Presentation on The Elementary and Secondary Education Act “No Child Left Behind” Nicholas C. Donohue, Commissioner of Education New Hampshire Department of Education November, 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

 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 - 4 th and 8 th Grade, reading and math, every two years  Single State Accountability System

$$$$$$$$$$$  This Year $41.9 Million  Next Year $59.6 Million  New 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 (21 st 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 results  Major debate.. Very hard to do as one size fits all  Old version… Accepted…  Now changing  New stakes, new guidelines

Goal: All Proficient Starting Point School Year Defining AYP: Starting Point

Defining AYP: Intermediate Goals Goal: All Proficient Starting Point Intermediate Goals – 3 years max must increase in equal increments First increase within 2 years

Annual Measurable Objectives Goal: All Proficient 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 AND For 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 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