No Child or Educator Left Behind

1

No Child or Educator Left Behind

January 29, 2003

2

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?

4

So Many Acronyms So Little Time…

Origins of NCLB 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.

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!!!

8

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

To achieve the 5 goals of NCLB, Illinois will focus on 3 previously identified GAPS.

Identified Gaps

Achievement Gap

Educator Gap

Funding Gap

11

Key Dates for Illinois

January 2002

Fall 2002

Winter 2002-03

Spring 2003

Fall 2004

2003-04

2005-06

2007-2008

12

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.

13

Illinois Public Act 92-604 amends 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)

14

Review of the 5 Goals

Achievement

Limited English Proficient

Highly Qualified Teachers

Safe Schools

Graduation

15

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.

16

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.

17

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…

18

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

19

This will apply to all schools in 2003 using disaggregated data!

20022003

20032004

20042005

20052006

20062007

20072008

20082009

20092010

20102011

20112012

20122013

20132014

100%

100%Target

2013 - 2014

20012002

40%

40%Baseline Target -

2002 data

20

Illini Plan for Intermediate Goals

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

An

nu

al T

arg

et

Illini 40 40 42 45 50 56 63 70 77 84 90 95 100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

21

Minimal Size of Subgroup

States must set the size of the group in order to States must set the size of the group in order to

“…“…yield statistically reliable information…”yield statistically reliable information…”

States must produce a rationale for the selected “minimal size.” States must produce a rationale for the selected “minimal size.”

Using 40 for subgroups and 10 as minimum for reportingUsing 40 for subgroups and 10 as minimum for reporting

Low income status +Students with disabilities +Limited-English proficient +

Race/ethnicity 5 groups

ReadingReadingReadingReading

MathMath

AYP is determinedAYP is determined

by making it over all 18 hurdles by making it over all 18 hurdles

(9 hurdles for reading and 9 for (9 hurdles for reading and 9 for math) math)

by disaggregation of data.by disaggregation of data.

Composite

Composite

AmericanIndian

AmericanIndian

Asian

Asian

Black

Black

White

White

Hispanic

Hispanic

Students withDisabilities

Students withDisabilities

LowIncome

LowIncome

LEP

LEP

“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)

24

2001-2002 ISAT Reading - Grade 3

75.7

33.8

46.1

74.2

39.9

62.4

76.1

34.0

48.1

74.4

40.3

62.2

0

20

40

60

80

100

White, Non-Hispanic

Black, Non-Hispanic

Hispanic Not LowIncome

Low Income All

Per

cen

t M

eets

+ E

xcee

ds

2001 2002

25

72.3

32.037.2

70.5

35.6

58.7

72.6

33.440.5

71.4

37.4

59.1

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

White, Non-Hispanic

Black, Non-Hispanic


Low Income All

Per

cen

t M

eets

+ E

xcee

ds

2001 2002


26

76.4

40.747.7

74.3

43.9

65.6

76.8

48.8 51.0

75.2

50.0

68.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

White, Non-Hispanic

Black, Non-Hispanic


Low Income All

Perc

ent M

eets

+ E

xcee

ds

2001 2002


27

Achievement Gaps

2002 PSAE Math

28

PSAE Reading - Students with Disabilities

% Meets and Exceeds

Students with Disabilities

Students w/out Disabilities

29

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

State Academic Early Warning List Level 1

Misses AYP for 2 years

Federal School Improvement 1 Status

State Academic Early Warning List Level 2


Federal School Improvement 2 Status

State Academic Watch List


Federal Corrective Action Status

State Intervention Status


Federal Restructuring Status

Revised School Improvement Plans approved by local board

External Support Team

School & District Analysis

District/State Performance Agreement

Optional: Extended Day/Year Programs

Revised School Improvement Plans approved by local board and Regional Office of Education

External Support Team




Revised School Improvement Plans approved by local board, Regional Office of Education and ISBE

School Improvement Panel appointed by State Superintendent




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

In addition, Title I schools must Offer

School Choice

In addition, Title I schools must offer

School Choice

Supplemental Educational Services

In addition, Title I schools must offer

School Choice Supplemental Educational Services

Options for Title I schools also include:Extended school day/year and/orIncentives for HQ teachers and/orExternal curriculum modifications

Moderate Support

Intensive Support

•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

31

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

32

ILLINOIS SINGLE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTABILITYCOMPLIANCE ACCOUNTABILITY

(Inputs)

PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY

(Outcomes)

School Code Requirements/ Regulations

Illinois Learning Standards

Monitoring

Annual Assurances

Full Compliance

Full Recognition

Incomplete Compliance

Pending Recognition

Probationary Recognition

Non-Recognition

State Assessments

Meeting AYP CriteriaNot Meeting AYP Criteria

State & Federal RewardsAcademic Early Warning List

Academic Watch List

Non-Recognition

Illinois Proposed Single Accountability System: School Rewards/Recognition

PROGRESS RECOGNITIONAll Student Groups Meet AYP Requirements in Reading and

Mathematics

Public Reporting of Progress Attainment

Regulatory Flexibility

PERFORMANCE RECOGNITION>X% of student test scores

meet or exceed state standards for all student groups

for all tested subjects

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

SPECIAL PROGRAM RECOGNITIONPrograms show measurable positive

results for students; e.g.,•Early Childhood

•Attendance•Truancy/Dropout Prevention

•Substance Abuse•Violence Prevention•Extended Day/Year

Public Reporting

Established as a model school for specific

program(s)

Public Reporting

School Banner

Regulatory Flexibility

THOSE WHO EXCEL RECOGNITIONSignificant closure of achievement gaps

among student groups ORExceeds AYP Targets

Public Reporting

Monetary Award for Instructional Use

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

STATE FEDERAL

Public Recognition

Established as a national model

school

34

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

35

National Accountability

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

Participation in NAEP(National Assessment of Educational Progress)

36

Performance Goal 2: LEP

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.

37

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)

38

Performance Goal 3: Highly Qualified Teachers

By 2005-06 all students will be taught by highly qualified teachers.

Quality Educator Issues Title II/Part A

39

“The Teacher Effect Makes All Other Differences Pale

In Comparison “

Williams Sanders

40

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.

41

Criteria on Highly Qualified Staff

Funding Source Location Duties

42

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.

43

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.

44

Highly Qualified Teachers--Duties

“…Those teaching core academic subjects…"

Reading or English LAMathematics

ScienceForeign Languages

CivicsGovernmentEconomics

ArtsHistory

Geography

45

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.

46

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.

47

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.

48

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.

49

Qualified Paraprofessionalsaraprofessionals The law addresses qualifications, duties and

responsibilities.

Paraprofessionals in programs supported with Title I funds newly hired after January 8, 2002 must meet one of 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.

50

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

http://www.isbe.net/NCLB

51

Principal’s Role Principals will have

to verify compliance

Attest annually in writing as to whether the school is in compliance or not

52

For More Information www.isbe.net/nclb www.isbe.net/teachers www.isbe.net/recertification www.isbe.net/profdevelopment www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/index.html Certification/Testing: 1-800-845-8749 Certificate Renewal: 1-866-238-2738 Professional Preparation: 1-217-782-4330

http://www.isbe.net/nclb

http://www.isbe.net/teachers

http://www.isbe.net/recertification

http://www.isbe.net/profdevelopment

http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/index.html

53

Performance Goal 4: Safe Schools

All students will be educated in learning environments that are safe, drug free, and conducive to learning.

54

Unsafe School Choice Option “Persistently Dangerous” is addressed by ISBE policy right now.

Legislation may be required. Students may exercise their choice option and transfer under the

“persistently dangerous” school provision when: Violence related expulsions are greater than 3%. One or more students have been expelled for gun or explosive

device. # of students exercising the choice option is greater than 3%. Any individual student who is a victim of “violent criminal

offense at school” (immediate transfer upon verification of the offense).

55

Performance Goal 5: Graduation

All students will graduate from high school.

56

Looking Deeper:

Reading First

Special Education

SIP and Data Analysis

Secondary Education

57

Reading First Eligible districts are those that have the

greatest percentage or number of 3rd grade students not meeting state standards for reading AND have the greatest % or # of students eligible for Title I, Basic.

Funds of $50,000-175,000 per school for the initial year, and then diminishing over time.

Focus on K-3

58

Students with Disabilities

IDEA is being reauthorized at this time… Student – all public school children will be

tested, including students with disabilities. The % of students with disabilities

participating in state assessments is increasing.

IMAGE and IAA results were included in the calculations of AYP in 2002.

59

Federal Funding Sources

Titles I, II, IV and V

21st Century Community Learning Community

Rural Education

Comprehensive School Reform and Title I Accountability

Community Service Grant

60

Federal $$$ To IllinoisTitle I up $67.6 M over prior year, to $434.4 MReading First at $32.8 M (statewide) new21st Century at $12.5 M (statewide*) newClass Size $/Eisenhower $ per se (-$85.7 M)Title II - Teacher Quality at $115.5MState Assessment Funds at $12.3 M newEducational Technology Grants up to $25.7 MUrgent School Repair (none now, -$42.6 M)IDEA up $55 M over the prior year, to $336 MTotal increase in federal $ over last year: $222.8 MEarmarks to LEAs to help with specific achievement gapsGRAND TOTAL IN ALL NCLB FUNDS NOW AT $800 M!!!

NO NEW APPROPRIATION YET

Resource Updates

ISBE Home Page – http://www.isbe.net

ISBE No Child Left Behind Page – http://www.isbe.net/nclb

ISBE No Child Left Behind e-mail – [email protected]

USDE home page- http://www.ed.govNewsletter: THE ACHIEVER

ROE/ ISC

http://www.ed.gov/

No Child or Educator Left Behind

Documents

Transcript of No Child or Educator Left Behind