1
2
3	…a little background information Origin of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 1965… Latest reauthorization in 1994 law, with some similar provisions but less accountability Testing in three grades, plus First bill before Congress in 2001 was HR 1, sponsored by Speaker Hastert of Illinois and others Bill moved through Congress, passed in December 2001 and became Public Law 107-110 on January 8, 2002 NCLB will now exist for 6 years then reauthorization process occurs all over again
4	Much has been in place prior to NCLB - Standards-led system, which is consistent with our 1997 Illinois Learning Standards Assessment since the late 1980's - IGAP now ISAT and PSAE Report cards since the late 1980's -school and district report cards Teacher Preparation Standards, to be in place in 2003
5
6	Federal Assessment Requirements Assessment of State Standards in at least reading + math once in 3-5; once in 6-8; once in 9-12 Multiple assessment methods Report Scores by: Title I, low income, 5 Races, Gender, Migrant, LEP, IEP States determine Adequate Yearly Progress Assessment of State Standards in at least reading + math In all grades (3 through 8) by 2005-2006 Assessment of Science in 3 grades by 2007 States must meet Federal definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (which includes progress in specific subgroups). Must have 95% participation rate to meet AYP.
7	NAEP Assessment
8	Accountability Our current Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) system continues through the 2002 tests. In 2003, states will be required to establish a starting point to define student proficiency. Proficiency will be for individual subgroups as well as overall for reading and for math (major racial/ethnic groups, low income, LEP, and disabled). AYP will mean statewide annual measurable objectives in equal increments over a 12 year span, so that all students will be proficient by the end of 2013-14.
9	"For paraprofessionals hired after January..." For paraprofessionals hired after January 8, 2002 or for current instructional aides, employed with Title I funds, there are federal requirements: By 2004-05, all current teachers’ aides must have completed at least two years of study at an institution of higher education; obtained an associate’s or higher degree, or met a rigorous standard of quality established at the state and local level, which includes an assessment of math, reading and writing.
10	"Beginning with the first school..." Beginning with the first school year after NCLB, each school receiving federal Title I funds will be required to ensure that all teachers hired and teaching in a program supported by those funds are highly qualified… States will be required to submit a plan to USDE to ensure that every teacher in the state is highly qualified to teach in his or her subject area by the end of the 2005-2006 school year...no teaching out of field…
11	Public Reporting Test data will be used to measure the performance of each school; data will be disaggregated by race, gender, income, and other criteria to measure and compare the performance of groups. States will be required to provide parents with annual report cards detailing the school’s performance and their child’s data is required as part of the report cards, including the professional qualifications of teachers.
12	Dollars to the Classroom IDEA up $55 M to $336 M Title I up $67.6 M to $434.4 M Reading First at $32.8 M (statewide) 21^st Century at $12.5 M (statewide) No Class Size $/Eisenhower $ per se: - $85.7 M Title II - Teacher Quality: $115.5M State Assessment Funds of $12.3 M Educational Technology Grants $25,692,598 Total increase over last year: $222.8 M GRAND TOTAL: $1.6-1.7 BILLION IN FEDERAL EDUCATION $
13	Among the Best Features: Reading First!!! $32.8 million for 2002-03 Beginning in 2004, up to 10% of new money, but not more than $90 million, would be available as incentive grants to States that successfully increase the number of students reading at a proficient level. States may use 20% of the funds to develop and implement a program of professional development for teachers of grades K-3. States may use funds for planning, administration, and reporting.
14	"Illinois State Board of Education" Illinois State Board of Education http://www.isbe.net/nclb U.S. Department of Education http://www.ed.gov/legislation/ESEA02 Grant Funds Available Through the Illinois State Board of Education http://www.isbe.net/federal/grantsbe.htm Learning First Alliance www.learningfirst.org National Association of State Boards of Education http://www.nasbe.org/
15
16
17	Federal Assessment Requirements Assessments of State Standards in at least reading + math once in 3-5; once in 6-8; once in 9-12 Multiple assessment methods Report scores by: Title I, low income, 5 Races, Gender, Migrant, LEP, IEP States determine Adequate Yearly Progress
18	Additional Federal Assessment Requirements Assessment of State Standards in at least reading + math once in 3-5; once in 6-8; once in 9-12 Multiple assessment methods Report scores by: Title I, low income, 5 Races, Gender, Migrant, LEP, IEP States determine Adequate Yearly Progress Assessment of State Standards in at least reading + math In all grades (3 through 8) by 2005-2006 Assessment of science in 3 grades by 2007 States must participate in NAEP States must meet Federal definition of Adequate Yearly Progress (which includes progress in specific subgroups). Must have 95% participation rate to meet AYP.
19	National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Participation Under H.R. 1 a small sample of students in each state will participate in the fourth- and eighth-grade (NAEP) in reading and math every other year. Involves approximately 100 schools at grade 4 and 100 schools at grade 8 Assessment data will help the US Department of Education verify the results of statewide assessments required under Title I Proposed legislation for required participation Administrated by Federal Contractors in January + February
20	Adequate Yearly Progress (1997 State Definition) A school that fell below the 50% meets line for two years in a row was placed on an Academic Early Warning List and given a schedule of improvement to make 50% meets line in 5 years. If the school made it to the scheduled target, it was placed into a school improvement status under the Title 1 requirements. If a school failed to meet AYP, it moved from School Improvement 1 to School Improvement 2 with additional consequences.
21	Adequate Yearly Progress (New Federal Definition) Based on the premise that ALL students will meet standards by 2014 Prescribed by US Dept. of Education Baseline = 2002 Assessment results AYP begins in 2002-2003 school year Must disaggregate data to show progress of ALL students in meeting standards. AYP is a composite based on all the scores in the school in separate “tracks” for reading and mathematics.
22
23	GROUPS DISTINGUISHED to Determine AYP
24
25	States have two options when setting the baseline for AYP for reading and math. Lowest performing subgroup from 2002 (statewide) American Indian Asian Black White Hispanic Students with Disabilities Low Income LEP
26	States have two options when setting the baseline for AYP for reading and math. Lowest performing subgroup from 2002 (statewide) American Indian Asian Black White Hispanic Students with Disabilities Low Income LEP
27	"60%" 60% equally divided by 12 years = 5% increments 5% increments – simplify targets Beginning at a higher level = less % increase per year
28	Each State shall establish Intermediate Goals that… Shall increase in equal increments over the period covered by the state’s timeline.
29
30	Adequate Yearly Progress Comparison 2002 – 33.1% 2003 – 37.3% 2004 – 41.6% 2005 – 45.8% 2006 – 50.0%
31
32
33
34
35	Additional Indicators for “Safe Harbor” Schools must increase the graduation rate at the high school level. Schools must increase one other academic indicator at the elementary level.
36	Minimal Size of Subgroup States must set the size of the group in order to “…yield statistically reliable information…” States must produce a rationale for the selected “minimal size.”
37	Projected % of ALL Schools That Would Meet AYP with a Minimal Size of 20
38
39
40	Key Principles Increased Accountability Scientifically Based Research and Proven Practices Flexibility Parent Knowledge, Choice, Involvement
41	Premises Resource Reallocation Scientifically Based Research and Proven Practices All Students Meeting Standards in Reading/Writing and Mathematics Uniform Basis for School Performance Measures (ISAT/PSAE Districts and Schools Partnerships for Services/Resources Balance of Pressure and Support Integrating Agency Resources Teacher Quality Parent Involvement Instructional Leadership
42	"Establishing and providing assistance through..." Establishing and providing assistance through school support teams Designating and using distinguished teachers and principals Using other approaches, e.g., local consortia, regional service agencies Using distinguished schools as models and sources of support for low-performing schools
43
44	Schools Needing Improvement Schools that have not met state-defined adequate yearly progress (AYP) goals for 2 consecutive years will be identified by districts as “schools needing improvement To be taken out the “needs improvement” status, a school must demonstrate AYP for 2 consecutive years.
45
46	Illinois Learning Partnership - Consortium for Educational Change Critical Study Process Analyze data/customer satisfaction, conduct KEYS assessment, study best practices, review CSR, establish initial benchmarks, define need, describe urgency Covenant/Vision Define mission, values, goals Charter/Constitution Define school structure, describe school processes for making decisions School Improvement Plan Review site requirements of a CSR design, filter & choose CSR model
47	Solid Foundations Training for Site-based Support Team Parent Education Facilitator (teacher) Parent Educators School Improvement Plan that includes Compact, Homework Policy, Parent-Teacher-Student Conference procedures, and variety of reading activities Home visits to parents to encourage reading, provide materials Reading School-Home Links for K-3 Reading at Home course for K-3 parents Studying at Home course for parents of students in grades 4-8 Interactive Reading workshop for teachers and parents Parent Leadership Institute for Support Teams Family Reading Nights Family Resource Libraries
48	School Improvement Plan Cover 2 Years Action plan based on scientifically based research Adopt practices that have the greatest likelihood of raising student achievement Incorporate a teacher – mentoring program Assure at least 10% of Title 1 funds on professional development Establish annual measurable objectives for AYP for each subgroup Provide effective parent involvement Incorporate extended time activities
49	District Responsibility Be implemented no later than the beginning of the next full school year following identification for improvement Districts must review the plan, using a peer review process, within 45 days of receiving it and approve it if it meets requirements Districts must ensure that schools receive technical assistance Districts must provide all students in the school the option to transfer to another school not identified for improvement
50	Regional Offices of Education/Intermediate Service Centers Professional development on scientifically based and proven practices in reading, writing and mathematics Participation in Standards Aligned Classroom Initiative Leadership training in mentoring/induction Assistance with data analysis and school improvement planning Choosing and implementing instructional technology to support SBR
51	Internal - ISBE Responsibility Fiscal and Programmatic Approval of Funding Applications (Reading First, CSR, 21^st CCLC, Consolidated Applications) Student Performance and Other Agency Data Analysis (Planning & Performance Management) Scientifically Based Research and Proven Practices (Reading, Writing & Mathematics, Standards) Early Learning (Early Childhood) Resource Allocation/Reallocation (Financial Services, Program Support) Instructional Technology (e-Learning) Professional Preparation & Leadership (Re-certification & Leadership, Mentoring & Induction)
52
53