Capitol Hill Education Update
-
Upload
catapultlearn -
Category
Education
-
view
83 -
download
4
description
Transcript of Capitol Hill Education Update
Capitol Hill Education Update
FEBRUARY 19, 2014
PRESENTED BY MICHELLE DOYLE
Do Nothing Congress
This Congress has not accomplished much
Evidence of the gridlock in DC
44 substantive laws enacted this year
• Compared to average of 70 between 1999 and 2012
What Has Been Done?
Appropriation of funds
Passage of ESEA in the House
Bills for ESEA reauthorization introduced in the Senate
*********************************************
Extension of Waivers
New guidance on the use of federal funds of technology
Guidance on new method of counting students for Title I
Appropriations—A Look Back
• The sequester is a group of cuts to federal spending set to take effect March 1, barring further congressional action.
• The sequester was originally passed as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA), better known as the debt ceiling compromise.
• It was intended to serve as incentive for the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (aka the “Supercommittee”) to come to a deal to cut $1.5 trillion over 10 years. If the committee had done so, and Congress had passed it by Dec. 23, 2011, then the sequester would have been averted.
Impact of Sequestration
Across-the-board cut of 5.1% for Education Department programs
Cuts in each LEAs differed:
• Increase in poverty = application of formula yields less than
5.1% cut
• Decrease in poverty = application of formula yields more than
5.1% cut
Appropriators: Omnibus
Title IA Subgrants to Local Educational Agencies:
• FY 2013 $13,760,219
• FY 2014 $14,384,802
• Percentage change: + 4.539%
This change in appropriations for the 2014-15 school year nearly restores all of the funds that were lost during the 2013-14 school year due to sequestration.
Different Funding Sources Title I
Basic grants
• FY 2013 $6,232,639
• FY 2014 $6,459,401
• Percentage change: + 3.638%
Concentration grants:
• FY 2013 $1,293,919
• FY 2014 $1,362,301
• Percentage change: + 5.285%
Funding Sources (cont.)
Targeted grants:
• FY 2013 $3,116,831
• FY 2014 $3,281,550
• Percentage change: + 5.285%
Education finance grants:
• FY 2013 $3,116,831
• FY 2014 $3,281,550
• Percentage change: + 5.285%
Titles IIA and III Funding
Title IIA
• FY 2013 $2,337,830
• FY 2014 $2,349,830
• Percentage change: + .513%
Title III
• FY 2013 $693,848
• FY 2014 $732,400
• Percentage change: + 4.259%
ESEA Reauthorization
First signed into law January 2002 for 5 years
Renewed each year without change
Several attempts at passage
• Miller proposal
• Kline bill (passed House)
• Harkin bill (passed out of Committtee twice)
• Alexander bill
Highlights of Kline bill
Enhanced consultation language, goal to reach agreement, added pooling and how $$ calculated, “substantially failed” added to bypass and complaint
Calculate private school funding on state level—inform simultaneously; ombudsman
Sign off for all programs
Counseling and mentoring firmed up in Title I
Biggest changes
Title I funds determined prior to any set asides
• Currently 20% or more set aside for public school only purposes
Title IIA funds determined prior to other uses by LEA
• Currently LEA chooses to spend IIA funds on class size
reduction, teacher recruitment/retention, and professional
development
Harkin bill
Passed the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee (HELP)
Did not include any changes to the private school sections
Alexander bill
Minority alternative
Not considered by the Committee
Includes “fix” for Title I
• Funding for private school program determined prior to any set
asides by the LEA
Administrative Initiatives
State of the Union: If Congress can’t get it done, Administration will use Executive Orders
Administration has already been making changes
• Waivers
• Technology
• Community Eligibility Option
Waivers
Began with 2012-13 school year for two years
45 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Bureau of Indian Education submitted requests for ESEA flexibility
42 States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico are approved for ESEA flexibility
Waived Requirements Include…
Adequate Yearly Progress
Provision of SES
Provision of public school choice transportation
Schools and Districts in Need of Improvement
Requirements Include…
Common Core or other acceptable standards
Assessments tied to standards
Priority and focus schools
Reward schools
Renewal of Waivers 2014-15
This one-year extension will allow SEAs and ED to gather additional information on successes and challenges in the implementation of reforms committed to under ESEA flexibility, in order to improve current systems and better support students and teachers.
Must amend application to address monitoring findings
Private School Implications of Waivers
Difficult to get transparency
No longer (unless in waiver app) have SES, public school choice, SINI, DINI = less set asides
Add common core
Add priority and focus schools = set asides (in some cases)
ConnectED Initiative
High-speed internet to the classroom,
Affordable mobile learning devices,
High-quality learning content, and
Support for teachers to move to digital learning within five years.
Updates Needed
Many of the terms we use today to describe technology-enhanced learning did not exist when laws such ESEA and IDEA were passed (2001 and 2004)
ED: Need to clarify opportunities to use federal grant funds to support digital learning
http://www.ed.gov/edblogs/technology/files/2013/06/Federal-Funds-Tech-DC-.pdf
Innovative Use of Federal Funds
Support teachers using digital learning tools (IIA and IA)
Provide online professional development (IIA)
Adopt digital competency-based professional development (IIA and IA)
Digital resources for Common Core (IIA)
Digital educational resources for English Language Learners and students with disabilities (III and IDEA)
Additional Ideas
Use technology to communicate with parents (IA, III, IDEA)
Connect teachers and STEM professionals with technology (IIA and IIB)
Participate in English Learner focused Communities of Practice (III)
Provide students with mobile learning devices (IA)
Provide assistive technology (IDEA)
Community Eligibility Option
Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010
Goal to increase meals served
Direct certification
• SNAP, TANF, Medicaid, etc.
Schools with 40% or more directly certified students are eligible
1.6 times # of directly certified = new lunch count
Serve free meals to all
All states eligible 2014-15
Title I Guidance
www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/13-0381guidance.doc
Public and private schools eligible for using CEO
• Unlikely many private schools will use the option
– Need 40% directly certified
– Need to participate in the lunch program
– Need to provide free lunches to those not counted for reimbursement
Implications for Private Schools
CEO could lead to higher public school count
• That’s the goal of the program!
Title I funding does not increase due to use of CEO
Proportional share for private school program will be less if public school count is higher
Bonus Topic!! New Private School Statistics
Private school enrollment declined by 11 percent from 6.1 million in 2005 to 5.4 million in 2010.
About one in ten U.S. elementary and secondary school students is a private school student.
Projected private school enrollment for the next several years is estimated to vary little
The number of full-time equivalent private elementary and secondary school teachers in the fall of 2012 was estimated at 0.4 million, down from 0.5 million in 2007
(Digest of Education Statistics 2012)
THANK YOU!
Questions? Contact Michelle at [email protected]
View the recording of this webinar on Catapult’s site: www.catapultlearning.com/webinars
Follow Michelle Doyle Educational Consulting on Facebook
Check out Michelle’s blog at www.ask-michelle.com