Ensuring Every Student Succeeds: Opportunities and Challenges of ESSA

1. Ensuring Every Student Succeeds:Opportunities and Challenges of ESSA Maureen Wentworth Director, Education Data & Information Systems Council of Chief State School Officers

2. “By passing this bill, we bridge the gap between helplessness and hope for more than five million educationally deprived children. We put into the hands of our youth more than 30 million new books, and into many of our schools their first libraries. We reduce the terrible time lag in bringing new teaching techniques into the nation's classrooms. We strengthen state and local agencies which bear the burden and the challenge of better education. And we rekindle the revolution--the revolution of the spirit against the tyranny of ignorance. As a son of a tenant farmer, I know that education is the only valid passport from poverty.” -- President Lyndon B. Johnson, April 11, 1965

3. “It will extend programs for the disadvantaged and other students with special needs, stimulate education innovation and reform, enhance local control and flexibility, improve program accountability, and focus program benefits on those with the greatest need.” -- President Ronald Reagan, April 28, 1988

4. “Education is the one investment that means more for our future because it means the most for our children. Real improvement in our schools is not simply a matter of spending more: It's a matter of asking more—expecting more—of our schools, our teachers, of our kids, of our parents, and ourselves.” -- President George H. W. Bush, 1990

5. “The first thing this bill does is to encourage schools to take kids that are from underprivileged backgrounds and instead of separating them out from other students, bring them into the classrooms, have smaller classes, work with them, have kids help kids to get everybody into the mainstream, and everybody develop to the fullest of their God-given capacities.” -- President William Clinton, October 20, 1994

6. “No longer is it acceptable to hide poor performance. No longer is it acceptable to keep results away from parents. One of the interesting things about this bill, it says that we're never going to give up on a school that's performing poorly; that when we find poor performance, a school will be given time and incentives and resources to correct their problems.” -- President George W. Bush, January 8, 2002

7. “And finally, this bill upholds the core value that animated the original Elementary and Secondary Education Act signed by President Lyndon Johnson -- the value that says education, the key to economic opportunity, is a civil right.  With this bill, we reaffirm that fundamental American ideal that every child, regardless of race, income, background, the zip code where they live, deserves the chance to make out of their lives what they will.” -- President Barack Obama, December 10, 2015

9. Overview • The Every Student Succeeds Act aligns with Key Priorities CCSSO outlined for reauthorization: • Maintains annual assessments • Authorizes assessment pilots to foster innovation • Increases state flexibility to design school accountability systems, school interventions and student supports • Gives states flexibility to work with local stakeholders to develop educator evaluation and support systems • Increases state and local flexibility in the use of federal funds

10. Accountability Systems • Each state accountability systems must “meaningfully differentiate” schools using the following components: • Academic proficiency on state assessments • Graduation rates for high school • Growth or another statewide academic indicator for K-8 schools • English language proficiency • At least one additional state-determined (non-academic) indicator of school quality or student success • 95% assessment participation rate

11. Accountability Systems • The accountability components in the law are a minimum. States can add additional subgroups or elements as they see fit. • The law does not specify how a state must weight these components within its accountability system. States have the flexibility to weight each component, but academic indicators must carry “much greater weight” than nonacademic indicators.

12. School Improvement • States must identify and publicly report the following schools based on the state-determined accountability system: • Lowest-performing 5% of Title I schools; • High schools with less than a 67% graduation rate, and • Schools with underperforming subgroups that do not improve after a state-determined number of years. • States must use “evidence based” strategies to improve identified schools. School Improvement Grant (SIG) models are no longer required.

13. Teacher and Leader Quality • The Every Student Succeeds Act does not require specific educator evaluation measures or methods. • The law does allow, but does not require, states to use Title II funds to implement teacher evaluations • Title II Part A allows states to fund their priorities in attracting, preparing, supporting and retaining effective teachers and leaders to serve high-poverty, minority students.   • The law reauthorizes the Teacher Incentive Fund, a competitive grant to support innovative educator evaluation systems.

14. Teacher and Leader Quality • ESSA authorizes new allowable federal funding for states to develop and implement: • Teacher and School Leader Academies; • Activities to support principals (new 3% Title II set-aside); • Educator training on the use of technology and data privacy; • Reform of state certification, licensure and tenure systems; • Development and implementation of teacher evaluation and support systems; • And other state educator workforce priorities.

15. Data Collection and Reporting • ESSA expands requirements for data collection and reporting: • State report cards must include certain OCR data • School-by-school and LEA-by-LEA finance data • Achievement reporting for homeless, military-connected, and foster status • Must make certain data available to the public “in an easily accessible and user-friendly manner that can be cross-tabulated by, at a minimum, each major racial and ethnic group, gender, English proficiency status, and children with or without disabilities.”

16. Educational Technology • Title I: Digital Learning Resource study by IES • Title I: State Assessment Grants • Title II: PD focused on Technology and Student Data Privacy • Title IV-A: Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants • Providing all students with access to a well-­rounded education; • Improving school conditions for learning; and • Improving the use of technology in order to improve the academic achievement, academic growth and digital literacy of all students.

17. Regulations

18. Transition Timeline • Familiarize SEA staff and stakeholders with ESSA; Read and Respond to NPRM Now

19. Our Big Picture To ensure that all students – regardless of background – are prepared for success in college, careers, and life

20. CCSSO’s ESSA Implementation • Cross-Cutting Actions • (Decision Tree Includes) • Equity • Content Knowledge & Evidence • Anchor documents • Communication • Data Use & Technology Supports • Stakeholder Engagement • Advocacy • Continuous Improvement Multi-State Support Tools, Self Assessment & Direct Technical Assistance

21. http://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Programs/Every_Student_Succeeds_Act.htmlhttp://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Programs/Every_Student_Succeeds_Act.html

22. Questions? Maureen Wentworth Director, Education Data and Information Systems Maureen.Wentworth@ccsso.org ESSA.Questions@ccsso.org

23. Appendix More on Regulations

24. Basic Elements of Proposed Regulations • The U.S. Department of Education (ED) officially published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on Tuesday, May 31, 2016 • The NPRM will remain open for public comment for 60 days, with comments due on Monday, August 1, 2016 • The NPRM covers accountability provisions included in Title I, reporting, and consolidated state plan requirements in the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)

25. ESSA Statutory Accountability Provisions: Standards • States must establish “challenging state academic standards” in reading/language arts, math, and science • Standards must be aligned with college entrance requirements and state CTE standards • States must also establish English language proficiency (ELP) standards for English learners

26. ESSA Statutory Accountability Provisions: Assessments • States must administer assessments for reading/language arts and math annually in grades 3-8 and once in high school, and once in each of three grade spans for science • ESSA requires that states assess 95% of all students and subgroups, but statute allows states flexibility in how that requirement is factored into state accountability systems

27. ESSA Statutory Accountability Provisions: Indicators • Required indicators, all of which must be able to be disaggregated: 1) academic proficiency as measured through state assessments, 2) high school graduation rates, 3) growth or another academic progress indicator for elementary and middle schools, 4) ELs’ progress in attaining proficiency in English, and 5) at least one school quality or student success indicator. • State accountability systems must give “substantial weight” to all indicators and “much greater weight,” in the aggregate, to the specified indicators 1-4.

28. ESSA Statutory Accountability Provisions: School Identification • Each state is required to identify schools for: • Comprehensive Support and Improvement: • lowest-performing 5% of Title I schools • all public high schools with a graduation rate below 67%, • additional schools that have chronically low-performing subgroups and have not improved with targeted support. • Targeted Support and Improvement: • Schools with low-performing subgroups, as defined by state.

29. ESSA Statutory Accountability Provisions: School Improvement • Authorizes significant new flexibility in determining what actions to take to improve underperforming schools • Requires “evidence-based” interventions • In place of the School Improvement Grants program and the separate Title I set-aside for school improvement, states receive a single 7 percent set-aside of their Title I allocations for state administration and subgrants to LEAs

30. Proposed USED Regulations re: Indicators Note: all indicators must include at least 3 levels of performance

31. Proposed USED Regulations re:Indicators (cont.)

32. Proposed USED Regulations re:Student Subgroups • “Super subgroups” are not permitted in place of individual subgroups, but may supplement them • N size must be less than 30 or must be approved by ED; lower N sizes are permitted for reporting purposes • Former EL students may continue to be counted for up to 4 years in the EL subgroup count; these students would continue to count towards the EL subgroup N size

33. Proposed Regulations re: Test Participation • States must use one of four methods to respond to participation rates that fall below the 95 percent threshold (all students or subgroup): • Lower summative performance rating • Lowest performance level on academic proficiency indicator • Identification for targeted support and improvement • State-determined action that is rigorous and approved by ED • Schools not meeting the 95 percent participation requirement must develop an improvement plan that is approved and monitored by the local educational agency • LEAs with significant number of schools must implement improvement plans reviewed and approved by state

34. Proposed Regulations re: School Identification • Identification for Comprehensive Support under new accountability structure must take place for 2017-18 school year, based on data available in the 2016-17 school year • Identification of schools with consistently underperforming subgroups for Targeted Support does not have to take place until 2018-19 school year • All schools must receive a single summative rating, from at least 3 rating categories

35. Proposed Regulations re: Identification forComprehensive Support and Improvement • Data can be averaged over a period of up to 3 years • Identification must take place at least once every 3 years • Would require that states use four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate (excludes use of extended year graduation rate)

36. Proposed Regulations re: Identification forTargeted Support and Improvement • Requires the establishment of a uniform, statewide definition of consistently underperforming subgroups that allows for the identification of subgroups based on at least one of the following factors: • Whether a subgroup is on track to meet state’s long-term goals • Whether a subgroup is at or below a state-determined threshold • Whether a subgroup is performing at the lowest performance level on one of the State’s annual indicators • Whether a subgroup is performing significantly below the state average for all students • Another, state-determined factor • Schools with one or more subgroups performing at or below the level of Comprehensive Support and Improvement schools (bottom 5%) must also be identified

37. Proposed Regulations re: Interventions for School Improvement • Interventions must be supported “to the extent practicable” by the strongest level of evidence • States may provide an exhaustive or non-exhaustive state-approved list of intervention strategies • The implementation of school improvement plans may provide for a planning year

38. Proposed Regulations re: Consolidated State Plans

39. Proposed Regulations re: ConsolidatedState Plans (cont.)

40. Public Comment Period Comments must be filed by August 1, 2016. Please comment!

41. Additional Questions can be directed to: Peter Zamora Director of Federal Relations 202-336-7003 Peter.Zamora@ccsso.org