1. Every Student Succeeds Act 101 Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast and Islands Governing Board Meeting May 2016

2. Knowledge Alliance Founded in 1971, Knowledge Alliance is a non-profit, non-partisan organization focused on dramatically improving K-12 public education by advocating for the widespread, effective use of research-based knowledge in policy and practice. 2

3. Member Organizations Abt Associates AdvancED AIR CNA CTAC Education Analytics EDC Education Northwest ETS FHI 360 IMPAQ International Learning Forward Marzano Research McREL International NWEA Results for America RMC Research RTI International SRI International University of Oklahoma WestEd 3

4. ESSA Policy Update Political context Policy overview –Accountability –School improvement –Teachers and Leaders Timeline Discussion 4

5. Accountability Each statewide system will “meaningfully differentiate” schools using: 1.Academic proficiency on state assessments 2.Graduation rates for high school 3.English Language Proficiency 4.Growth or another statewide academic indicator for K-8 schools 5.Not less than one other state-set indicator of school quality or student success 6.95% assessment participation rate 5

6. Accountability Comprehensive Support and Improvement: –Lowest-performing 5% of Title I schools on state accountability index. –High schools with less than 67% graduation rates. –Schools with underperforming subgroups that do not improve after a state-determined number of years. Targeted Support and Improvement: –Schools with consistently underperforming subgroups, as defined by the state 6

7. School Improvement School Improvement Grant (SIG) models no longer required Comprehensive Support and Improvement and Targeted Support interventions must be “evidence-based” RELs cited as resource to SEAs and LEAs for identifying evidence-based interventions 7

8. Teachers and Leaders Allows—but does not require—states to use funds for educator evaluation Authorizes the Teacher Incentive Fund, a competitive grant to support innovative educator evaluation systems Requires SEAs and LEAs to demonstrate how they will ensure that low-income and minority children are not served at disproportionate rates by ineffective, out-of-field and inexperienced” educators 8

9. Teachers and Leaders Authorizes states to use funds to develop and implement: –Teacher and School Leader Academies (up to 2% of state’s entire Title II allocation) –Activities to support principals (permissive 3% state Title II set-aside) 9

10. Negotiated Rulemaking ED required by law to conduct negotiated rulemaking on “supplement not supplant” and assessments Computer Adaptive Nationally recognized high school assessment 8 th grade math exemption Inclusion of students with disabilities Alternate assessments- 1% cap Inclusion of English learners 10

11. Timeline-Regulations U.S. Department of Education will issue regulations in 2016 –Hosted two public hearings in January to collect initial public comment –Convened a Negotiated Rulemaking panel in March and April on “supplement not supplant” and assessments –Reached consensus on assessment issues, but not “supplement not supplant” –Publish draft regulations in spring 2016, open for public comment –Final regulations in fall of 2016 11

12. Transition Timeline August 2016: ESEA Waivers expire School Year 2016-17: Work with stakeholders to transition to new systems School Year 2017-18: New systems go into effect 12

13. ESSA & Evidence-Based Requirements

14. School Improvement

15. Identified Schools Comprehensive Support and Improvement: –Lowest-performing 5% of Title I schools on state accountability index. –High schools with less than 67% graduation rates. –Schools with underperforming subgroups that do not improve after a state-determined number of years. Targeted Support and Improvement: –Schools with consistently underperforming subgroups, as defined by the state 15

16. Funding Increases state set aside for school improvement from 4% to 7% Requires funds be used for evidence-based activities –SEAs required to allocate 95% of funds to LEAs –May allocate funds by formula or competitive grants 16

17. NCLB v. ESSA Definitions NCLB included “scientifically-based research” definition –Experimental and quasi-experimental ESSA includes “evidence-based” definition –Four evidence tiers: Strong: experimental Moderate: quasi-experimental Promising: correlational Rationale + evaluation (entry evidence) 17

18. Application of Definition Activities, strategies or interventions funded by 7% state set aside must meet top three evidence tiers Comprehensive and targeted interventions must meet four evidence tiers 18

19. Intermediary organizations Requires SEAs and LEAs, to the extent feasible, to work with outside intermediary organizations that have practical expertise in the development or use of evidence-based strategies to improve teaching, learning, and schools 19

20. Regional Educational Laboratories RELs must provide technical assistance to SEAs and LEAs in implementing the evidence-based definition At least two researchers at every REL are certified as What Works Clearinghouse reviewers –Have in-depth knowledge of the WWC standards and how the standards are applied 20

21. Other ESSA Programs

22. Formula Grants Requires use of four evidence tiers Title II Part A –Professional development, class size, induction Title IV Part A –definition and use of drug and violence prevention –mental health awareness and training programs –resources addressing health and safety practices –reduction of exclusionary discipline practices –school-based mental health programs, including trauma-informed programs 22

23. Competitive Grants Prioritizes top three evidence tiers –LEARN (literacy) –SEED (educator development) –School Leaders –Family Engagement –Promise Neighborhoods –Community schools –High-ability learners 23

24. Education Innovation and Research program Modeled after Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program in education Grants to districts and other entities to create, develop, implement, replicate and take to scale evidence-based interventions 24

25. Education Innovation and Research program Three grant phases: –Early phase: based on promising evidence –Mid-phase: based on successful implementation of early phase grants (or equivalent) –Expansion grants: implementation and replication of mid-phase grants Grantees must conduct independent evaluations of interventions 25

26. Clarifying Questions & Answers Michele McLaughlin President, Knowledge Alliance michele@knowledgeall.net @knowledgall 26