NCLB: Known as No Child Left Behind Opinions and Thoughts of Robert C. McCracken

NCLB  Some Facts  Some Opinion  Some Help  Some Updates

Checking for Knowledge/Beliefs  Do you think all children learn at the same rate, same time and same level?  Do you think all children, including those with disabilities, can pass the same test at the same chronological age?  Do you think everyone can pass a test, the first time?

Checking for Knowledge/Beliefs  Do you think all students in Virginia can earn a standard or advanced studies diploma?  Do you think modified standard diplomas are acceptable forms of graduation?  Do you think IEP diplomas represent a successful school career?  Do you think GED is an acceptable alternative for students?  Do you think vocational completers are useful and productive citizens in Virginia?

Some Facts  Signed in Law: January 8, 2002  History: Title I, Chapter I and ESEA  Trojan Horse Example  First Benchmark: Highly Qualified Paraprofessionals  Next Benchmark: First set of data regarding schools failing to Adequate Yearly Progress

Some Facts  State Accountablility: AKA “Workbooks”  Virginia’s “Workbook”; timeline issues  First Set of Data release: Virginia’s Issues  Data Sets: Disaggregated Data What does that mean?

Some Facts  In Virginia: SOL test results 3, 5, 8 and End of Course (English and Math) End of ; 4 and 7 Projected Science in middle school and high school Attendance Graduation Rates

Some Facts  What is AYP  the Nation: All the same subgroups  What are the subgroups  In Implementation Goals of NCLB 100% All Subgroups by 2014 Virginia first goals: 58 Math and 61 English Failure of ANY subgroup at any time MEANS “Failure to Make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)”

Some Facts  Highly Qualified Professional Personnel by Who are they? Who are they NOT? Provisional Licensure Career Switchers Experienced Teachers  Staff Development: High Quality Staff Development NOW

Some Facts  Penalties: Failure to make AYP  “Title I” and Non-Title I Regardless; Public label is applied  Supplemental Services  School Choice  Removal of Staff “responsible for the failure”  Reconstitution of the school

Some Facts  Reopen as a Charter School  Virginia’s Requirement for Charter Schools  Charter Schools in other states

Some Opinion  Provisional Licenses will cease to exist  Local Licenses will cease to exist  Teacher shortage already exists and will grow  Relationship to Special Education will merge with NCLB expectations and personnel requirements regarding “Highly Qualified”

Some Opinion  Special education and NCLB will conflict in court  IF adjustments are not made, public schools as currently defined, will cease to exist by 2014  What is the intent of the political agenda to implement Charter Schools and or Vouchers?  What is the outcome of implementation of Charter Schools and Vouchers?

Some Help  Virginia, remember 1995 and SOL’s  This does affect all educators  Get knowledgeable  Get involved  Think “this too shall pass” and you will be passed

Some Updates  A new Secretary of Education  Maybe some relief and common sense?  Maybe Not

Some Updates  By Rosalind S. Helderman  Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, April 14, 2005; Page B04  The U.S. Department of Education has rejected Virginia's first request for a waiver from part of the No Child Left Behind law, which has strict testing requirements to determine whether students from all economic, ethnic and other groups are performing up to par.  The rebuff arrived just days after U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings convened a meeting of the nation's top state school officials at Mount Vernon to promise that there would be new flexibility for states that "show results and follow the principles" of the federal law.

Some Updates  Texas Fined for No Child DefianceEducation Secretary Margaret Spellings fined Texas $444,282 Friday for the state's continued defiance of the No Child Left Behind Act. For the last two years, the Texas Education Agency has exceeded the federal cap on how many students with learning disabilities can be exempted from regular state testing, mandated by the act, in favor of an easier exam. In a stern letter addressed to Texas Education Commissioner Shirley Neeley, Spellings said "the TEA has not shown cause why" she should not withhold the money from the agency's 2004 federal grant.

Questions / Reactions  What questions do you have?  How would you now answers my questions, from the perspective of NCLB?