 |
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| NCLB QueryMaster |
 |
This tool, an online, interactive NCLB database, is available to those who have access to InsideNEA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| All stimulus, all the time |
Last week the Department of Education released a bonanza of information, guidance documents, and fact sheets on a number of programs related to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), including the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF), Title I Part A, and IDEA Parts B and C (early childhood services for students with disabilities).
While all of these programs relate in some way to education (and to the goals of NCLB to close achievement gaps), here are a few nuggets of particular importance:
State Fiscal Stabilization Funds: While the Department of Education has not yet signaled how it will address the accountability framework of NCLB, it has become increasingly specific in its intention to tie ARRA to some of NCLB’s main objectives. For example, to receive SFSF funds the Department will require states to provide both baseline data and follow-up numerical reports on four policy “assurances”: (1) increasing teacher effectiveness and addressing inequities in the distribution of highly qualified teachers; (2) requiring rigorous academic standards and student assessments; (3) establishing effective longitudinal data systems that are timely and inform instruction; and (4) providing assistance to schools in the restructuring phase.
To get the first round of SFSF funds (67 percent of a state’s total stabilization allocation), governors must commit to advancing educational reform in the four areas noted above (the so-called assurances). To receive phase two funding, states will have to document progress in the specific areas. Note: Draft metrics will be published in the Federal Register for public comment in the near future. For each metric, a state would need to demonstrate that it collects the required data and that it will make the data easily accessible to the public. If a state cannot report the final developed metrics, it would submit a plan detailing how it would report this information by September 30, 2011.
While the Department expects states “can and should make progress on each of the proposed metrics,” it says states are not required to demonstrate progress in order to get SFSF phase two funds. “We are only asking states to ensure that states have in place systems to report on final metrics that are developed through rulemaking so that parents, teachers, and policymakers have clear and consistent information about where our schools and students stand.”
Get lots more information on all things stimulus from the Department of Ed, the ARRA site on Inside NEA, and Education Week’s Schools and the Stimulus web section.
Guidance on Title I funds: On April 1, the Department released its guidance outlining how and when the $10 billion in new Title I, Part A recovery funds will be awarded. It also announced that additional guidance regarding these funds, including how they should be used, the submission of waiver requests, and the reporting requirements, will be posted on http://www.ed.gov/. The Department also will soon provide information about Title I School Improvement grants, for which a $3 billion appropriation will be made available beginning this fall.
|
| Back to Top |
 |
| Duncan affirms most of Spellings’ Title I regs |
In a letter to the Chief State School Officers, Ed Secretary Arne Duncan last week expressed his support for most of the Title I regulations issued by former Secretary Spellings, and, in fact, has proposed changes to only a few provisions.
Those “midnight” regulations, issued last October, addressed graduation rates and adequate yearly progress (AYP), Supplemental Education Services (SES) and school choice, reporting of NAEP data, school restructuring, growth models, multiple measures, and more. NEA expressed concern that despite their complexity, they still reflected the test-punish-label framework established by NCLB. We also noted that they effectively imposed additional mandates on states and schools already struggling to stay afloat financially or avoiding laying off staff in a time of budget cutbacks.
Duncan says he supports requiring the inclusion of a uniform graduation rate calculation disaggregated by student subgroups in the AYP and accountability framework, as well as the regulations aimed at ensuring that all students eligible for school choice of SES are free to exercise those options through mandatory SES set-aside funding requirements. (However, Duncan has expressed willingness to consider waivers of SES and choice-related transportation funding requirements for Title I funds under ARRA as opposed to the annual fiscal year Title I appropriation.)
The letter to the Chiefs says the Department will propose changes to existing Title I regulations to (1) repeal the requirement that states revise their Accountability Workbooks with respect to their definition of AYP and submit those revisions for peer review, and (2) amend or repeal a regulation that barred the selection of schools and LEAs in need of improvement as SES providers (and considering waivers of this regulatory provision for the 2009-10 school year).
The Secretary also announced that he will consider waiver requests to (1) allow school districts to exclude the stimulus (ARRA) funds when determining the amount the district must spend to meet SES/school-choice-related transportation services (currently 20 percent of Title I funds) as well as the per-pupil amount to be spent for SES, and (2) release public schools from the requirement to notify parents of the school choice option at least 14 days before the start of the 2009-10 school year.
Duncan expressed support for the core principles of the law, “including closing achievement gaps and demanding accountability for ensuring that all students achieve to high standards.” But he said the law can be improved -- and he announced his plans to travel the country, talking to local educators and other stakeholders to learn how ESEA/NCLB and its resulting policies can be enhanced.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| Huge stimulus for Title I schools in 2009 |
Schools serving poor students are about to receive unprecedented amounts of cash. Combined, the FY 2009 appropriations plus the economic recovery (ARRA) funds means states will receive nearly $25 billion by October 1, 2009. This includes nearly $16 billion that will be distributed to states within a 24-hour window (Sept. 30-Oct. 1).
The Center on Education Policy has published a new report, Who Gets Title I Funds From the Economic Stimulus Package?  , that examines the distribution of Title I funds under ARRA. It notes that the stimulus funds for Title I are more concentrated in high poverty districts than are annual Title I appropriation funds. For example, approximately 1,000 districts that normally participate in Title I will not receive allocations. The primary reason is that the new funds are allocated using two factors that favor higher poverty districts and states with greater equity in distributing state funds for education.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| Preliminary data show number of schools in improvement, corrective action, and restructuring |
One of the requirements contained in the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund phase one application is baseline data on the number of schools in the state identified for corrective action or restructuring under NCLB. USED has just released a table showing the preliminary 2008-09 school year data on the number of schools in improvement, corrective action, and restructuring for each state.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| Tell us how stimulus funds are being used in your school or district |
And speaking of stimulus dollars, NEA is beginning to track the impact of this new law on real educators, schools, communities, and families. We are collecting stories from members and others that address some of these questions: has your job (or a colleague’s) been saved by the new law? Is your school hiring extra teachers of offering additional services to students with special needs? Will your school now get long overdue repairs? Do you know a college student who will now be able to get a loan to finish school -- or a parent who will now be able to afford to send a child to college?
The Associated Press ran a story last week noting that while President Obama wants the stimulus bill to save teaching jobs, some states could end up spending the money on playground equipment or wallpaper. But the piece ends with this note: “Education Secretary Arne Duncan threatens to ‘come down like a ton of bricks’ on anyone who defies the administration’s plans to bring relief to states like California where 26,500 teachers have gotten pink slips.”
If you can see the effect of stimulus money in your school or district, please send us details. NEA will be sharing some of the stories with the White House on how recovery dollars are helping your school or district (or not).
|
| Back to Top |
|
| Will the stimulus ‘stimulate’ ESEA reauthorization? |
What do economic recovery funds have to do with ESEA reauthorization? Rep. George Miller, D-CA, chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee and a key figure in the passage of NCLB, says “a lot.”
Miller says the passage of the economic stimulus package, which included more than $100 billion in education funding, has “change[d] the conversation dramatically” on NCLB and will make things easier. Among those things? That small item on the to-do list: reauthorization of NCLB.
Miller even says he hopes to reauthorize NCLB this calendar year. The law’s renewal has been pending since 2007.
Others in Congress aren’t convinced. According to the Ed Week story, Sen. Michael Enzi of Wyoming, the ranking Republican on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, said that the funding for education in the stimulus package “didn’t change the conversation at all, since it’s just one-time money.”
NEA President Dennis Van Roekel, also quoted in the article, says while increases for Title I “definitely have an impact … we also have to do things inside that system to change” the kinds of supports students get, including expanding prekindergarten programs. And he said Congress still should rework the accountability system that’s at the center of the law, putting less emphasis on high-stakes tests. “We need to spend the money on research to find a good, solid system that measures student learning,” said Van Roekel.
However the stimulus (ARRA) may affect the timing of NCLB reauthorization, it’s clear that the Department of Education is outlining its support of broad principles on reauthorization through some of ARRA’s provisions (e.g., see SFSF assurances noted above). While NEA generally agrees with these principles, it remains to be seen how Secretary Duncan will diverge from Secretary Spellings in implementing them.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| Find out where NEA stands on 34 ESEA-related bills |
Now that we’re talking about ESEA reauthorization, take a look at this list of ESEA-related bills pending in the 111th Congress. At last count, there were 34 bills (plus ARRA, PL 111-5). NEA supports 30 of these bills, opposes 3, and has taken no position on one. Several of the bills were carried over from the last session.
|
| Back to Top |
|
|
| Museums visits down, thanks to NCLB |
While teachers continue to speak out about the negative consequences of NCLB in their schools and classrooms, others involved in the education of young people – such as those who work in America’s history, science, and art museums – are also expressing their concerns.
In fact, Ford Bell, president of the American Association of Museums, speaks out frequently on the important role that museums play in education . Field trips to museums stimulate student curiosity and imagination in ways that textbooks and classroom instruction cannot, he says, adding that many museums design their programs to coordinate with state and local curriculum standards in subjects ranging from math and science to art and social studies.
“NCLB has had a strikingly negative effect on art, science and history education, and museum visits have decreased as a result,” he said in a recent letter to Congress .
|
| Back to Top |
|
| Tutoring company gets $21 million in NCLB funds – in one state |
In another example of tutoring companies not being reviewed, the New York Daily News reports that Champion Learning Center, one of the private companies with state approval to provide tutoring services under NCLB, received more than $21 million in state money over the past two years. Most of the money is reported to have gone into overhead.
The company, which provides tutoring at home, is said to have received $62 in overhead for every hour its employees spent tutoring a child. (Champion was paid $79 an hour to tutor each pupil for up to four hours per week. The tutors that were hired, many college students without any teaching experience, were paid an average of $17 per hour).
Champion is one of dozens of private companies with New York state approval to provide tutoring services under NCLB.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| Growth models are a chance to improve accountability |
A new study from Education Sector by accountability expert Charles Barone looks at Tennessee’s growth model system as an alternative to the prescriptions of NCLB. “Are We There yet? What Policymakers Can Learn From Tennessee’s Growth Model” identifies issues that state and federal policymakers should consider in using growth models. He concludes that “the use of growth models represents an opportunity to improve upon the state accountability systems currently in use under NCLB.”
|
| Back to Top |
|
| Voice from the classroom: North Wales, Pennsylvania |
"So much of what we do as educators, especially in the elementary grades, involves helping our students learn to become real human beings. Math, reading, science, social studies, the arts, and health issues are critical to a student's success in life. So why are those things not considered in ESEA?
"I see my job as helping my kids grow as much as they are capable of growing in all academic areas, but that's not enough. I want my kids to leave my classroom as better citizens of our community, as more respected and respectful than when they arrived.
"My students are expected to learn the academics and to apply positive social skills to all of their interactions. From pushing in their chairs, to holding doors for others, from saying please and thank you, to asking permission to use someone's materials -- these and many other social habits are learned in a positive classroom environment.
"And it is just these environments that are being eroded by the increasing pressure to improve test scores every year.
"Less time is being devoted to having students learn social skills, as we focus more core time on test prep. Where once there was time for daily gatherings to discuss the social issues that affect our day, we now have time devoted each day to another practice math problem or to another writing prompt. I see the slow, inexorable process of turning once-rich classroom experiences into cookie-cutter test prep centers devoted to turning out test-taker widgets.
"Tomorrow's leaders are in our classrooms today. Will they be prepared to read, write, and cypher? Probably. Will they have the skills to be a positive, supportive member of tomorrow's communities? Not if we keep going down the road of No Child Left Untested.
"Let's step back and ask what we really want -- and, yes, we really do want it all. I think we can have it all as well, if we begin to see the process of education as a continuum that begins at birth and in which all the stakeholders -- parents, community and business leaders, politicians, educators, every one of us -- take our rightful place and accept our responsibility for success and follow through with the support and the resources to help see that all children reach their greatest potential.
"Only then can we hope to really leave no child behind."
Jim Sando
Fifth Grade Teacher
Wissahickon
North Wales, Pennsylvania
|
| Back to Top |
|
|
| Take action: Contact Congress on the FY2010 budget |
Last week both the House and Senate passed slightly different versions of the Congressional Budget Resolution for fiscal year 2010 (which begins October 1, 2009). Congress will be on recess from April 6-17 and Members will be home in their states and districts. When Congress returns to Washington, the House and Senate budgets will go into “conference committee” to work out differences, and then the House and Senate will vote on a final budget agreement.
Contact your Members of Congress and urge them to support a final Budget Resolution that reflects the importance of education to our nation by providing as much funding for education as possible.
|
| Back to Top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| © Copyright 2002 - 2007 National Education Association | 1201 16th Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 |
 |
|
