In the past year, many experts and organizations have shared guidance on how states should think about creating their state plans and what key provisions they should be sure to include. In advance of the April 3 state plan submissions to the U.S. Dept. of Education, here are a few we think are worth reading again:
Thanks to an inclusive and well-designed approach, Colorado is among a small group of states that will meet an April 3 deadline to submit plans to implement new federal education legislation.
Participants and outside observers have praised the state for its ability to involve a wide swath of stakeholders in drafting its plan to implement the Every Students Succeeds Act (ESSA), the successor to No Child Left Behind.
“The government said, ‘You have to consult with stakeholders,’ but the law gave few guidelines,” said Priscilla Wohlstetter, Distinguished Research Professor at the Teachers College, Columbia University.
For that reason, some states have struggled through the process or delayed plans until the final September deadline, but not Colorado. The state has distinguished itself for its unique plan and thorough public engagement.
“Top Performer” in Stakeholder Engagement
Colorado officials conducted seven statewide ESSA listening sessions. Then, utilizing a “hub-and-spoke” committee model, they formed seven “spoke” committees with 130 members that fed information into a “hub” committee of 20 statewide leaders who met nine times and formulated a draft ESSA implementation plan. In total, the state oversaw 170 meetings and collected more than 5,000 public comments.
Wohlstetter and two colleagues are conducting a research project on ESSA and intergovernmental relations. They have tracked each state’s outreach efforts and filed them into three categories: “Informative,” which provide information to the public; “consultative,” which gather public feedback but don’t necessarily use it to develop a plan; and “collaborative,” which gather public feedback through regular meetings and incorporate it into the state’s plan.
“A lot of states had listening tours so they would get feedback, but they weren’t doing anything with it,” Wohlstetter said. “Colorado was a top performer, not only pushing out a lot of information but being collaborative, setting up committees and using the information they got.”
Groups representing traditional education advocacies, civil rights organizations and business groups confirmed these findings and are satisfied with how the process played out.
Sean Bradley, the president and CEO of the Urban League of Metropolitan Denver who sat on the “hub” committee, said about 30 civil rights groups met with top education officials early on to show how serious they were about being a part of the process. Since the “spoke” committees met during the day when working parents and teachers could not attend, the groups requested that the meetings be live-streamed and that people watching could submit questions.
“There’s a lot of talk about black and brown issues but black and brown people aren’t at the table when those decisions are being made. We’re trying to change that narrative in the state,” Bradley stated.
Partners Getting Creative with ESSA’s Flexibility
One hallmark of ESSA is the flexibility it gives state education officials in how they allocate resources for Title I, the federal program which provides education funding for low-income students. Officials in Colorado are seizing this opportunity.
“One of the exciting things about the new law is that it broadens the uses of funds and lets school districts spend in new ways,” stated Pat Chapman, executive director of federal programs for the Colorado Department of Education. “Title I primarily targets students who are farther away from achieving standards, who are struggling to be proficient in math or reading. The new law really does target all kids, and we’re really excited about the potential for these funds to have a dramatic impact directly on students. There’s a real-life impact on kids right out of the gate.”
Chapman said the agency is looking to take advantage of that as much as possible in some untraditional ways, such as programs for career and technical schools, which have never been a focus for Title I funds before.
Beyond the education department, community organizations around the state are also looking at creative ways to help students. Bradley explained that the Urban League is interested in grants through Title I that they can use in partnership with local school districts to assist homeless youth. Denver has a substantial number of students who, while not living on the streets, are not in stable environments.
“It’s an opportunity for us and others to do what we can to provide real support services for those students,” he added. “There’s much more flexibility for organizations to apply [for grants] and for the opportunity to be at the table when decisions are made on who will receive grants.”
For the business community, the newfound Title I flexibility is a chance to work with local schools and districts to help create programs like apprenticeships, job training and credentialing that will lead to high-quality employees. Colorado Succeeds represents business leaders throughout the state who are looking for ways to help students beyond writing sponsorship checks. They see new and unique opportunities under ESSA.
“It’s a chance to integrate more science and technology,” said Shannon Nicholas, the group’s director of Communications and Programs. “We’re big advocates of thinking more strongly about computer science. The jobs we have now aren’t the same job we will have 20 years from now. For our members, it’s a chance to provide partnership and opportunity for students to explore the different opportunities available in their communities, giving kids access to technology and future jobs.”
Education Reformers Demand High-Quality Tests
In addition to funding and improving employment opportunities, testing was another major topic in the discussions held around the state.
Reilly Pharo Carter, executive director of Climb Higher Colorado, a statewide initiative focused on raising academic standards, sat on the assessments “spoke” committee and commended the state for facilitating good conversations about the tests students are required to take.
Colorado will go into the next school year with their current set of assessments intact, but since students will be taking more tests than required by ESSA, education officials and lawmakers are reviewing various options to change that.
“We have some strong opinions on what we expect out of our assessments,” Carter said. “Not everyone’s bought into statewide testing so we’re not forcing ourselves into a unanimous conclusion on the topic. There are basic criteria we want to make sure we have.”
Climb Higher Colorado is part of the Equity in Colorado Coalition, which is comprised of more than 20 groups focused on closing achievement and accessibility gaps for minority student populations, low-income students, students with disabilities and bilingual students. Several representatives of individual groups served on various “spoke” committees, and, while Carter said they were “satisfied” with the state’s plan, there’s a recognition that more needs to be done.
A Plan for the Future
Once the state submits its plan to the U.S. Department of Education, officials see their real work beginning: working with local districts and schools to figure out how to implement it in classrooms. But even as state officials shift their focus, they remain committed to staying in contact with the public.
“We have pledged that a year in, we’ll reconnect with people to see what’s working and what’s not,” Chapman said.
That pledge is resonating with participants who now see themselves as partners with the state education department going forward.
“We appreciate the work that’s gone into this, and we’re going to assume the best,” Carter said. “If we see the state move forward without making adjustments based on feedback, you may see more traditional roles for advocacy groups pushing back and calling that out. We’re looking for opportunities to do more, to make the plan better.”
Bradley echoed Carter’s sentiments, noting that groups like the Urban League have a responsibility to participate in meetings.
“Even though we made some really good progress, there’s still a lot more that needs to be done,” he said. “We have to find the best ways to make sure that our kids are getting the best possible education. If students aren’t learning, we have to figure out why not and use the best tools we have to make sure they can.”
The business community will also be keeping a close watch.
“There are places where the state left the plan somewhat vague so our biggest concern is around implementation,” Nicholas said. “A plan is just a piece of paper until we start working on it together.”
While the hard work of implementation remains, Colorado’s outreach efforts have forged partnerships that are essential to taking full advantage of ESSA to the benefit of all students.
Jessica R. Towhey is a contributor to RealClearEducation.
As the first submission deadline for state ESSA plans rapidly approaches, Educators for High Standards released a new report, “Teacher Engagement and Perspectives on ESSA: An Eagerness to Engage and Be Heard.” The report, based on a nationwide survey of classroom teachers and teacher advocacy leaders (those engaged in education advocacy work), reveals that almost all teachers believe that they should play an influential role in policy discussions, but a majority of teachers don’t think their state has sought adequate teacher input in the ESSA planning process. “Teachers work hard each and every day to ensure that students are getting the education they deserve. As they implement policies at the classroom level, teachers should be the go-to voices in policy discussions and shouldn’t have to beg to be included in the debate,” said Katrina Boone, who oversees Educators for High Standards.
The Fordham Institute is one of the major backers of ‘choice’, vouchers, and charter schools — and of defunding public schools. So it’s quite a surprise when they publish a major studyshowing that students who use vouchers actually do WORSE than their peers who remain in the public schools.
You are probably thinking that I am joking or exaggerating.
No.
I will quote from the executive summary:
EdChoice improved the achievement of the public school students who were eligible for the voucher but did not use it.
The students who use vouchers to attend private schools have fared worse academically compared to their closely matched peers attending public schools. The study finds negative effects that are greater in math than in English language arts. Such impacts also appear to persist over time, suggesting that the results are not driven simply by the setbacks that typically accompany any change of school.
Let us acknowledge that we did not expect—or, frankly, wish—to see these negative effects for voucher participants; but it’s important to report honestly on what the analysis showed and at least speculate on what may be causing these results.
(INDIANAPOLIS) – The Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) will host a meeting to gather input and discuss implementing Indiana’s plan to fulfill the new federal education requirements known as the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in Indianapolis on April 4, 2017.
ESSA was signed into law in December 2015 as the update to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. ESSA replaces the previous update to the law, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). While ESSA mirrors NCLB in that ESSA holds states accountable for high standards, maintains state accountability systems, requires annual tests in grades 3-8 and in high school, and sustains support for struggling schools and development of teachers, ESSA also allows for more state input and direction. Through ESSA, states can determine how they want to reach each of these policy goals and have more local control in crafting their approach.
In an effort to ensure student success, IDOE will host a series of meetings across the state to solicit recommendations from educators, administrators, parents, community members, and local leaders. Each meeting will begin with a brief overview of ESSA, followed by small group discussions involving attendees and IDOE staff. The input and recommendations gathered will then be compiled into a community meeting report and will help drive IDOE’s response to meeting ESSA requirements.
MEETING: ESSA Community Engagement Meeting
WHEN: Tuesday, April 4, 2017
LOCATION: Indianapolis Urban League at 777 Indiana Ave. in Indianapolis
TIME: 6:30 P.M. – 8 P.M. ET
For information regarding upcoming dates, times, and locations of ESSA meetings, or to RSVP, please visit: www.doe.in.gov/essa/essa-community-meetings. To learn more about ESSA, please visit: www.doe.in.gov/essa.
Thanks to an inclusive and well-designed approach, Colorado is among a small group of states that will meet an April 3 deadline to submit plans to implement new federal education legislation.
Participants and outside observers have praised the state for its ability to involve a wide swath of stakeholders in drafting its plan to implement the Every Students Succeeds Act (ESSA), the successor to No Child Left Behind.
“The government said, ‘You have to consult with stakeholders,’ but the law gave few guidelines,” said Priscilla Wohlstetter, Distinguished Research Professor at the Teachers College, Columbia University.
For that reason, some states have struggled through the process or delayed plans until the final September deadline, but not Colorado. The state has distinguished itself for its unique plan and thorough public engagement.
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump signed bills Monday (March 27) overturning two Obama-era education regulations, continuing the Republican majority’s effort to undo key pieces of the previous administration’s legacy.
Trump’s move scraps new requirements for programs that train new K-12 teachers and rolls back a set of rules outlining how states must carry out the Every Student Succeeds Act, a bipartisan federal law meant to hold schools accountable for student performance. In a signing ceremony at the White House Monday, the president hailed the measures for “removing an additional layer of bureaucracy to encourage freedom in our schools.”
Leaders of the Republican majority claimed that the accountability rules represented an executive overreach by former president Barack Obama. Democrats argued that rescinding the rules opens loopholes that states can use to shield poorly performing schools from scrutiny, especially when they fail to serve poor children, minorities, English-language learners and students with disabilities.
Civil rights and business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, also opposed doing away with the rules. The measure to repeal the regulations passed easily in the GOP-dominated House, but barely made it out of the Senate on a 50 to 49 vote, mostly along party lines…
Action at the federal level created minor complications for the state in complying with the law that replaced No Child Left Behind, but Vermont stands to benefit under the new education act, say state officials.
States have been developing plans to comply with the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 by an April deadline. But early this month Congress threw out the rules that were guiding the process for creating state plans, because lawmakers felt they didn’t give states enough flexibility.
That led to U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos asking the states in mid-March to submit their information using new templates.
DeVos said the streamlined ESSA templates ask only for descriptions, information, assurances and materials that are “absolutely necessary” for the Department of Education to consider the plans.
“I wanted to ensure that regulations comply with the requirements of the law, provide the State and local flexibility that Congress intended, and do not impose unnecessary burdens,” she wrote to education officials in all the states. Letter on Every Student Succeeds Act State Templates
While the series of decisions created drama in Washington, they ultimately won’t harm Vermont’s schools or slow down Vermont’s application for ESSA funds, say education officials.
In fact, with the new latitude in ESSA and the administration’s more hands-off approach, Vermont stands to do well under the new law, said Amy Fowler, a deputy secretary at AOE.
According to the agency, ESSA outlines expectations for states concerning school accountability and distribution of federal funding for student supports, with a goal of ensuring equitable outcomes for historically marginalized groups. These include students of color and low-income students.
Under ESSA, as under No Child Left Behind, states must explain how they intend to measure the performance of their schools and students. When NCLB was first implemented, Vermont had to label a number of schools as failing because the state sets high expectations and standards. Fowler said life under ESSA will be different because there is more flexibility and the focus isn’t only on reading and math achievement.
Vermont has been preparing to file its ESSA plan April 3. The Education Agency has already given a copy to Gov. Phil Scott.
The new template for submitting the plan isn’t that different, but there are fewer things the agency needs to put into it, according to Fowler.
“So far everything we wrote we found a place for in the template and we don’t have any blank spaces, so we are pretty excited about that,” she said recently, adding that it will be in a different order from what the public saw in draft form, but it is all the same content.
The governor, education secretary, State Board of Education and school districts are committed to closing the achievement gap for underprivileged youth, and those goals will not be harmed by Washington, Fowler said.
“We are super lucky to live in Vermont where we are committed to supporting vulnerable youth,” she said.
Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos made big news twice the first time she visited a school in her new job. Ever since then, educators, advocates, and others have expressed keen interest in keeping close tabs on each time she visits a school to see how things go, and what she says during and after her visit.
Now you can easily keep up with DeVos’ visits to schools: Click here to use our handy interactive map and tracking tool. Each time she stops by a school, you’ll see a slide with the name and location of the school, along with any other pertinent information and coverage we have of her trip. The interactive tool also adds up not just the number of times she’s visited schools, but the types of schools she’s visited: traditional public, private, and charter schools. You can also check out an embedded version of the tracker below:
School visits and the accompanying photo ops for education secretaries are part of the job, of course. Former Secretary of Education William Bennett, for example, the nation’s third education secretary, visited 75 schools from 1985 to 1987. And it was one of his favorite parts of the job…
The Illinois House met this week, while Senate was not in session. Lawmakers are working to meet important deadlines; to remain active in the legislative process this session, bills must be approved in their chamber of origin by April 28. Next week marks the deadline for bills to move from committee to the floor for consideration in the full House. The committee deadline has already passed in the Senate.
Here are a few highlights from this week:
Proposals address substitute teacher shortage
Illinois has a serious problem with attracting and retaining substitute teachers. House lawmakers have put forward various measures in search of a solution, including:
(Click on each bill to view its status.) HB 3021(Martwick) requires the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) to implement a program to allow temporary staffing firms to contract with school districts to provide substitute teachers.
HB 751 and HB 2547 (Davidsmeyer) would affect the definition of “eligible employment” for the purpose of allowing a retired teacher to return to teaching in subject shortage areas without impairing his or her retirement status or retirement annuity by changing the ending date of the employment from no later than June 30, 2013 to no later than June 30, 2020.
HB 2898 (Crespo) removes the sunset date of June 30, 2021 to allow individuals with four years of experience as school support personnel to obtain a principal endorsement.
HB 3298 (Scherer) waives the Substitute Teaching License fee for individuals who prove they were previously employed as a full-time teacher. If a Substitute Teaching License application is from someone who doesn’t currently hold one, if granted a license, they can receive a full refund by proving they taught 10 full school days within a year of receiving their license. Status: Passed the House Elementary & Secondary Education: Licensing, Administration and Oversight Committee.
HB 3080 (Reis) increases the amount of time a retired educator may work as a teacher without impairing retirement status; allows 130 paid days or 700 paid hours in a school year. Effective immediately.
House Education committees update
The House Education Curriculum and Policy and Licensing committees discussed numerous proposals this week, including:
HB 3869 (Wallace) requires in-service training to develop cultural competency (rather than training on civil rights and in cultural diversity), including understanding and reducing implicit racial bias. This bill passed committee and is headed to the House floor. IFT supported this measure.
HB 3394 (Walsh) provides that the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) may recommend that a school district remove an employee who is the subject of an investigation from his or her employment position pending the outcome of an investigation; however, all employment decisions regarding school personnel shall be the sole responsibility of the school district or employer. This bill passed committee and now heads to the House.
HB 459 (Ives) provides that school districts may not be indebted in an amount greater than that indicated in current statute. If a district does exceed the debt limitation, it may not incur any new debt until the debt is lower than the debt limitation. This bill passed committee and is headed to the House floor. IFT opposed this legislation.
HB 266 (Flowers) allows parents to opt-out of standardized testing. The measure prevents the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) from assessing (testing) any student whose parent or guardian informed ISBE, in writing, that they do not wish the student be assessed. The bill requires ISBE to develop an opt-out form for parents to submit, and requires districts to distribute the forms. The bill did not pass out of committee, but the issue is likely to resurface. IFT supported this legislation.
IFT educates lawmakers about harms of mandate relief proposals
Due to the Governor’s budget impasse, a high volume of mandate relief bills have been introduced this session. With just one week remaining before the House committee deadline, IFT legislative staff continue to educate lawmakers about the harmful effects these changes would have on schools. To date, the House and Senate Education committees have not approved any of the following measures:
HB 440 (Ives) provides that physical education (PE) may (rather than shall) be provided to pupils. Because class sizes for PE are often larger than other classes, this bill may increase school district costs.
HB 663 (Morrison) provides that if any payments from the state to a school district are delayed for at least one payment cycle, the school board may discontinue, by a publicly adopted resolution, any instructional mandate in the Courses of Study Article of the school code during that time (with exceptions).
HB 670 (Morrison) provides that a school district may offer a driver education course by contracting with a commercial driver training school to provide both either or both the classroom instruction and driving practice components without requesting a modification or waiver of administrative rules.
HB 788 (Demmer) provides that all units of local government, school districts, and public colleges and universities may, by a majority vote of the governing body, exempt themselves from specified unfunded mandates if it is determined that it is not economically feasible to comply.
HB 793 (Demmer) provides that school districts need not comply with – and may discharge – any unfunded mandate or requirement placed on school districts by the school code or administrative rules. The IFT opposes this measure.
HB 2443 (Bennett) provides that a school district may offer a driver education course by contracting with a commercial driver training school to provide both the classroom instruction part and the practice driving part or either one without having to request a modification or waiver of administrative rules of the State Board of Education.
HB 2569 (Harris) provides that a school board may excuse pupils enrolled in grades 9 – 12 from engaging in physical education courses if those pupils request to be excused for any of certain listed reasons.
HB 3205 (Davidsmeyer) prohibits unfunded mandates, among other changes.
SB 13 (Cullerton) establishes a temporary property tax freeze and provides mandate relief for school districts, including greater flexibility in scheduling physical education, using commercial driving schools for driver education, and contracting with third parties for non-instructional services. SB 13 was part of the grand bargain, but did not receive a floor vote and has been referred back to the Senate Assignments committee.
SB 756 (Morrison) authorizes a school board to excuse students in grades 9-12 from engaging in physical education courses if those pupils request to be excused for any of certain listed reasons.
SB 1712 (Barickman) mirrors language in SB 13 that would allow for 3rd party contracting and physical and driver education changes without the referendum procedure for discharging mandates.
SB 1862 (Rooney) provides that the corporate authorities of a municipality may, by ordinance with a three-fifths vote, exempt the municipality from one unfunded mandate per year if it determines that compliance with the unfunded mandate creates an undue burden.
SB 2064 (Righter) provides that all units of local government, school districts, and public colleges and universities may, by a majority vote of the governing body, exempt themselves from specified unfunded mandates.
