Bruce Hunter MASFPS November 13, 2007 Reauthorizing the Elementary & Secondary Education Act

Bruce HunterMASFPS

November 13, 2007

Reauthorizing the Reauthorizing the Elementary & Elementary &

Secondary Education Secondary Education ActAct

ESEA Reauthorization – It’s Moving

• House Miller/McKeon discussion draft issued August 30 – seeking comment

• Hearing on Sept 10 – AASA testified

• M &M wanted to mark up in October, but didn’t

• Unhappiness among both R’s & D & the D freshmen slowed the process.

ESEA Reauthorization – It’s Moving

• Senators Kennedy & Enzi released a draft Oct. 16 – missing Titles I, II, VI and IX –

• Missed Oct 31 mark up target

• Kennedy/Enzi method of development is controversial with other Senators

ESEA Reauthorization

• It is going as we projected

• It is going much more slowly than House Chairman Miller and Senate Chairman Kennedy had publicly projected

• If ESEA is not reauthorized in 2007, it may not be reauthorized until a new President is inaugurated in2009.2009.

Seven Reasons Why Reauthorization is Proceeding

Slowly• Very complex and technical issues, e.g., testing• Six years of complaints from educators have taken a toll

on Members and staff• Six years of bashing by prominent researchers and sown

doubt about methods and directions• Six years of implementation decisions that left friends

and foes scratching their heads have sapped confidence• Three election cycles where new members of Congress

ran against NCLB built a reservoir of ill will• Some members who voted for NCLB have had a change

of heart• Anger among Senators on the Senate HELP Committee

who have not been consulted about reauthorization• National v. state v. local control, larger political issues

ESEA Reauthorization Need for speed

• Many school districts will be in corrective action if not the law is not changed

• State tests cannot be fundamentally improved unless the law changes

• Local adaptive or more instructionally sensitive tests cannot be counted

ESEA Reauthorization Need For A Deliberate Pace

• The effect of some proposed changes is either unclear or seem to cause more failure, not less

• There are at least 46 new reports, studies, plans and staffing mandates in the discussion draft, ESEA needs to be less bureaucratic and paperbound not more

• Proposed new programs would dilute ESEA’s focus without enforceable promise of more money to avoid diluting current programs and practices

Troubled ESEA Reauthorization Recent Chronology Oct 11, 2007Roll Call -Talks Stall on No Child Left Behind, By Steven T. Dennis, Roll Call Staff • “Efforts to reach a bipartisan deal on revamped No Child

Left Behind legislation have broken down, with Republicans charging that House Education and Labor Chairman George Miller (D-CA) has refused to compromise.”

• “Republicans said Wednesday that Miller has shown little to no willingness to accommodate their concerns about an erosion of accountability measures and a host of other issues with the bill and say that unless Miller shows new flexibility, Republicans will vote en masse to kill it. “

• “We’re still better off with current law,” said Education and Labor ranking member Howard McKeon (R-CA).”

Troubled ESEA Reauthorization Recent Chronology Oct. 12, Oct. 12,

20072007 Democrats Divided on "No Child" Reauthorization, Democrats Divided on "No Child" Reauthorization, Michael Sandler, CQ TODAY, Michael Sandler, CQ TODAY,

• George Miller has clashed publicly with Republicans and the White House in recent weeks …

• But an equally precarious fight is shaping up within his own caucus.

• Albert R. Wynn, D-MD, expressed– "strong concerns regarding the direction we

appear to be heading in reauthorizing the No Child Left Behind Act."

– "If the bill ultimately presented to the House does not reflect significant changes . . . I will have difficulty supporting its passage,"

Troubled ESEA Reauthorization Recent Chronology Oct 16, 2007One Key Republican staffer’s reaction to the

Kennedy/Enzi draft• It is not the product of a bipartisan process. New

mantra of this reauthorization: More Federal control. No ETA at all on the stuff that matters, 1111 and 1116. Maybe next week, but wouldn’t hold my breath. Kennedy staff is now saying October 31 markup, but I wouldn’t put down any of my own money on that. If it happens that soon, it won’t be bipartisan and it won’t get out of committee.

• There’s just no way we can get a bill done this congress at this point. But please look through this ____ and send me your outrage about all of the federalization of decision making and the massive expansion of obligations and mandates under these proposals. It’s depressing.

Troubled ESEA Reauthorization Recent Chronology Oct 26, 2007

• ED REVIEW- a bi-weekly update on U.S. Department of Education activities NCLB ED REVIEW- a bi-weekly update on U.S. Department of Education activities NCLB UPDATEUPDATE

• As Congressional members continue to debate legislative language for the reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act, President Bush issued a stern warning to those who would change the law's focus on student achievement. "Any effort to weaken No Child Left Behind will get a presidential veto," he said during a town hall-style meeting in Arkansas. "I believe this piece of legislation is important, and I believe it's hopeful, and I believe it's necessary to make sure we've got an educated group of students who can compete in the global economy when they get older."

Troubled ESEA Reauthorization

Recent Chronology Nov 6, 2007• FOR A KEY EDUCATION LAW,

REAUTHORIZATION STALLS

• New York Times -- by Sam Dillon• The leaders of the Senate and House

education committees are signaling that time has run out for reauthorizing the No Child Left Behind Act this year, leaving prospects for rewriting it uncertain during the presidential campaign in 2008.

Troubled ESEA Reauthorization

Recent Chronology Nov 7, 2007Press Statement – George Miller, Chairman , Press Statement – George Miller, Chairman ,

House Education and Labor CommitteeHouse Education and Labor Committee• This week, by saying he will veto additional

funding for America’s schools, President Bush sharply reduced the prospects for good faith bipartisan negotiation over the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind.

• The President proved, yet again, that he is not serious about creating a world-class public education system. He thinks he can have his education legacy on the cheap. He is profoundly mistaken.

Carry Over from NCLB to the Discussion Draft

From the Miller/McKeon Discussion Draft

• The goal of 100% proficiency by 2013-14

• Test at least 95% of the students in grades 3-8 every year in reading and math and then once again in high school on


• Tests must be built around the concept of grade level.

• High performance target - called proficiency.

• Requirement to disaggregate findings and report the results to parents and the community.


• Testing English language learners on content in English after one school year.

• Adequate Yearly Progress, AYP, as the evaluation metric


• The penalties levied, in order, include:• Permitting students in a school that missed AYP to

move to another school of their choice in the district.

• Permitting students to purchase after school tutoring from a list of tutors supplied by the state

• Reopening the school as a charter school

• Hiring an outside group to run the school, and • Reconstituting (redesigning) or closing the school

New Features in the Discussion Draft

• Growth measureGrowth measure looking at scores of cohorts from year to year. The change is determined to be the value added. – Limited to the definition of growth used by the

U.S. Department of Education in the current regulations.


• Multiple measures of achievementMultiple measures of achievement - Limited options • Elementary option

– Another statewide test

• High school options – Graduation rates - required – Rates of college readiness tests like AP and IB, – Rates of postsecondary enrollment, and – Sores on a statewide formative assessment.

• If the state elects to measure growth – additional measure can be growth from below basic to basic;

basic to proficient; etc


• Failure= missing the same cell two years in a row.

• Assessment of special education students = codifying the regulations - 1% & 2% and restriction on the out of level assessments to within the one percent cap.

• Testing ELL students – Where any language group comprises 10 percent of all ELL students in the state -tested in native language.


• Differentiated failure= two tiers– High Priority and Priority

• High Priority = – graduation rate of 60% or less – less than ½ of students scoring proficient – less than ½ in any disaggregated group are

proficient if the state uses a growth model – sanctions are limited to High Priority schools– limited to 10% or 50 schools per district


• Standard calculation of graduation rates, to disaggregate the rates and to use the rates for AYP

• Vertical alignment of standards - would make growth measures more accurate.

• College and work place readiness added to all state standards.


• Expands the improvement timeline by one year before penalties kick in.

• Greater oversight of Supplemental Educational Services– Districts pay ¼ of 1% of Title I– Districts provide professional development reletive to

special education and ELL • HOUSSE eliminated

– Discussion of restoring for special education teachers– No recognition of

• Rural issues• Math/Science/World Language teacher shortages

Controversial New ProvisionsNEA & AFT Concerns

• Requiring equal average per pupil spending for instruction in high- poverty schools and low-poverty schools.

• Providing discretionary grants for to implement performance pay plans (Title II) that include test scores in the calculation of teacher performance.

Controversial New Provisions

AASA Concerns • 46 new paperwork and

administrative requirements in the discussion draft

• The conflict between IDEA and Title I of ESEA regarding student assessment

Controversial New Provisions

AASA Concerns• The graduation calculation must fails

to: • Include students in alternative schools

and students in adult education.

• Recognize that special education services are permitted until age 21

• Give credit for eventual graduation

Controversial New ProvisionsAASA Concerns

– The proposed expansion of services for homeless students under the McKinney – Vento Homeless Act alone adds 12 new requirements.

• Extends school of origin transportation requirement through high school graduation

• Adds a new IDEA like dispute resolution process

School-based Medicaid School-based Medicaid ClaimingClaiming

• *HR 1017 and S 578* Medicaid Administrative and Transportation claiming for school districts

• President Bush’s FY2008 budget proposed elimination of administrative and transportation claiming.

• CMS Proposed regulation to eliminate administrative and transportation claims Sept. 7, 2007.

• SCHIP passed 8/2/07 – Moratorium included in SCHIP until May 28, 2008– SCHIP vetoed- Veto sustained 10/18/07

• SCHIP revised and passed again 10/25 & 11/1/07– Moratorium again included to January 1, 2010

• Urge your members of Congress to recognize the role schools play in health care.

FY’08 Appropriations – Highlights Veto Promised

ProgramProgram FY ’08 funding FY ’08 funding Increase/Decrease Increase/Decrease• Title I $14,311.40 1,473.40

– Basic .50– Concentration .00– Targeted Grants 736.00– EFIG 736.00

• Impact Aid $ 1,262.80 34.35• REAP $ 168.90 .05• Title II $ 3,037.43 150.03• IDEA $12.357.90 555.00

– Part B 509.42• Title V Title V $ -0-$ -0- -0- -0-

Next Steps: A Call to Next Steps: A Call to ActionAction

• Federal Programs administrators 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, don’t assume that someone else will do it!

• Be sure to get to know the Education LA in DC!

AASA Executive CommitteeAASA Executive Committee Positioning AASA 10-06-07 Positioning AASA 10-06-07

AASA views ESEA as an important instrument to promote social justice through its focus on equal educational opportunities for low income and minority students. Unfortunately the policies and practices contained in the Miller/McKeon discussion draft are not sufficient to improve achievement among low income and minority students.

AASA is completely dismayed by the top down, command and control structure governing decisions about teaching and learning. The many complex decisions related to educating individual children are too far removed from Washington and too tempered by family and neighborhood conditions to control through federal policy. Further there is little evidence that rigid, prescriptive federal policy improves achievement. The down side of a top down, command and control structure also includes lost opportunities for improved achievement through individualized policies and practices for specific students that are forbidden by a rigid, one size fits all law.

Therefore AASA will withhold support for the discussion Therefore AASA will withhold support for the discussion draft until sufficient changes, additions and deletions draft until sufficient changes, additions and deletions have been made to produce the desired resultshave been made to produce the desired results. .

Representing YOU Lately:

• AASA submitted comments on proposed rule to eliminate CMS reimbursement: Read AASA's comments on the proposed rule to eliminate CMS reimbursement for school-based administrative and some transportation services. Comments are due to CMS by Nov. 6, 2007.

• AASA Executive Committee Releases Recommendations on ESEA Draft Reauthorization: Read the AASA Executive Committee’s recommendations to Congress on the draft bill to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

• AASA Submits Letter of Support: The FY 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Bill works to reverse the decline in federal education funding to local school districts.

• AASA Releases Talking Points on ESEA Draft Reauthorization: Use these talking points (PDF) in meetings with your representatives!

• AASA Executive Director Paul Houston Testimony Before Congress: On September 10, Paul Houston testified (PDF) before the House Education Committee about the draft ESEA Title I Reauthorization bill.

• AASA Response to ESEA Reauthorization bill: AASA submitted a suite of documents in response to the House Education Committee's draft ESEA reauthorization bill. Read the AASA response below:

– Title I: Response, paperwork concerns and general comments. (PDFs) – Titles II through XI: Response, paperwork concerns and general comments. (PDFs)

Thank You-Thank You-Any questions?Any questions?


• Clear promise to fully fund Title I of ESEA and Part B of IDEA and a clear path to full funding for Title I and IDEA.

• Real, valid, reliable and standards based measures that accurately measure each student's actual starting point and growth over time.

• Settling the continuing conflict between IDEA and Title I of ESEA in favor of the individualized instruction and assessment required by IDEA in the following ways:

– Eliminate the arbitrary caps (1% and 2%) add assessments called for in the student’s IEP;

– Include the IDEA mandate for services to high school graduation or age 21 in the calculation of graduation rates.


• Permitting states to determine appropriate measures and assessments for English language learners based on state approved tests and the professional judgment of teachers and administrators.

• Permitting local school districts to implement formative and adaptive assessments that provide instant feedback, and include the local measures in the accountability system.

• Eliminating all plans, reports, audits and staffing mandates that are not fully funded and not critical to improved achievement for low income students.


• Permitting states greater latitude in selecting measures of achievement and program strength

• Adding a requirement for complete and immediate transparency; eliminate sweetheart deals; and eliminate violations of the Department of Education Organization Act.

• Sharpening the targeting of funds to school districts and schools based on the percentage of such students.


• Adding more assistance and support for schools and school districts.

• Eliminating the comparability requirement for equal per pupil spending on teachers.

• Either eliminate all teacher, administrator and paraprofessional credentialing requirements or restore the HOUSSE provisions in current law.– Rural school districts – Teacher shortage areas

AASA Executive CommitteeAASA Executive Committee

• Eliminate the proposed extension of school of origin change, and the proposed dispute resolution procedure in the Education of the Homeless Act.

• Change the high school graduation rate calculation to include:– special education students up to age 21 based on their transition

plan developed as part of their IEP at age 16, – students in alternative high schools who graduate from high

school even though it may take them longer, – students who achieve a high school diploma through an adult

education class, and– students who have serious health problems or other issues that

remove them from school for extended periods.

Documents

Bruce Hunter MASFPS November 13, 2007 Reauthorizing the Elementary & Secondary Education Act