the government can be efficient?
    13·1 answer
  • Why was it a mistake for General Cornwallis to move his troops to Yorktown?
    15·2 answers
  • According to Locke, what may happen when legislators destroy someone's property?
    11·2 answers
  • Describe the backgrounds and philosophies of Patriots and Loyalists. Why did colonists with such diverse individual interests un
    9·1 answer
  • Which two classes of people would historians most likely thank for leaving written records of early civilizations? Select all th
    14·2 answers
  • What conflict started the yakima war and how did it end
    13·2 answers
  • Neo-Malthusians argue that
    6·1 answer
  • How did Kublai Khan's actions reflect the advice of his Chinese adviser?
    15·1 answer
  • During the French and Indian War, George Washington
    8·2 answers
  • What happened to Alexander's armies on the march home?
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!