1 / 20

ESEA – How Did We Get Here?

ESEA – How Did We Get Here?. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) – enacted 2001 Why was it so strict? Role of special ed advocates Required all students to be proficient by 2014 – significant consequences attached to failure NCLB allows for Secretary to grant waivers (unlike IDEA).

genna
Download Presentation

ESEA – How Did We Get Here?

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. ESEA – How Did We Get Here? • No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) – enacted 2001 • Why was it so strict? • Role of special ed advocates • Required all students to be proficient by 2014 – significant consequences attached to failure • NCLB allows for Secretary to grant waivers (unlike IDEA)

  2. ESEA Reauthorization • Started in earnest in 2011 • Harkin introduced ‘bipartisan’ bill in Fall of 2011 • Kline came up with 5 bills in the House • Charter school bill only one that had bipartisan support • And then……nothing happened until….

  3. Secretary Duncan Started Granting Waivers • In September, 2011, Secretary Duncan invited states to apply for waivers • Status of waiver requests: • 47 states, DC, Puerto Rico and BIE have applied for waivers • 39 states & DC have been approved • States NOT applying: CA, MT, ND and NE – 9 LEAs in CA representing more than 1 million students have jointly applied for waivers

  4. What Do ‘Waiver States’ Have to Do? • College and career-ready standards • Adopt the Common Core/New assessments • Identify priority schools • Identify focus schools • Reward high achieving schools • Implement educator effectiveness evaluations

  5. Issues with Waivers • Subgroup accountability • Requirements in general, educator effectiveness evaluation HUGE issue • Should LEAs be granted waivers? • Impact on new ESEA?

  6. More on Waivers • Duncan authorized waiver of waiver requirements regarding implementation of teacher evaluation plans

  7. Which Brings Us To….. • ESEA reauthorization déjà vu all over again

  8. Which Brings Us To….. • ESEA reauthorization déjà vu all over again

  9. Which Brings Us To….. • ESEA reauthorization déjà vu all over again • Or…Ground Hog Day.. Part 3

  10. Current Status of ESEA Reauthorization • Senate markup was June 11-12 • Two bills: Chairman Harkin’s version • Would allow state waivers to continue and require achievement, growth goals and accountability plan in states where no waiver • Ranking member Alexander’s version • States could design their own accountability system; would require subgroup accountability

  11. More on Senate ESEA • Harkin bill does include references to UDL, RTI, PBIS • Teacher evaluations must be based in part on student performance • Overall concerns: • 1%/2% issues • Vouchers • Overall accountability for students with disabilities

  12. More on Senate ESEA • Expect to go to Senate floor in September

  13. House Version of ESEA • Two bills in the House: • Chairman Kline • Ranking Member Miller • Committee markup was June 19 • Kline bill: • States can design their own accountability systems • Continues subgroup disaggregation • Gets rid of maintenance of effort

  14. More on House ESEA • More on Kline bill: • Eliminates cap on alternate assessment • Merges numerous programs -- what’s wrong with block granting programs?? • Could transfer funds among programs • Requires use of teacher evaluation system based in part on student outcomes • Miller substitute was rejected • Floor vote expected this week

  15. More on House ESEA • Watch for voucher amendments • Amendment to change funding formula

  16. Results-Driven Accountability (RDA) • Began in early 2012 – OSEP announced suspension of monitoring visits • Established working group to discuss options • Invited input from stakeholders

  17. Components of RDA • State Performance Plan (SPP)/Annual Performance Report (SPR) to focus more on outcomes • Determinations – will broadly reflect state performance -- not just compliance and accurate data • Differentiated monitoring and technical assistance based on weighted identification of states

  18. Where Are We Now in the Process? • Proposed revisions to Indicators for the SPP/APR were put out for comment this spring • OSEP will consider comments/make final proposal to OMB • Final proposal will go out for 30-day comment period • New SPP/APR will be used for APR due February 1, 2015

  19. New Indicator 17 (Part B) and 11 (Part C) • New: State Systemic Improvement Plan • Removes plans from individual indicators • Questions remain • How is this plan tied to other state improvement activities? • Data reporting in general – connection to other ED program reporting, especially Consolidated State Performance Plan (CSPP) under Title I of the ESEA

  20. Just In Case Your Head Isn’t Spinning Yet…. • There’s: • The President’s early childhood initiative • President’s E-rate initiative • Mental health initiatives • Workforce Incentive Act (WIA) – includes vocational rehabilitation

More Related