1 / 23

Sizing Up the Opportunities

Sizing Up the Opportunities. Service-Learning and the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Shelley H. Billig, Ph.D RMC Research, Denver CO. The Act. No Child Left Behind reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Schools Act (ESEA) Provides about 5% of all education funds in the U.S.

Download Presentation

Sizing Up the Opportunities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Sizing Up the Opportunities Service-Learning and the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Shelley H. Billig, Ph.D RMC Research, Denver CO

  2. The Act • No Child Left Behind reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Schools Act (ESEA) • Provides about 5% of all education funds in the U.S. • Embeds a 12 year lifespan though will be revisited legislatively in 2006.

  3. NCLB Emphases • Accountability • Increased academic achievement • Standards • Scientifically based evidence of success • Accountability!!

  4. Title I Part A • Part A: Funds for economically disadvantaged youth; • Service-learning is an allowable use of funds IF it is linked to academic achievement. • Example: Georgia • Issues: territoriality and “making the case”.

  5. Title I Part C • Funds for migrant education: can be used for program delivery during the school year or summer school; • Example: Colorado • Issues: lack of awareness, entry/exit of students.

  6. Title I: Part H • Part H: School Dropout Prevention – allows counseling and mentoring for at-risk students. Schools can implement service-learning programs that include tutoring, peer counseling, cooperative learning, and other similar approaches. • Example: Kansas • Issues: student voice, teacher training, and transportation.

  7. Title III • Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students—eligible entities may receive funds for “implementing applied learning activities such as service-learning”; • Example: Texas • Issues: state policies surrounding ELL

  8. Title IV • 21st Century Schools programs – may use funds for service-learning or community service to rebuild safe and healthy neighborhoods and increase students’ sense of responsibility; • Safe and Drug Free Schools – may be used to prevent risk behaviors; • May use funds for mentoring, including programs that include service and service-learning Examples: Texas, California, Nebraska, Utah Issues: competitive funding; need for data

  9. Title V • Innovative programs– may include community service programs and service-learning activities; • Character Education programs– service-learning in use in NY, PA, CA, others; • Gifted and Talented programs - establish and operate model projects and exemplary programs including service-learning. • Examples: New York; Pennsylvania • Issues: evaluation; sparse funding.

  10. Title VII • Funds for Indian, Native Hawaiian, Native Alaskan Education – for mentoring, training, and apprenticeship programs that may include service-learning. • Examples: Hawaii; Montana • Issues: professional development

  11. Profile of Linkages Between Service-Learning and NCLB Programs

  12. NCLB Coordinators’ Familiarity with Service-Learning (Those with Linked Programs in the State)

  13. Title Coordinators’ Views of SL

  14. State Policy Supports for SL

  15. District Funding for Service-Learning: Average Across States

  16. NCLB Challenges • Accountability: how coordinators define this will open or limit opportunities for service-learning; • Scientifically-based evidence of success is needed – either academic success or reduction of risk or other valued outcomes; • Quality counts; • Relationships count.

  17. Challenges Reveal by SL Survey Respondents • Funding; • Emphasis onstandards and testing; • Lack of time; • Lack of conceptual understanding; and • Lack of or conflicting state policies.

  18. Keys to Success • Must be “best” or “promising” practice – eventually meet criteria for scientifically-based best practice. • Can be used to fund professional development, if linked to Title program. • Can be used to fund coordinators, materials, transportation if linked to program design and goals.

  19. Survey Respondents: Facilitators of Progress • Financial support; • State “culture of service”; • Strong community partnerships; • Professional development opportunities and understanding of service-learning among administrators and teachers; • Individual district or school champions;

  20. Facilitators of Progress (continued) • Link to content standards; • State-supplied tangible resources such as curriculum projects; • Strong state level team familiar with service-learning; • State conferences with sl presentations; and • Ability to show “legal” links.

  21. Training Needs • Learning about best practices for high quality service-learning specifically for academic achievement; • Learning about how to use service-learning for specific Title purposes; • Developing strategies to help coordinators become aware; • Evaluation appropriate to Title programs; and • Information on outcomes.

  22. What Next? • Awareness needs; • Motivation to adopt; • Implementing best practices; • Evaluation. • Tools are available; • Professional development is available; • Data are available… Advocacy and a strategic plan are needed.

  23. Resources • National Service-Learning Clearinghouse - www.nslc.org; • National Service-Learning Partnership - www.nslp.org; • Corporation for National and Community Service – www.cncs.org; • National Youth Leadership Council - www.nylc.org; • Many more….

More Related