Presentation on The Elementary Presentation on The Elementary and Secondary Education Actand Secondary Education Act

“No Child Left Behind”“No Child Left Behind”

Presentation on The Elementary Presentation on The Elementary and Secondary Education Actand Secondary Education Act

“No Child Left Behind”“No Child Left Behind”Nicholas C. Donohue, Commissioner of Nicholas C. Donohue, Commissioner of

EducationEducationNew Hampshire Department of EducationNew Hampshire Department of Education

November, 2002November, 2002

Purpose of No Child Left Behind

“…to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessments”

Persistent Themes

Local Schools and Districts……”where the action is.”

Federal-State-Local pieces all essential Support “disadvantaged” children “What Works!” Increased Resources… related costs? Urgency Accountability…

…with teeth.

Major Provisions

• Provides Flexibility and Local Control• Provides for Expanded Options and

Choice for Parents• Focus on Teaching• Focus on Reading• Demands Accountability for Results

Demands Accountability for Results

High standards –English Language Arts, Math and Science… at a minimum.

Assessment system ELA and math every year grades 3-8 Science – 3 times, once within each of three grade-spans (3-5),(6-

9),(10-12) ELA and math once with (10-12) grade-span.

All public school children NAEP - 4th and 8th Grade, reading and math, every two

years Single State Accountability System

$$$$$$$$$$$

This Year $41.9 MillionNext Year $59.6 MillionNew Resources $ 17.7 Million

(36% Increase)

H$ghl$ghts! $27 million in Title I “Basic” - $5 million more (+18%) $13.6 million to train and retain skilled educators (+45%) $3.1 million for Educational Technology Programs in the

schools (+30%) $1.5 million to fund after-school programs for at-risk

children (21st Century Schools Program – New!) $2.1 million in funding for Reading First (New!) $3.9 million to help NH assess student learning (New!)

Note: Funding figures are US Department of Education estimates

Single State Accountability system

Based on academic standards and assessments

Includes achievement of all students Include sanctions and rewards to hold all

public schools accountable for student achievement (these may differ from the sanctions required under Title I)

Includes “Adequate Yearly Progress”- Measure of performance and

progress

At The Center… “Adequate Yearly

Progress”Grounded in assessment resultsMajor debate.. Very hard to do as

one size fits allOld version… Accepted… Now changingNew stakes, new guidelines

01-0202-03

03-0406-07

09-1008-09

07-0805-06

04-05

Goal: All Proficient

10-1111-12

12-1313-14

Starting Point

School Year

Defining AYP: Defining AYP: Starting PointStarting Point

Defining AYP:Defining AYP:Intermediate Intermediate GoalsGoals

01-0202-03

03-0406-07

09-1008-09

07-0805-06

04-05

Goal: All Proficient

10-1111-12

12-1313-14

Starting Point

Intermediate Goals – 3 years maxmust increase in equal increments

First increase within 2 years

Annual Annual Measurable Measurable ObjectivesObjectives

01-0202-03

03-0406-07

09-1008-09

07-0805-06

04-05

Goal: All Proficient

10-1111-12

12-1313-14

Starting Point

AYP Requires

Same high standards for all Statistically valid and reliable Continuous and substantial improvement for all students Separate measurable annual objectives for achievement

• All students• Racial/ethnic groups• Economically disadvantaged students• Students with disabilities• Students with limited English proficiency• All related subject areas, all grades

Graduation rates for high schools and 1 other indicator for elementary schools

How a school or district makes AYP…

Each group of students meets or exceeds statewide annual objective

exception: - the number below Proficient reduced 10% from

prior year, and - subgroup made progress on other indicators

ANDFor each group, 95% of students participate in the assessments on which AYP is based

Schools Not Making AYP For 2 Consecutive Years

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

- 2 Year Plan, Choice w/in District- Choice, “Supplemental Services” *- Choice, Supp. Services, “Corrective Actions”

Staff, New Curric, Outside Expert, Extend Year and/or Day, Restructure Internal School Organization

- Choice, Supp Services, “Plan Restructuring”**Reopen as charter, Remove staff –all or most, principal too, Contract with entity, State takeover, Any other major governance restructuring.

- Choice, Supp Services, Implement Restructuring

*Unless natural disaster, or “unforseen” decline in $$$** Consistent with state law

For a State to make AYP

Annual peer review beginning in year 3 will determine…

Did the State make AYP as defined under Title I for each group of students ?

Did the State meet its annual measurable achievement objectives for LEP attainment of English proficiency under Title III?

(Title VI, Subpart 4)

If a State fails to make AYP for 2 consecutive years…

The United States Secretary of Education shall provide technical assistance that is: • Valid, reliable and rigorous, and• Constructive feedback to help the State

make AYP or meet the annual measurable objectives

SY 2005 Report to Congress on Status of States

State Administrative Funds at Stake

Annual State Report Card

Will include:• Disaggregated student achievement results by performance

level• Comparison between annual objectives and actual

performance for each student group• Percent of students not tested, disaggregated• 2-year trend data by subject, by grade tested• Data on other indicators used to determine AYP• Graduation rates• Performance of districts making AYP, including the number

and names of schools identified for school improvement• Professional qualifications of teachers, percent with

provisional credentials, percent of classes not taught by highly qualified teachers including comparison between high- and low-poverty schools

• Optional information provided by State

COSTS

• Assessment: Expanded, Plus and Minus, Local Work.

• AYP: The Cost of Help and Support.• High Quality Educator: Certification,

Professional Development, Para’s.• Accountability: AYP, State, What

Will it Look Like, What Will It Mean.

This Year! Answering questions

without clear answers Tracking fed regulations AYP for NH Identify “supplemental”

service providers Support Parent

Notification NH Accountability

System Developing “Plan” for

’05-’06 Including key stakeholders

Grade Level Benchmarks High Quality Educators

Definitions Drop out, Safe School

and LEP Targets Analyzing implications

re: NH State Law and related rules, and DOE capacity

Communicating well Details/Big Picture

Balance

NH Issues and Choices…

Minimum required Single State Test Social Studies ? Dual (and dueling)

accountability systems Continue to provide limited

technical assistance Limit Reading Effort Limited Quality Educators Assume fed’s know best

Take Advantage State/local partnership Continue to build a powerful

“system” of teaching and learning.

One, sensible, unified system of accountability and support

Attract and keep even better educators

Lead the nation in literacy Assume we can make the

“best of this.”

NH Issues and Choices…

Will we…Meet federal requirements or…

meet New Hampshire’s challenges?

Meet expectations or… exceed expectations?

Adequate or…excellent?

Your NH Department of Education