ESEA 1965- NCLB -2001-2014.  Stronger accountability  More freedom for states and communities  Use of proven research-based methods  More choices.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Bureau of Indian Education
Advertisements

No Child Left Behind Act © No Child Left Behind Act ©Kristina Krampe, 2005 EDS 513: Legal Issues in Special Education.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) “No Child Left Behind” Act of 2001 Public Law (NCLB) Brian Jeffries Office of Superintendent of.
No Child Left Behind Act January 2002 Revision of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Education is a state and local responsibility Insure.
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
NCLB Basics From “What Parents of Students with Disabilities Need to Know & Do” National Center on Educational Outcomes University of Minnesota
Before IDEA One in five children with disabilities was educated. One in five children with disabilities was educated. More than 1 million children with.
1 Title I Faculty Presentation Department of Federal and State Programs or PX
1 The Federal No Child Left Behind Act and the Financial Impact on Manchester Public Schools Fiscal Year
Knowledge is Power Pitt County Schools Title I Workshop.
Coal City Unit District #1 Title I Parent Meeting.
EDU 221.  Group Presentation Reflections due for 7 & 8  Quiz #2 (Tuesday, Nov. 16 th ) – Problem- based ◦ What makes an outstanding response? Referring.
The persons whose photographs are depicted in the slides are professional models. They have no relation to the issues discussed. Any characters they are.
Pitt County Schools Testing & Accountability The ABC’s of Public Education.
+ Duluth High School Gwinnett County, Georgia Joy Singleton Scott Gravitt Elizabeth Goff Duluth High School Analysis of Assessment Data.
Data 101 Presented by Janet Downey After School Program Specialist Riverside Unified School District.
1 Prepared by: Research Services and Student Assessment & School Performance School Accountability in Florida: Grading Schools and Measuring Adequate Yearly.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Public School Choice The School District Of Palm Beach County May 2011.
Delaware’s Accountability Plan for Schools, Districts and the State Delaware Department of Education 6/23/04.
Our Children Are Our Future: No Child Left Behind No Child Left Behind Accountability and AYP A Archived Information.
NCLB Title I, Part A Parent Notification Idaho SDE Title I Director’s Meeting September 15, 2008 Cathryn Gardner, Senior Program Advisor Northwest Regional.
Cambrian School District Academic Performance Index (API) Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Program Improvement (PI) Report.
A Guide to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Public School Choice The School District Of Palm Beach County April 2010.
Maryland School Assessment (MSA) 2010 Results Leslie Wilson, Assistant State Superintendent Division of Accountability and Assessment July 20, 2010 State.
1 No Child Left Behind Critical Research Findings For School Boards Ronald Dietel UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies National Center.
Title I Annual Meeting What Every Family Needs to Know!
Standards The Achievement Gap The Debate Continues.
Presentation on The Elementary and Secondary Education Act “No Child Left Behind” Nicholas C. Donohue, Commissioner of Education New Hampshire Department.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
Annual Student Performance Report October Overview NCLB requirements related to AYP 2012 ISAT performance and AYP status Next steps.
1 No Child Left Behind for Indian Groups 2004 Eva M. Kubinski Comprehensive Center – Region VI January 29, 2004 Home/School Coordinators’ Conference UW-Stout.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 10, 2007.
No Child Left Behind Tecumseh Local Schools. No Child Left Behind OR... 4 No Educator Left Unconfused 4 No Lawyer Left Unemployed 4 No Child Left Untested.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
School Accountability in Delaware for the School Year August 3, 2005.
Lodi Unified School District Accountability Progress Report (APR) Results Update Prepared by the LUSD Assessment, Research & Evaluation Department.
Annual Student Performance Report September
NCLBNCLB No Child Left Behind (take notes, please)
No Child Left Behind Education Week
No Child Left Behind. HISTORY President Lyndon B. Johnson signs Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 1965 Title I and ESEA coordinated through Improving.
Making Sense of Adequate Yearly Progress. Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a required activity of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Title I Faculty Presentation Faculty Title I and AYP Combined Presentation.
NCLB / Education YES! What’s New for Students With Disabilities? Michigan Department of Education.
Ed Reform in Washington State 4.5, 4.6. Purpose of Understanding  If you don’t know where you are going, how will you know when you get there?  How.
ESEA Federal Accountability System Overview 1. Federal Accountability System Adequate Yearly Progress – AYP defined by the Elementary and Secondary Education.
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) /22/2010.
On the horizon: State Accountability Systems U.S. Department of Education Office of Elementary and Secondary Education October 2002 Archived Information.
No Child Left Behind Impact on Gwinnett County Public Schools’ Students and Schools.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez January 2010.
1 Welcome to the Title I Annual Meeting for Parents Highland Renaissance Academy.
EDU 4245 Class 5: Achievement Gap (cont) and Diagnostic Assessments.
1 NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND The reauthorized elementary and secondary education act.
Neo-Conservative Ideas Berliner and Biddle ( ) Neo-conservative “centrist” thought won out in school reform. Main approaches to school reform: Get.
Presented by: Frank Ciloski, Sherry Hutchins, Barb Light, Val Masuga, Amy Metz, Michelle Ribant, Kevin Richard, Kristina Rider, and Helena Shepard.
- 0 - OUSD Results MSDF Impact Assessment State Accountability Academic Performance Index (API) The API is a single number, ranging from a low.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez September 1, 2008.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA May 2003 Modified by Dr. Teresa Cortez for Riverside Feeder Data Days February.
Title I Annual Meeting What Every Family Needs to Know!
Elizabeth Burmaster, State Superintendent Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction November 2004 No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Implementation of the.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). What is Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)? As a condition of receiving federal funds under No Child Left Behind (NCLB), all.
SCHOOL REPORT NIGHT.
Elementary/Secondary Education Act (1965) “No Child Left Behind” (2002) Adequacy Committee February 6,2008.
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
Analysis of No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
2009 California Standards Test (CST) Results
Education Briefings for Candidates for Office In 2008
Education Briefings for Candidates for Office In 2008
Education and Accountability
Presentation transcript:

ESEA NCLB

 Stronger accountability  More freedom for states and communities  Use of proven research-based methods  More choices for parents

What does this mean for schools?

 Use of state-designed tests to assess students every year in grades 3-8 and once in grades  ISATS in Idaho= Math, Reading, Language Usage  Science tested once each level 3-5, 6-9, 10-12

 Students take tests once a year and according to the state scoring system their score ranks as  Below Basic  Basic  Proficient (performing at grade level)  Advanced

States are required to keep not just overall data, but data in 9 specific sub-categories of students as well to ensure that those groups are not being left behind.

 African-American  Asian  American Indian/Alaska Native  Hispanic  Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander  White  Limited English Proficiency (LEP)  Students with Disabilities (SWD)  Economically Disadvantages (FRL)

 To have all students (100%) proficient or above in math, reading, and science by

 The measurement a state uses to determine if a school is meeting its annual goals

2010/2011 Adequate Yearly Progress Report State of Idaho () ISAT ReadingISAT Math3rd Indicator % Tested% Proficient% Tested% ProficientGraduation Goal: 95.0%Goal: 85.6%Goal: 95.0%Goal: 83.0%Goal: 90.0% All Students African American Asian American Indian Hispanic Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander White Limited English Proficiency Economically Disadvantaged Students with Disabilities ~ For reporting purposes (participation), Idaho does not report student data for less than 10 students. For accountability purposes (proficiency), Idaho does not report student data for less than 34 students. )

 A school must meet the states’ AYP goals not just overall, but in all subcategories.  If not, they are placed on “alert” status for the first year.  If a school does not meet AYP in the same category for a second consecutive year, they are “in need of improvement.”

 They must then develop a “Plan of Improvement.”  They must allow the parents and students the option of sending their children to another public school in the district.

 If a school does not meet AYP in the same category for a fourth consecutive year, they must take “corrective action”– new staff or curriculum.  If a school does not meet AYP in the same category for a fifth consecutive year, they must restructure the school which could include all new staff or having the state or a private company take over the school.

 NCLB also required that all teachers be “highly qualified” to teach in their subject area.  That generally means having a bachelor’s degree in the subject that he/she teaches and/or having passed a certification exam.

 NCLB required states to have a “highly qualified” teacher in every classroom by the end of 2006 school year.  Not one state as met the requirement.  Approximately 90% of teachers in the nation are designated as highly qualified.

 “Highly Qualified”  The “highly qualified” provision makes it even harder for schools in difficult, high need areas (rural and urban) to find teachers.

 Narrowing of the curriculum  The requirement of testing reading, science, and math has taken focus away from art, music, physical education, social studies.

 Less time for learning  All the time spent testing could be better used actually instructing students.  Teachers must spend so much time on teaching the basics, the creative part of education is what gets left behind.

Each state makes its own tests and sets the scores needed, creating a wide range of difficulty. Many states have lowered standards and weakened tests to improve results.

 Students with disabilities should not be included in AYP results.  To expect every child with a disability, even those who are cognitively impaired, to be proficient in reading and math is unrealistic and sets schools up to fail.

 Results aren’t always valid.  There is so much pressure on schools to perform that some teachers are teaching to the test or even cheating.

 With all the focus on making sure students are proficient, little effort or money is spent challenging the top students and making sure they continue to advance.

 In some areas, struggling students are actually encouraged to drop out so their test scores will not reflect poorly on a school/district.

 Once again, teachers are being asked to do more with fewer resources.  The pressure of increased test scores and teaching to the test leads to teacher burnout.