Peg Portscheller CASE Fall, 2002

1. Changes in NCLB That Will Require Either Action By School System Leaders or New School Board Policy Peg Portscheller CASE Fall, 2002

2. School System Leaders Guide to Major NCLB Changes • Requires a single state wide accountability system based on federal specifications. • Requires specific Adequate Yearly Progress targets for every single public school and school district & new Penalties for schools and school districts that fail to hit AYP targets.

3. School System Leaders Guide to Major ESEA Changes 3. Requires hiring only “highly qualified” teachers in Title I schools starting 2002-03 and then in all schools by 2005-6. 4. Requires all paraprofessionals in Title I schools starting January 8, 2002 be “highly qualified” with more limited duties. 5. Requires State and Local Report Cards, and specifies the minimum contents.

4. School System Leaders Guide to Major ESEA Changes 6. Requires use of instruction methods, curriculum and materials and staff development that are backed by “scientifically based research.” 7. Permits new flexibility for local use of funds. 8. Increases the percent of Title I funds allocated to larger, higher poverty school districts.

5. Accountability Requirements: What Is New? • The State must within two years (possible 1 year waiver): • Establish standards (or review and revise existing standards) for reading and math, • Develop or select tests for grades 3-8 in reading and math and one test for high school, • Set cut scores for basic, proficient and advanced, • Set the number of years LEAs have to move 100% of students to proficiency, • Choose method for setting adequate yearly progress, and • Pick at least one other accountability factor beyond tests--for high school it must be drop out rate. • Starting 2007-08 test every student three times in science (grades 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12).

6. Accountability Requirements: What Is New? • Assessments must be aligned with state standards. • Assessments must be “valid and reliable”. • Assessments must provide diagnostic information for teachers and administrators to improve test scores. • Results must be disaggregated by race/ethnicity, poverty status, disability, English proficiency, migrant status, and gender. • Off the shelf Norm Referenced or home grown Criterion Referenced???? • NCLB regulations are tilted toward home grown CRT’s because the test MUST be aligned to state standards– I have heard that ED officials do not believe this is possible for off-the-shelf NRT’s!

7. Accountability Requirements: What Is New? • Local assessments can be used IF: • States assure that the tests are valid and reliable for all subgroups. HOWEVER, if a state uses only local assessments--the results apply only to Title I schools –This area is to be settled right now, it seems that only Nebraska and Iowa could be involved with this decision.

8. Accountability Requirements: New Practices for LEA’s • Starting in school year 2002-2003 school districts and schools must: • Disaggregate test results by: race, gender, language, income level, and disability. • Test at least 95% of the students in each subgroup. • No out of level testing (6th grader cannot take a 3rd grade test). • Accommodations for disabled can include using different tests, but the results must permit comparisons. • Work with the fact that the score of lowest scoring subgroup will be the score for each school and the whole school district.

9. My Recommendations on Accountability—Not AASA’s • Work with your state department of education through your associations to: • Establish a rich inclusive open environment for state decisions on accountability; • Go for depth in standards not breadth. Recognize that schools cannot possibly teach everything in a discipline, and that there is essential information in each discipline that students must master before advanced knowledge is possible; • Cooperatively develop or purchase state tests built on state standards, and on the standards of the Commission on Instructionally Supportive Assessment (see www.aasa.org); • Set the cut scores for proficiency at a reasonable level so teachers and students have a fighting chance to build on success not staunch failure; and • Establish early return of scores and maximum item analysis as standard operating procedures.

10. Adequate Yearly Progress What Is New? • Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is the new measure of quality for ALL public schools and school districts. • Previous accountability applied only to Title I schools, now school districts can be subject to penalties. • Based Primarily on state assessments. • Move 100% of students to Proficiency in reading, math and science within 12 years. • Proficiency is determined by the state—a cut score on the state test. • NCLB only requires penalties for schools and school districts receiving Title I funds.

11. Adequate Yearly Progress What Is New? • Succeeding on AYP means: • That the percent of students scoring at or above the cut score for proficiency grew by the required amount. • Said conversely, not a single cell falls below the minimum percentage set for AYP growth, and • 95% of students were tested in each cell (or has an n below the minimum). • Considerations: • Every secondary factor adds nine cells and nine opportunities to fail. • Every new disaggregated group adds five cells and five opportunities to fail.

12. Minimum 45 Cell AYP Matrix for Schools and School Districts To be resolved in each state: (Smallest n = 30 or 20 or ?)

13. Must Disaggregate and Report for 11 Subgroups: Gender Poverty Migrant Status LEP IEP Race and Ethnicity White Black Hispanic Asian Native American Must Meet AYP for 9 groups: All Students IEP LEP Poverty Race/Ethnicity White Black Hispanic Asian Native American NCLB Requirements for Test Use and Reports

14. Adequate Yearly Progress What Is New? • Succeeding on AYP means: • Not a single cell falls below the minimum set for AYP growth, and • 95% of students were tested in each cell (or has an n below the minimum). • Every secondary factor adds nine cells and nine opportunities to fail. • Statistically every new opportunity to fail will result in additional failures.

15. Penalties for Schools Failing to Make Adequate Yearly ProgressState Oversight Required • Penalties for failure to hit AYP are more extensive. However NCLB penalties apply only to Title I schools either targeted assistance or school wide. • Year one of failure to hit AYP targets: • Unspecified

16. Penalties for Schools Failing to Make Adequate Yearly Progress • Penalties • 2nd year of failure to hit AYP: • Within 3 months develop a 2-year plan for improvement that is scientifically based. • District must direct school to spend at least 5% percent of the Title I allocation on professional development. • District must provide peer review within 45 days. • District must offer students choice to go to “another” school in the district with free transportation—up to 10% of Title I allocation, district pays the remainder. Limitations on choice for: • Capacity • Boundaries • Interdistrict

17. Penalties: Public School ChoiceStates must make the rules • For every school identified for school improvement, the school district must, not later than the first day of the next school year, provide all students enrolled in the school with the option to transfer to another public school served by the local educational agency, which may include a public charter school, that has not been identified for school improvement, unless such an option is prohibited by state law. • Priority must be given to the lowest achieving children from low-income families, as determined by the school district.

18. Penalties for Schools Failing to Make Adequate Yearly Progress • Penalties • 3rd year of year of failure to hit AYP: • Continue implementing plan. • Continue school choice. • District must offer supplemental services for low income children up to 5% of Title I allocation. • State develops the list of qualified providers, • Districts must notify parents at least annually, • Districts must help parents find service providers, • Providers contract with district, and • Districts must monitor and evaluate.

19. Penalties for Schools Failing to Make Adequate Yearly Progress • Penalties • 4th year of year of failure to hit AYP: • District must continue school choice, • District must continue supplemental services to low income students, and • District must take corrective action.

20. Corrective Actions: The school district must chose at least one. • Replace the school staff who are relevant to the failure to make AYP. • Institute and fully implement a new curriculum, providing appropriate professional development. • Significantly decrease management authority at the school. • Appoint an outside expert to advise the school based on its plan. • Extend the school year or day. • Restructure the internal organization of the school.

21. Penalties for Schools Failing to Make Adequate Yearly Progress • Penalties • 5th year of year of failure to hit AYP: • District must continue school choice, • District must continue supplemental services to low income students, and • District must take more drastic restructuring action. Beyond 5th year penalties unspecified but both school districts and states can take more drastic action.

22. Continued Failure: The District Must Choose at Least One • Reopen the school as a public charter school. • Replace all or most of the school staff (which may include the principal) who are relevant to the failure to make adequate yearly progress. • Enter into a contract with an entity, such as a private management company, with a demonstrated record of effectiveness, to operate the public school. • Turn the operation of the school over to the State educational agency, if permitted under State law and agreed to by the State. • Choose any other major restructuring of the school's governance arrangement that makes fundamental reforms. • In the case of a rural local educational agency with a total of less than 600 students in average daily attendance (all of whose schools have a School Locale Code of 7 or 8) the Secretary shall, at such agency's request, provide technical assistance to such agency for the purpose of implementing this clause.

23. My Recommendations to Avoid Penalties– Not CASE’s • Focus your efforts and Title I funds in sufficient quantities to give teachers and principals a fighting chance to succeed. • Avoid spreading Title I funds too thinly. • Put good experienced teachers in schools with high need students. • Use every incentive possible to get good teachers in hard to staff schools. • Use proven interventions in instruction, curriculum, materials and staff development. • There are many claims but few have a basis in science.

24. School District AYP • School districts must make AYP in all cells of the AYP matrix!! • Where students are not tested and the “n” in a cell is too small to report the school district must aggregate and report scores. • Thus, a school may duck by not testing but then the whole district may be thrown into improvement or corrective action. • There is a huge incentive to test all kids and report scores because it is better to have a school in improvement or corrective action than the whole district.

25. What Happens To School Districts That Fail to Make AYP? The State educational agency shall take at least one of the following corrective actions: • Deferring programmatic funds or reducing administrative funds. • Instituting and fully implementing a new curriculum that is based on state and local academic content and achievement standards. • Replacing the local educational agency personnel who are relevant to the failure. • Removing particular schools from the jurisdiction of the local educational agency and establishing alternative arrangements for public governance and supervision of such schools.

26. What Happens To School Districts That Fail to Make AYP? Continued • Appoint a receiver or trustee in place of the superintendent and school board. • Abolish or restructure the local educational agency. • Authorize students to transfer to a higher –performing public school operated by another school district and providing transportation (or the costs of transportation) to such schools.

27. Teacher Qualifications:What Is New? Highly Qualified New Title I Teachers Starting 2002-03. • Highly qualified means: • Has at least a bachelors degree. • Has an academic major in the subject (s) they are teaching or an elementary education degree for elementary teachers. • A full certificate from the state in the subject (s) they teach or an elementary certificate for elementary teachers. • Demonstrated competence through rigorous examination or performance in the subject (s) they teach. • By the end of the 2005-06 school year every teacher must be highly qualified.

28. Paraprofessional Qualifications: What Is New? • New paraprofessionals In Title I Schools must be highly qualified by Jan 8, 2002. • All Title I paraprofessionals must be highly qualified within 4 years. • ED is now using a “liberal” definition -- 4/28 letter • Only Title I paraprofessionals with “instructional duties”, • In school wide programs, only instructional paraprofessionals, and • All Title I aides regardless of duties must be high school graduates. • Highly qualified means: • An AA degree, or • Two years of college, or • Passed a rigorous test demonstrating knowledge equivalent to two years of college.

29. State and Local Report Cards: What is New? At a minimum, State & Local report cards are to include: • Aggregated achievement information. • Disaggregated achievement information by subgroups. • Percentage of students not tested, disaggregated. • Most recent two-year trend data in achievement. • Aggregated information on state indicators used to determine adequate yearly progress (AYP). • Information about performance of districts making AYP. Source: No State Left Behind: The Challenges & Opportunities of ESEA 2001, 3/2002, ECS

30. State and Local Report Cards: What is New? Reporting on teacher qualifications : • The percentage of teachers with emergency or provisional credentials. • The percentage of classes in the state not taught by “highly qualified” teachers. • An explanation of what the school is doing to address low achievement. Source: No State Left Behind: The Challenges & Opportunities of ESEA 2001, 3/2002, ECS

31. Parental NotificationsNew State Requirements? States must provide guidance for parental notifications that meet the requirements of NCLB. School districts must notify parents of children attending Title I schools that they may request information about the professional qualifications of classroom teachers, including, at a minimum: • Whether the teacher has met state qualification and licensing criteria for the grade levels and subject areas taught. • Whether the teacher is teaching under emergency or other provisional status. • The baccalaureate degree of the teacher and any other graduate certification or degree. Source: No State Left Behind: The Challenges & Opportunities of ESEA 2001, 3/2002, ECS

32. Parental NotificationsWhat is New? • A local educational agency shall promptly provide to parents (in an understandable and uniform format and, to the extent practicable, in a language the parents can understand) of each student enrolled in a school identified for school improvement, corrective action, or restructuring; • An explanation of what the identification means, • how the school compares in terms of academic achievement to other schools in the district and State; and • the reasons for the identification.

33. Parental Notifications for Low Performing Schools: What is New? • Parental notifications must contain an explanation of: • What the school district or state department is doing to help the school; • how the parents can become involved in addressing the academic issues; and • the parents' option to transfer their child to another public school (with transportation provided by the LEA) or to obtain supplemental educational services for their child.

34. New Requirements Re:Teaching, Curriculum, Materials and Professional Development. • Instructional methods, curriculum and materials and professional development must be based on scientific research. • All Title I schools must allocate between 5 and 10% of their allocation to scientifically based professional development. • In low performing schoolsat least 10% of Title I grant must be spent on professional development.

35. Local Flexibility: What Is New? LEA may transfer up to 50% of the funds it receives among the following programs: • Teacher quality state grants, • Educational technology, • Innovative programs, • Safe and drug-free schools, and • 21st Century Community Learning Centers. Funds may not be taken out of Title I, Part A, but can be put into Title I Part A. Source: No State Left Behind: The Challenges & Opportunities of ESEA 2001, 3/2002, ECS

36. Local Flexibility: What Is New? A district identified as in need of improvement under Title Imay transfer up to 30% of its allocation among the following programs: teacher quality state grants, educational technology state grants, innovative programs, and safe and drug-free schools. The district, however, must transfer the funds to either supplement its school improvement allocation or carry out Title I district improvement activities. Source: No State Left Behind: The Challenges & Opportunities of ESEA 2001, 3/2002, ECS

37. FOR COPIES OF THIS PRESENTATION:WWW.CO-CASE.ORG You must have PowerPoint for e-mail or we can mail you a black & white hard copy