1. Sizing Up the Opportunities Service-Learning and the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Shelley H. Billig, Ph.D RMC Research, Denver CO

2. The Act  No Child Left Behind reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Schools Act (ESEA)  Provides about 5% of all education funds in the U.S.  Embeds a 12 year lifespan though will be revisited legislatively in 2006.

3. NCLB Emphases  Accountability  Increased academic achievement  Standards  Scientifically based evidence of success  Accountability!!

4. Title I Part A  Part A: Funds for economically disadvantaged youth ;  Service-learning is an allowable use of funds IF it is linked to academic achievement.  Example: Georgia –Issues: territoriality and “making the case”.

5. Title I Part C  Funds for migrant education : can be used for program delivery during the school year or summer school;  Example: Colorado  Issues: lack of awareness, entry/exit of students.

6. Title I: Part H  Part H: School Dropout Prevention – allows counseling and mentoring for at-risk students. Schools can implement service-learning programs that include tutoring, peer counseling, cooperative learning, and other similar approaches.  Example: Kansas  Issues: student voice, teacher training, and transportation.

7. Title III  Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students— eligible entities may receive funds for “implementing applied learning activities such as service-learning”;  Example: Texas  Issues: state policies surrounding ELL

8. Title IV  21 st Century Schools programs – may use funds for service-learning or community service to rebuild safe and healthy neighborhoods and increase students’ sense of responsibility;  Safe and Drug Free Schools – may be used to prevent risk behaviors; –May use funds for mentoring, including programs that include service and service-learning Examples: Texas, California, Nebraska, Utah Issues: competitive funding; need for data

9. Title V  Innovative programs – may include community service programs and service- learning activities;  Character Education programs – service- learning in use in NY, PA, CA, others;  Gifted and Talented programs - establish and operate model projects and exemplary programs including service-learning.  Examples: New York; Pennsylvania  Issues: evaluation; sparse funding.

10. Title VII  Funds for Indian, Native Hawaiian, Native Alaskan Education – for mentoring, training, and apprenticeship programs that may include service- learning.  Examples: Hawaii; Montana  Issues: professional development

11. Profile of Linkages Between Service- Learning and NCLB Programs

12. NCLB Coordinators’ Familiarity with Service-Learning (Those with Linked Programs in the State)

13. Title Coordinators’ Views of SL

14. State Policy Supports for SL

15. District Funding for Service-Learning: Average Across States

16. NCLB Challenges  Accountability : how coordinators define this will open or limit opportunities for service-learning;  Scientifically-based evidence of success is needed – either academic success or reduction of risk or other valued outcomes;  Quality counts;  Relationships count.

17. Challenges Reveal by SL Survey Respondents  Funding ;  Emphasis on standards and testing ;  Lack of time ;  Lack of conceptual understanding; and  Lack of or conflicting state policies.

18. Keys to Success  Must be “best” or “promising” practice – eventually meet criteria for scientifically- based best practice.  Can be used to fund professional development, if linked to Title program.  Can be used to fund coordinators, materials, transportation if linked to program design and goals.

19. Survey Respondents: Facilitators of Progress  Financial support;  State “culture of service”;  Strong community partnerships;  Professional development opportunities and understanding of service-learning among administrators and teachers;  Individual district or school champions;

20. Facilitators of Progress (continued)  Link to content standards;  State-supplied tangible resources such as curriculum projects;  Strong state level team familiar with service-learning;  State conferences with sl presentations; and  Ability to show “legal” links.

21. Training Needs  Learning about best practices for high quality service-learning specifically for academic achievement;  Learning about how to use service- learning for specific Title purposes;  Developing strategies to help coordinators become aware;  Evaluation appropriate to Title programs; and  Information on outcomes.

22. What Next?  Awareness needs;  Motivation to adopt;  Implementing best practices;  Evaluation. –Tools are available; –Professional development is available; –Data are available… Advocacy and a strategic plan are needed.

23. Resources  National Service-Learning Clearinghouse - www.nslc.org;  National Service-Learning Partnership - www.nslp.org;  Corporation for National and Community Service – www.cncs.org;  National Youth Leadership Council - www.nylc.org; www.nylc.org  Many more….