No Child or Educator Left Behind January 29, 2003
WelcomeWhy Are You Here? • Welcome to Chicago … • Why did you come? • What is the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001? • What do you know about it?
So Many Acronyms So Little Time… NCLB Soup SBRR SES ISC AEW ISBE CSR SIP NAEP SOS PSAE ESEA IMAGE AYP IAA ISAT USDE ROE
Federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) first enacted in 1965. Periodic reauthorization by Congress has occurred, with the last one prior to NCLB being in 1994. Origins of NCLB
NCLB in Illinois Finding Balance
NCLB This is the Federal Law (PL 107-110) • Signed into law January 8, 2002 • Addresses complex issues. • Interpretations will be numerous. • Court challenges will likely occur. • Be prepared for major changes!!! The law is enormous!
The Illinois Vision • The vision of the Illinois State Board of Education is that public schools will enable all students to succeed. • ISBE identified three priorities that are considered critical to meeting the vision for Illinois education. • Eliminating the Achievement Gap • Eliminating the Educator Gap – Quantity and Quality • Eliminating the Funding Gap • The priority of the state board will be focused on guiding policy to accomplish the elimination of these gaps by addressing the 5 goals of NCLB.
Five Goals Achievement Limited English Proficient Highly Qualified Teachers Safe Schools Graduation Identified Gaps Achievement Gap Educator Gap Funding Gap To achieve the 5 goals of NCLB, Illinois will focus on 3 previously identified GAPS.
Key Dates for Illinois January 2002 Fall 2002 Winter 2002-03 Spring 2003 Fall 2004 2003-04 2005-06 2007-2008
Illinois School Code • State laws must change to meet the requirements and interpretations of NCLB. Although most requirements currently apply only to Title I funded schools, NCLB requires a single state accountability system… so… Expect legislation in 2003 Illinois Public Act 92-604 has already been amended to address NCLB.
Illinois Public Act 92-604amends the School Code to align with NCLB Effective immediately … • NAEP*…all schools selected by USDE must participate • Report Card…will be made available on district web sites or upon request • Bilingual Education Notice…notifications to families include additional provisions beyond previous state law • Public School Choice…selection parameters now in place • Laws or court orders (e.g., desegregation) cannot be violated. • Magnet schools transfers meet existing criteria or as a last resort. • Student transfer cannot exceed school enrollment capacity. *NAEP National Assessment of Education Progress (grades 4 and 8 reading and math)
Review of the 5 Goals Achievement Limited English Proficient Highly Qualified Teachers Safe Schools Graduation
Performance Goal 1: Achievement By 2013-14 all students will reach high standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics.
Measuring Achievement • The Illinois state assessment system will need to be modified to assure testing in at least reading and mathematics for grades 3-8 (by 2005-06). • As of spring 2002, all tests counted! Prairie State Achievement Exam (PSAE) Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT) Illinois Measure of Annual Growth in English (IMAGE) for limited English proficient students. Illinois Alternate Assessment (IAA) for students with disabilities included in AYP for the first time.
AYP: Making Adequate Yearly Progress • Baseline for both reading and mathematics are projected to be at 40% meeting/exceeding standards based on 2001 AYP simulation. • All schools will have the same annual target. • Schools under the baseline need to meet the 2003 annual target (in composite and student demographic groups), then progress toward 100% meeting/exceeding standards by 2014. • Schools over the baseline have no required progression rate, but know that the target moves up annually…
Elements of Making AYP • 95% participation by all subgroups (40 as N size) and composite, per school, per district + • Making academic achievement goals + • Meeting another academic indicator • High schools: graduation rate threshold • Elementary and middle schools: attendance rate threshold
100% Target 2013 - 2014 40% Baseline Target - 2002 data 2002 2003 2003 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 2007 2007 2008 2008 2009 2009 2010 2010 2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 100% 2001 2002 40% This will apply to all schools in 2003 using disaggregated data!
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.” Using 40 for subgroups and 10 as minimum for reporting Low income status + Students with disabilities + Limited-English proficient + Race/ethnicity 5 groups Asian, American Indian, Hispanic, Black, White
Reading Composite American Indian Asian Black White Hispanic Students with Disabilities Low Income LEP Math Composite American Indian Asian Black White Hispanic Students with Disabilities Low Income LEP AYP is determined by making it over all 18 hurdles (9 hurdles for reading and 9 for math) by disaggregation of data.
“Safe Harbor” Safe Harbor • “Safe Harbor” allows for schools to avoid being identified as “not meeting” the achievement benchmark as identified by NCLB. • Even if a school does not make AYP in the composite or any student demographic group, it can fulfill its progress requirement per group by: Decreasing by 10% the proportion of students who do not meet/exceed standards AND maintain or raise the graduation rate (for high schools) OR maintain or improve attendance rates (for elementary/middle schools)
Achievement Gaps 2002 PSAE Math
Students with Disabilities Students w/out Disabilities PSAE Reading - Students with Disabilities % Meets and Exceeds
Adequate Yearly Progress Accountability School Improvement Status (Federal) and System of Support (Illinois) • Schools are identified as needing school improvement (School Improvement I) and placed on Academic Early Warning List (AEWL) if they: • Fail to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) • Are recipients of any Title I funding • Continue to serve the same grade levels • After 2 consecutive years of no improvement, these schools join the Illinois System of Support (School Improvement II).
Illinois Proposed Single Accountability System: School Improvement/Sanctions • Regional Superintendent removes local school board OR • State Superintendent appoints an Independent Authority to operate school or district • State Board non-recognizes school or district, dissolving the entity OR • State Superintendent reassigns pupils and administrative staff Intensive Support • Additionally for Title I schools: • Classify the school as a charter school OR • Replace principal and staff OR • Select an outside management entity OR • State takeover and management State Intervention Status Misses AYP for 5 years Federal Restructuring Status Revised School Improvement Plansapproved by local board, Regional Office of Educationand ISBE School Improvement Panel appointed by State Superintendent School & District Analysis District/State Performance Agreement Optional: Extended Day/Year Programs In addition, Title I schools must offer School Choice Supplemental Educational Services Options for Title I schools also include: Extended school day/year and/or Incentives for HQ teachers and/or External curriculum modifications State Academic Watch List Misses AYP for 4 years Federal Corrective Action Status Revised School Improvement Plans approved by local board and Regional Office of Education External Support Team School & District Analysis District/State Performance Agreement Optional: Extended Day/Year Programs State Academic Early Warning List Level 2 Misses AYP for 3 years Federal School Improvement 2 Status In addition, Title I schools must offer School Choice Supplemental Educational Services State Academic Early Warning List Level 1 Misses AYP for 2 years Federal School Improvement 1 Status Revised School Improvement Plans approved by local board External Support Team School & District Analysis District/State Performance Agreement Optional: Extended Day/Year Programs In addition, Title I schools must Offer School Choice Moderate Support
What is the Illinois System of Support? ISBE assistance to identified schools and districts: • School improvement planning • External support and partnerships • Additional funding and resources Using scientifically-based research and proven practices for: • increasing student achievement • raising teacher quality • parent involvement • instructional leadership • allocating resources
ILLINOIS SINGLE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTABILITY COMPLIANCE ACCOUNTABILITY (Inputs) PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY (Outcomes) Non-Recognition Non-Recognition Probationary Recognition Academic Watch List Academic Early Warning List State & Federal Rewards Full Recognition Pending Recognition Full Compliance Incomplete Compliance Not Meeting AYP Criteria Meeting AYP Criteria Monitoring Annual Assurances State Assessments School Code Requirements/ Regulations Illinois Learning Standards
STATE FEDERAL PROGRESS RECOGNITION All Student Groups Meet AYP Requirements in Reading and Mathematics Public Reporting of Progress Attainment Regulatory Flexibility • DISTINGUISHED SCHOOLS RECOGNITION • Title I school with year’s highest % of students reaching reading and math proficiency • Title I school that made the year’s most progress in closing achievement gaps in reading and math across all student groups Public Recognition Established as a model school for specific instructional strategies State Board Showcase School PERFORMANCE RECOGNITION >X% of student test scores meet or exceed state standards for all student groups for all tested subjects Public Reporting School Banner Regulatory Flexibility • SPECIAL PROGRAM RECOGNITION • Programs show measurable positive results for students; e.g., • Early Childhood • Attendance • Truancy/Dropout Prevention • Substance Abuse • Violence Prevention • Extended Day/Year • BLUE RIBBON SCHOOLS RECOGNITION • Schools having at least 40% of students from disadvantaged backgrounds that dramatically improve reading and mathematics to high levels • Schools whose students, regardless of background, achieve in the top 10% in reading and mathematics Public Reporting Established as a model school for specific program(s) Public Recognition Established as a national model school Public Reporting Monetary Award for Instructional Use THOSE WHO EXCEL RECOGNITION Significant closure of achievement gaps among student groups OR Exceeds AYP Targets Illinois Proposed Single Accountability System: School Rewards/Recognition
District Accountability and AYP (never used in Illinois before) • All school information aggregated at district level • 95% participation • Disaggregated data (so may be subgroups at district level while not at school level) • Achievement information • Use of additional indicator • Use of safe harbor
National Accountability Participation in NAEP(National Assessment of Educational Progress) • 363 public schools in Illinois were selected to participate in the 2003 Reading and Math sample at grades 4 and 8. • Illinois law requires selected schools to participate. • NAEP tests are administered to a sample of students (approximately 64) in each participating school. • US Department of Education will use State NAEP data to verify the results of statewide assessments. • NAEP is administrated by Federal Contractors from January 27 – March 7. • Chicago participates in District NAEP. • http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard
All LEP students will become proficient in English and reach high academic standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics. Performance Goal 2: LEP
LEP Requirements • New Testing Requirements • LEP students who have attended school in US for three consecutive years and who participate in a language instruction program must be tested in English in reading and language arts. (Individual waivers will be allowed for students for up to two years after the initial three year period if special circumstances exist) • New Notice for Parents of LEP • Detailed parental notification and documentation (with the application for funding forms)
By 2005-06 all students will be taught by highly qualified teachers. Quality Educator Issues Title II/Part A Performance Goal 3: Highly Qualified Teachers
“The Teacher Effect Makes All Other Differences Pale In Comparison “ Williams Sanders
All Talk: No ActionEducation Trust, August 2002 • The amount of out-of-field teaching in the nation and states remains unacceptably high; no progress nationally from 1993-94 to 1999-2000 to reduce this amount. • Classes in high poverty and high minority schools are much more likely to be assigned to a teacher lacking minimal academic qualifications in the subject area. • High schools have unacceptably high rates of out-of-field teaching in core subjects. • There is a significant problem in the middle grades in terms of teacher assignment and out-of-field teaching. • The rates for out-of-field teacher assignments are particularly high in math.
Criteria on Highly Qualified Staff • Funding Source • Location • Duties
Highly Qualified Teachers--Funding • Title I Teachers • Those teaching core academic subjects, teaching in a program supported by Title I funds, and hired after the first day of 2002-2003 school year must be highly qualified. • Targeted Assistance Schools • Schoolwide Schools • All Teachers (regardless of funding source) • By the end of 2005-2006 school year, all teachers must be highly qualified.
Highly Qualified Teachers--Location • Title I Teachers • Those teaching core academic subjects, teaching in a program supported by Title I funds, and hired after the first day of 2002-2003 school year must be highly qualified. • Targeted Assistance Schools • Schoolwide Schools • All Teachers (regardless of funding source) • By the end of 2005-2006 school year, all teachers must be highly qualified.
Reading or English LA Mathematics Science Foreign Languages Civics Government Economics Arts History Geography Highly Qualified Teachers--Duties • “…Those teaching core academic subjects…"
Highly Qualified Teacher Issues • What we know: Teachers holding only Transitional Bilingual or Substitute certificates do not meet highly qualified definition. • ISBE is seeking further guidance from USDE on definition of highly qualified as it relates to middle school and special education teachers. • Once guidance is received, ISBE and ROEs will facilitate district training to identify highly qualified teachers.
Parental Notification Requirements • Beginning with 2002-2003 school year, districts receiving Title I funds must notify parents they have the right to request information on the professional qualifications of teachers. • Schools receiving Title I funds must provide timely notice to parents if a student is assigned for four (4) or more consecutive weeks to a teacher who is not highly qualified.
Suggestions for Notification • Include information on how the teacher is qualified; • Include information on NCLB timeline requirements—2005-2006; • Include information on how the school will assist teachers in becoming highly qualified; • Include information on why teacher was assigned to position.
Professional Development Requirements • State and districts receiving funds must ensure that increased numbers of teachers receive high quality professional development each year. • ISBE will align professional development provider evaluations to USDE/NCLB definition of professional development. • One-day or short-term workshops and conferences cannot be considered professional development for NCLB purposes.
Qualified Paraprofessionals • The law addresses qualifications, duties and responsibilities. • Paraprofessionals in programs supported with Title I funds newly hired after January 8, 2002 must meet oneof the following 3 criteria: • 2 years of post-secondary study at an Institute of Higher Education • An Associate’s degree • A rigorous standard of quality as demonstrated through a formal state or local assessment measuring the ability to assist in the instruction of math, reading and writing or math readiness, reading readiness or writing readiness. • Existing paraprofessionals hired before January 8, 2002 and working in programs supported with Title I funds have until January 8, 2006 to become qualified.
Latest Paraprofessional News!!!!! • Paraprofessional Assessment Guidance • ETS’ ParaPro is acceptable means of meeting requirements. • Local assessment criteria is established. • ACT WorkKeys will be considered when evidence of ‘ability to assist in instruction’ is established. • Find the guidance document at ISBE NCLB web page www.isbe.net/NCLB