The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

1
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Reauthorizing the Elementary Secondary
Education Act Getting it Right this time

• Mary Kusler
• American Association of School Administrators
• November 29, 2007

2
FY 2008 Education Appropriations

• President vetoed the Congressional spending plan.
  Override vote failed Thursday evening by 1 or 2
  votes..
• Education would receive a 3.2 billion increase.

• Highlights include
• 1.8 billion for Title I
• 500 million for IDEA
• 100 million for Teacher Quality
• REAP is level funded

• Lowlights include
• Title V is ELIMINATED
• 13.4 cut for Safe and Drug Free Schools
• Everything else level- funded

3
School-based Medicaid Claiming

• President Bushs FY2008 budget proposed
  elimination of administrative and transportation
  claiming.
• Comment period Sept. 7, 2007 through Nov. 6, 2007
• Moratorium included in SCHIP until January 1,
  2010!!
• Support efforts to legitimize claiming for school
  districts. HR 1017 and S 578
• Expand claiming to 504 Vocational Rehab students.
• Support uniform methodology for claiming.
• Urge your members of Congress to recognize the
  role schools play in health care.

4
House ESEA Reauthorization

• House discussion draft issued August 27
• Extensive hearing on it September 10
• 46 witnesses testified, including AASA, no rural
  specific representative
• Discussion Draft of Titles II thru XI posted
  September 7th .
• Politics stalled progress for the rest of this
  session. Committee plans to take it up again in
  January.
• Waiting for next version of the bill.

5
Senate ESEA Reauthorization

• Senate is also slowly working but work is under
  tight wraps so we are unsure of what it contains.
• Committee released parts of Titles I II, III,
  IV, VI, VII X
• Has yet to complete discussions on Title I, Part
  A and the teacher provisions.
• Rumor says they will release their bill in
  January.
• With ESEA not progressing until January, it may
  not be reauthorized until a new President is
  inaugurated in 2009.

6
Function of Accountability Oversight or
Improved Instruction

• Information focused on Congressional, media and
  state officials will
• Provide political and media leaders information
  that is sufficient to identify problems and
  justify sanctions against school districts,
  schools, and educators where progress doesnt
  occur.
• Not be sufficient or accurate enough to make
  individual instructional decisions.
• Be understandable enough to the public to make
  federal labels and actions credible.

7
Function of Accountability Oversight or
Improved Instruction

• Information focused on instructional improvement
  will be
• Sufficient and accurate enough to make individual
  instructional decisions
• Sufficient and accurate information enough to
  plan and organize instruction, and accurately
  evaluate system wide progress.
• Understandable enough to the public to be
  credible evaluations of student achievement in
  schools and school districts

8
Major Changes in Senate Bill

• While most of the bill have not been released,
  two provisions are troublesome for rural schools.
• Safe and Drug Free Schools is changed from a
  formula grant program to a competitive grant
  program.
• Schools with locale code 6 are eliminated from
  the Rural and Low-income Schools Program.
• Still waiting to see Senate version of Title I.

9
Chairman Millers Non-negotiable List

• 100 proficiency
• 2013-14 timeline
• Disaggregation
• Penalties for continued low test scores

10
ESEA Issues 100 GoalPolitically Untouchable

• No goal can simultaneously be challenging to and
  achievable by all students across the entire
  achievement distribution. A standard can either
  be a minimal standard which presents no challenge
  to typical and advanced students, or it can be a
  challenging standard which is unachievable by
  most below-average students. No standard can
  serve both purposes this is why we call
  'proficiency for all' an oxymoron - but this is
  what NCLB requires.
• Richard Rothstein, Rebecca Jacobsen, and Tamara
  Wilder, EPI

11
Top AASA PrioritiesDiscussion Draft Limits
Options

• Growth measures permitted but limited to USED
  definition.
• Value Added - based on single snap shot tests
• Multiple measures permitted, but limited to
• Elementary- Another statewide test
• Secondary - A statewide test, graduation rate,
  increases in rates taking AP, IB, QualityCore and
  other courses and increases in college attendance
  rates

12
Computing AYPMultiple Measures

• In the case of an elementary school, the total
  credit any group may receive from additional
  indicators may not exceed 15 percent of its
  annual measurable objectives in reading or
  language arts and mathematics.
• In the case of a secondary school, the total
  credit any group may receive may not exceed 25
  percent of its annual measurable objectives in
  reading or language arts and mathematics.

13
Proposed Graduation Rate Calculations

• Creates a national calculation of graduation
  rate.
• Allows for a 4 or 5 year graduation cohort.
• 1 percent of students with disabilities excluded
  from calculation.
• 90 percent of all students from each of the
  disaggregated subgroups must meet graduation
  requirements.
• Or there must be growth/ improvement in those
  categories.

14
Special Education Assessment

• Concern 1 percent rule for alternate
  assessmentsnot scientifically defensible.
• Discussion draft codifies USED 1 and 2 special
  education testing rules.
• The draft allows for a waiver of the 2 rule to
  3 but there is limited opportunity for the 1
• Out of level testing is NOT in discussion draft
• Staff is dubious about out of level testing.
• Disability community is having a large impact.
• USED regulations only allow it in the 1.

Reid Lyon, in the Title I Monitor, May 2005
15
Proposed ELL Assessment

• New reliance on native language assessments.
• States required to develop native language
  assessments for any group that makes up 10 of
  the student population.
• Can use for up to 5 years, with 2 additional
  years possible.
• Questions about validity of native language
  assessments.

16
Proposed ELL Assessment

• Still have not addressed concerns of new
  immigrants to the country.
• Only exempted from reading and language content
  exams for the first year in the US.
• Will require schools to be held accountable for
  students comprehension of content before they
  even understand English.

17
Proposed Changes in Penalties

• New focus on school improvement.
• Differentiated Consequences
• High Priority
• More than ½ students not proficient, Grad rate of
  60 or less
• Priority
• Missed AYP
• Third year before penalties kick in
• Caused by same group missing AYP two years in a
  row
• Address High Priority schools first
• Redesign rather than reconstitution
• (5) SUPERVISION BY SUPERINTENDENT.The
  superintendent or chief executive of the local
  educational agency shall directly supervise the
  redesign of each school being redesigned under
  this subsection.

18
ProposedHighly Qualified Teachers

• Each local educational agency receiving
  assistance under this part shall ensure that all
  teachers hired and teaching in a program
  supported with funds under this part are highly
  qualified
• LOCAL PLAN.As part of the plan described in
  section 1112, each local educational agency
  receiving assistance under this part shall
  develop a plan to ensure its compliance with the
  requirement that all teachers teaching within the
  school district served by the local educational
  agency are highly qualified.

19
Proposed COMPARABLILITYThe Unions Object

• (A) COMPARABLE FUNDING IN GENERAL.Except as
  provided in paragraphs (4) and (5), a local
  educational agency may receive funds under this
  part only if the average expenditure per pupil,
  of State and local funds for teacher salaries, in
  the schools served under this part is equal to or
  greater than the average expenditure per pupil,
  of State and local funds on teacher salaries, in
  schools that are not receiving funds under this
  part.

20
Pay for PerformanceTitle II- The Unions Object

• Provide higher salaries to principals and
  teachers with at least 3 years of experience,
  including teachers certified by the National
  Board for Professional Teaching Standards, if the
  principal or teacher agrees to serve full-time
  for a period of 4 consecutive school years at a
  public high-need elementary school or a public
  high-need secondary school.

21
Proposed State Use of FundsTitle II- The Unions
Object

• Developing or assisting local educational
  agencies in developing performance pay programs
  or programs that reward teachers who teach in
  schools that have acute learning needs , if such
  activities have the demonstrated support of
  teachers in such local educational agencies and
  that such programs are not based primarily on
  student test scores.
• Developing or assisting local educational
  agencies in developing teacher advancement
  initiatives that promote multiple career paths
  for teachers (such as becoming a career teacher,
  mentor teacher, or master teacher).

22
Proposed New Reports, Plans, Studies and
Staffing Mandates

• 14 new reports, studies, plans and staffing
  mandates required in Title I of the discussion
  draft
• 32 new reports, studies, plans and staffing
  mandates required in Titles II-XI of the
  discussion Draft
• The Grand Champion of New Mandates is the Stuart
  McKinney Education for Homeless Children and
  Youth Act with 12 new requirements

23
Promise or Problem?New Programs in Discussion
Draft

• Creation of a New High School Improvement
  formula. Purposes include
• (1) to ensure all students graduate from
  secondary school with the education and skills
  necessary to compete in a global economy
• (2) to support comprehensive and effective
  secondary school reform in secondary schools
  designated as high priority or high priority
  redesign
• (3) to end the dropout crisis through early
  intervention and support to at risk students in
  middle and secondary school.

24
Promise or Problem?New Programs in Discussion
Draft

• Major pressure to create a new middle school
  formula program.
• What will that do to our push for Title I
  funding?
• Creation of a host of new competitive grant
  programs.
• Environmental education.
• Community schools.

25
Reauthorization of REAP

• Some changes need to be made to improve REAP in
  the coming reauthorization.
• Specifically, a number of districts are no longer
  receiving a financial benefit from the program
  despite qualifying.
• Allow districts to choose which program to apply
  under.
• Raise the sliding scale from 20,000 - 60,000 to
  25,000 - 70,000.
• For the Rural Low-income program, use free and
  reduced lunch instead of census.
• Update Locale codes.

26
Next Steps A Call to Action

• With bills being proposed in both houses, make
  sure your voice is heard.
• Superintendents must activate on ESEA.
• They will make these decisions with or without
  you.
• Better outcomes happen when you are involved.
• Get involved, make a call, dont assume that
  someone else will do it!
• Be sure to get to know the Education LA in DC!

27
Any questions?

• Mary KuslerAssistant Director, Government
  Relations American Association of School
  Administrators801 N. Quincy Street, Suite
  700Arlington, VA 22203(703) 875-
  0733mkusler_at_aasa.org