WASHINGTON — Democrats sparred with U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos about the budget proposal from President Donald Trump that would direct $1.4 billion to expand school choice and sharply questioning her commitment to protecting students with federal vouchers from discrimination during a House subcommittee hearing Tuesday.
Meanwhile, Republicans questioned the education secretary more gently, focusing on special education and applauding the fiscal 2018 budget plan’s emphasis on new resources for school choice.
Democratic lawmakers pushed DeVos to explain why public schools wouldn’t suffer and lose out because of a proposed $1 billion in new Title I for public school choice, as well as $250 million for a new research program to study the impact of vouchers on needy students…
President Trump released his Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 budget on May 23 and immediately received bipartisan criticism from members of Congress concerned with deep cuts to education, health-care programs for low-income adults and children, and a variety of other federal programs.
“I can understand why President Trump wanted to be overseas when he released a budget slashing education at home,” said Alliance for Excellent Education President Bob Wise. “Still, I bet he could hear the outcry emanating from U.S. schools all the way in Rome. Thankfully, members of Congress are already signaling that Trump’s proposal will be parked—permanently—on the tarmac when he returns.”
Trump’s budget would cut discretionary funding for the U.S. Department of Education, excluding Pell Grants, by $5.3 billion or 11.6 percent compared to the 2017 funding levels recently approved by Congress. Funding cuts and program eliminations were plentiful and targeted everything from large programs such as Title I, which was cut by $578 million, and special education, which was cut by $114 million, to smaller programs focused on literacy and afterschool academic opportunities.
In a statement, U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos said the budget “reflects a series of tough choices” and “ensures funding for programs with proven results for students while taking a hard look at programs that sound nice but simply haven’t yielded the desired outcomes.”
Labeling a program as ineffective has been a popular justification to cut funding, even in instances where research says otherwise. In a March 16 press briefing, Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said Twenty-First-Century Community Learning Centers, or afterschool programs, had “no demonstrable evidence of actually helping kids do better in school.” This is despite a U.S. Department of Education report finding that these programs “[touch] students’ lives in ways that will have far-reaching academic impact” and make students “more likely to persist to graduation.”
Afterschool Alliance Executive Director Jodi Grant said Trump’s proposal is “painfully short-sighted and makes a mockery of the president’s promise to make our country safer and to support inner cities and rural communities alike.”
Trump also proposes that funding be eliminated for the brand-new Student Support and Academic Enrichment (SSAE) grant program created with bipartisan support under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). The program supports a well-rounded education for students; a safe and healthy school climate; and the effective use of schoolwide technology.
“Republicans and Democrats consolidated and eliminated several different programs to create SSAE and give flexibility to school leaders,” said Wise. “Now the president’s budget removes the funding—and flexibility—designed to improve education. Instead of eliminating funding for the program, President Trump should take the advice of two key ESSA architects, former House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline and U.S. Representative Bobby Scott who have urged that the program receive the full $1.65 billion for which it is eligible under ESSA.”
Even programs recently praised by DeVos and Trump did not avoid the budget cleaver. In an April 18 speech in Kenosha, Wisconsin, Trump said that vocational schools are “going to be a big factor” in the his administration. However, his budget proposes to cut career and technical education grants to states by $168 million, or 15 percent.
Proponents for charter schools were among the very few winners in Trump’s budget as it includes an increase of $158 million, or 46 percent, to start new charter schools or expand and replicate existing high-performing charter schools. Still, charter school advocates disagree with Trump’s approach.
“The National Alliance supports the administration’s investment in opening, expanding, and replicating high-quality charter public schools,” said National Alliance for Public Charter Schools President and Chief Executive Officer Nina Rees. “However, we are concerned that the proposed budget doesn’t maintain final FY 2017 funding levels for IDEA and reduces Title I Part A formula funds. Both IDEA and Title I are foundational programs for some of our most vulnerable students.”
In addition to expanded funding for charter schools, Trump proposes $1 billion for a new program that would provide supplemental awards to school districts that allow federal, state, and local funds to follow students to a public school of their choice. These Furthering Options for Children to Unlock Success, or FOCUS, grants would help school districts establish or expand “student-centered systems that (1) differentiate funding based on student characteristics, providing disadvantaged students more funding on a per-pupil basis than other students; (2) offer a range of viable school options and enable the federal, state, and local funds to follow students to the public school of their choice; (3) make school performance and funding data easily accessible to parents; and (4) empower school leaders to use funds flexibly to address student and community needs,” according to the U.S. Department of Education’s budget summary.
“Under the guise of empowering parents with school choice, the Trump administration has proposed a federal budget that would hurt the very communities that have the most to gain from high-quality public school options,” said Eli Broad, founder of the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation. “The budget would undermine the purpose of Title I by encouraging states to redirect resources away from the highest-need schools and students. It would slash other education and social support programs that serve students and families in need. Arts education and science instruction, a safe place to go after the last school bell rings, an affordable home, and financial support to make it through college—these are all essential to a student’s success. Public school choice cannot come at the expense of all public school families and students.”
Members of Congress from both parties quickly panned Trump’s budget. U.S. Senators John Cornyn (R-TX), the second-highest ranking Republican in the Senate, and John McCain (R-AZ) called it “dead on arrival.” U.S. Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA), top Democrat on the House education committee, said Trump’s budget “undermines public education.”
CHARLESTON, W.Va. – West Virginia’s Universal Pre-K Program once again ranks among the top in the nation, according to the 2016 Yearbook released today by the National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER).
The State of Preschool Yearbook is the only national report on state-funded preschool programs with detailed information on enrollment, funding, teacher qualifications, and other policies related to quality. Despite a slight decrease in preschool funding, West Virginia continues to rank among the top states, maintaining quality standards and broad access. In fact, West Virginia was one of only five states that met all 10 of NIEER’s quality benchmarks.
“Research has shown again and again that high-quality early childhood education can prepare children for greater success in elementary school and beyond,” said West Virginia Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Steven Paine. “Maintaining quality standards for Pre-K learning throughout the Mountain State ensures that all children – no matter the socioeconomic background – are given the start they need to succeed.”
The West Virginia Universal Pre-K Program boasts a 76 percent participation rate based on 4-year-olds who go on to attend the state’s kindergarten program as 5-year-olds. West Virginia Universal Pre-K enrolled more than 16,000 children, which census data notes is 66 percent of 4-year olds and 11 percent of 3-year-olds in the state. Nationwide, state-funded preschool program enrollment reached an all-time high, serving nearly 1.5 million children, 32 percent of 4-year-olds and five percent of 3-year-olds.
“The success of our early learning programs is reflective of the collaboration with the Governor’s Office, state agencies like the Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR), and the legislature, all of whom see the impact quality early learning programs have on children,” said West Virginia Board of Education (WVBE) president, Tom Campbell. “We are constantly striving to maintain the highest-quality early learning programs to give West Virginia’s youngest students the best start possible.”
On May 23, 2017, President Trump released the Administration’s FY2018 budget request to Congress which calls for a number of program eliminations within the U.S. Department of Education, a few of which would impact K-12 programs. For a number of programmatic changes that are proposed, the Administration is urging school districts and states to utilize existing Title I funding to address priority areas, such as those for effective teachers and leaders (Title II), tutoring, and extended day learning opportunities (Title IV). While the budget request calls for a record increase of $1 billion to Title I grants for disadvantaged students, the increase in funding would be targeted to school choice.
Please note that there may be discrepancies in budget documents, as some were prepared before the enactment of the FY2017 Consolidated Appropriations Act earlier this month. Therefore, when comparing final budget allocations with those proposed for FY2018, not all program levels may reflect the final enacted allocation. For example, the Appendix for the budget request shows Title II (Supporting effective instruction state grants) receiving funding, but the Major Savings and Reforms document confirms the program is deleted.
An analysis of the proposed budget follows:
Title I Grants for Disadvantaged Students: Overall funding for Title I grants would be increased by $334 million, compared to the current funding level of about $16.1 billion. The composition of Title I grants, however, would be changed to accommodate new “Furthering Options for Children to Unlock Success (FOCUS) grants to local educational agencies to implement weighted student funding formulas combined with open enrollment systems.”
School Choice: The new FOCUS grants would be funded at $1 billion to promote school choice and would represent a “down payment” on the President’s goal of investing $20 billion annually in public and private school choice. The proposed FOCUS grants would provide supplemental awards to school districts that agree to adopt weighted student funding combined with open enrollment systems that allow Federal, State, and local funds to follow students to the public school of their choice. According to Department budget documents, the proposal “would support LEAs in establishing or expanding student-centered systems that: (1) differentiate funding based on student characteristics, providing disadvantaged students more funding on a per-pupil basis than other students; (2) offer a range of viable school options and enable the Federal, State, and local funds to follow students to the public school of their choice; (3) make school performance and funding data easily accessible to parents; and (4) empower school leaders to use funds flexibly to address student and community needs. Under the Administration’s proposal, LEAs (including consortia of LEAs) that commit to developing and implementing these funding and open enrollment systems would be eligible for grants, which the Department would administer under the Flexibility for Equitable Per-Pupil Funding (Flexibility) authority in Title I, Part E of the ESEA.”
Additionally, the Administration is proposing a $250 million increase for the Education Innovation and Research program to establish competitive awards for applicants to provide scholarships for students from low-income families to attend the private school of their choice and to build the evidence base around private school choice. The proposal includes an increase in charter school funding; $167 million for the Charter Schools program to strengthen significant State efforts to start new charter schools or expand and replicate existing high-performing charter schools. The program also provides up to $100 million to meet the growing demand for charter school facilities. The proposed increase in charter school funding brings the total charter school funding request to $500 million.
Special Education Grants to States: The Administration requests $11.9 billion for the Grants to States program (roughly level funding compared to Fiscal Year 2017) to assist States and schools in covering the costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities ages 3 through 21. The request would provide an average of $1,742 for each of the 6.8 million children with disabilities who are estimated to be served in 2018. The Federal contribution toward meeting the excess cost of special education and related services would be approximately 15 percent of the national average per pupil expenditure (APPE) under this request.
Level funding proposed for special education grants under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) would equate to a reduction nationwide. For example, the average federal share of funding per pupil in FY2017 was $1,777 and approximately 16 percent of APPE. The FY2018 proposal would represent a reduction averaging about $35 per pupil.
Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which provides the major source of federal funding to help school districts fund educational services to students with disabilities, the federal share of funding that Congress initially promised in 1975 is up to 40 percent of the average per pupil expenditure. However, the 40 percent promise has not been fulfilled; and, the
federal share of special education funding would decline further under this request. Increasing the federal share of funding for special education is paramount, and should be addressed before considering future funding for newly created programs that may not have proven results for program effectiveness.
Impact Aid: The Administration is requesting roughly $1.2 billion for Impact Aid payment programs, including $1.16 billion for Basic Support Payments on behalf of federally connected children; $48.2 million for Payments for Children with Disabilities; $4.8 million for Facilities Maintenance for nine school facilities that originally were built to enable school districts and the U.S. Department of Defense to educate federally connected students; and, $17.4 million for competitive school construction grants to eligible districts for emergency repairs and modernization projects.
The Impact Aid program provides a vital source of support for 1,400 school districts across the nation that have a federal presence within their boundaries. These resources help districts provide educational services to students whose parents/guardians are enlisted in our Armed Forces, as well as those who reside on tribal trust lands.
The Administration has proposed the elimination of $68 million in Impact Aid federal properties payments to school districts, per the summary on page four. Along with the National Association of Federally Impacted Schools (NAFIS), NSBA opposes this proposed elimination.
Career and Technical Education (CTE): The Administration is requesting a reduction of approximately $166 million in Career and Technical Education State Grants (currently funded at about $950 million). According to the Department, the requested 15 percent reduction would “provide significant resources to support CTE programs while also maintaining the fiscal discipline necessary to support the President’s goal of increasing support for national security and public safety without adding to the Federal budget deficit.”
The request includes a $20 million increase for Career and Technical Education National Programs to promote the development, enhancement, implementation, or expansion of innovative CTE programs in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM).
As Congress moves forward in reauthorizing the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act through bipartisan legislation reported by the House Committee on Education and the Workforce on May 17, NSBA urges Congress to sustain investments in CTE that support college and career readiness for our students through the integration of stronger academic components, facilitation of greater career pathways, and stronger public-private partnerships.
National School Lunch Program: The 2018 budget request would support approximately 5.4 billion lunches and snacks served to 31 million children in the National School Lunch Program. The total FY18 request for the National School Lunch Program is $13 billion, up from $12.4 billion in FY17. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the current maximum reimbursement rate for free and reduced priced school lunches is $3.39 and $2.99 respectively.
School-based Medicaid: Proposed cuts to Medicaid are around $610 billion over 10 years. (This is separate from proposed cuts in the American Health Care Act [AHCA], which includes $839 billion in Medicaid cuts.) Combined, those Medicaid cuts would result in slashing the program by an astonishing $1.5 trillion over a decade.
Medicaid is a cost-effective and efficient provider of essential health care services for children. School-based Medicaid programs serve as a lifeline to children who can’t access critical health care and health services outside of their schools. Under this bill, the bulk of the mandated costs of providing health care coverage would be shifted to the States, even though health needs and costs of care for children will remain the same or increase. Most analyses of the budget request, as well as ACHA, project that the Medicaid funding shortfall in support of these mandated services will increase, placing states at greater risk year after year. The proposed federal disinvestment in Medicaid could force States and local communities to increase taxes and reduce or eliminate various programs and services, including other non-Medicaid services. The unintended consequences could force states to cut eligibility, services, and benefits for children, which impact school readiness and student achievement.
Programs proposed for elimination in FY2018
The Administration has proposed the elimination of 21st Century Community Learning Centers ($1.164 billion), stating that, “While limited evaluation and survey data from certain States and individual centers highlights benefits from participation, such as improved behavior and classroom grades, overall program performance data show that the 21st CCLC is not achieving its goal of helping students, particularly those who attend low-performing schools, meet challenging State academic standards. For example, on average from 2013 to 2015, less than 20 percent of program participants improved from not proficient to proficient or above on State assessments in reading and mathematics.” The budget request also suggests that, “the provision of before- and after-school academic enrichment opportunities may be better supported with other Federal, State, local or private funds, including the $15 billion Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies program.”
Along with the National Association of Federally Impacted Schools (NAFIS), NSBA asserts that Impact Aid Payments for Federal Property must be maintained for the benefit of all students in these districts. Cuts would cause financial harm as Impact Aid supports personnel and professional development, academic materials, transportation, technology, and other general operating expenses. Elimination of this funding stream would be a reversal on a 68-year commitment to federally impacted communities.
The budget request to Congress proposes eliminating Impact Aid Payments for Federal Property ($68 million). These payments compensate school districts for the presence of non-taxable federal properties within their boundaries. The Administration contends that this program is not applicable to the presence of federally-connected students (such as those whose parents/guardians are enlisted in the Armed Forces), and therefore does not necessarily support the education of federally-connected students.
Under the budget request, the new Title IV Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants program ($400 million) that was authorized under the Every Student Succeeds Act would be eliminated. The grant program was authorized to help support activities that provide students with a well-rounded education, ensure safe and supportive learning environments, and use technology to improve instruction. Under this new grant program, four previously authorized programs were consolidated: Mathematics and Science Partnerships, Advanced Placement, Elementary and Secondary School Counseling, and Physical Education. The Administration contends that any subgrants that would be awarded “would result in award amounts of less than $30,000 for the vast majority of school districts. The Administration does not believe limited Federal resources should be allocated to a program where many of its grants will likely be too small to have a meaningful impact.”
The budget request would eliminate Title II Supporting Effective Instruction (SEI) State Grants ($2.3 billion). Under ESSA, Title II programs for “Preparing, Training, and Recruiting High-Quality Teachers, Principals, or Other School Leaders” support class-size reduction initiatives, professional development and in-service training for teachers, technology integration into curricula, training on data usage to improve student achievement and student data privacy, parental/community engagement, development of STEM master teacher corps, civics, and implementation of performance-based compensation systems. In its explanatory statement, the Administration states that, “While the SEI State Grants program authorizes a wide range of activities, in school year 2015-2016, 52 percent of funds were used for professional development (PD) and 25 percent were used for class-size reduction. An LEA that identifies either activity as a key strategy for responding to a comprehensive needs assessment may use Title I, Part A funds for the same purpose.” With ESSA implementation efforts underway that emphasize the role of effective teachers, principals and school leaders, the loss of Title II investments could impact state and local efforts to develop tools and incentives focused on strengthening instruction, improving student academic outcomes, and retaining effective educators, especially for schools in underserved communities.
SEATTLE — Seattle Mayor Ed Murray announced an $18 million proposal to fund education and healthy food programs, including nearly $10 million for the Education Action Plan, a series of programs aimed at eliminating the opportunity gap between white students and African American/Black and other students of color. An additional $5.7 million will fund increased support for children from birth-to-five years old and their caregivers, such as prenatal care. And $3.2 million will fund expanded food access including the Fresh Bucks program, which provides low-income households vouchers for fresh fruits and vegetables at local farmers markets. These programs will be funded by a 1.75 cent sweetened beverage tax Mayor Murray transmitted to Council today.
“Addressing equity in education and health are paramount challenges to ensure everyone has access to opportunity in Seattle,” said Murray. “It is imperative that we proactively support Seattle Public Schools students and improved food access with frontline programs that put equity first. Healthy kids get better educations and are more likely to have a brighter future. The sweetened beverage tax transmitted today gives the City the financial resources to address each of these challenges.”
Despite significant efforts to provide an equitable education system, a persistent opportunity gap exists between white and Black students in education. In Seattle, according to officials, public school students of color meet third grade reading standards at a rate 31 percent lower than white students. The proposed investments in the Education Action Plan will be implemented using guidelines recommended by the Education Advisory Group that are directly tied to eliminating educational disparities for African American/Black students and other students of color.
The robust investments proposed in the Education Action Plan will significantly scale up programs devoted to eliminating inequality in education such as investments in before and after school opportunities like STEM extracurricular classes; adding more mentors in schools; reducing discipline disparities by providing personalized case management and providing special training to teachers; expanding summer learning programs; funding more internships; and diversifying Seattle’s teaching staff.
To fund these investments in education and food access, Murray has proposed a local tax on naturally and artificially sweetened drinks including soda, energy drinks, juice and sweetened teas. The proposed $0.0175 per ounce (1.75 cents) tax is expected to raise $23 million for the first year, and because consumption is expected to decline, $18 million annually thereafter. Of the revenue raised in the first year, 20 percent will be invested in one-time start-up costs or time-limited projects such as $5 million for the 13th Year program – an investment intended to ensure all Seattle Public Schools graduates can attend at least one year at the Seattle Colleges.
The $3.2 million investment in the Fresh Bucks program helps fund a match of purchases at Farmers Markets for low-income recipients of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, promoting more healthy eating by increasing accessibility of fresh fruits and vegetables. This investment is important because the Fresh Bucks program is supported by federal funding which is not expected to be renewed by the Trump Administration. Additional health investments will also address food insecurity for households that do not qualify for SNAP or who may be unauthorized immigrants.
The Education Action Plan is the result of the City’s inclusive process that began in 2016 by bringing various communities together to address education disparities for African-American/Black students and students of color. The City heard from a total of over 2,000 parents, teachers, and advocates on how best to combat these disparities across 20 community conversations, on-line forums, and Seattle’s first citywide Education Summit in over 25 years. From those conversations, an Advisory Group was formed of representatives from the City, Seattle Public Schools, community organizations, businesses, philanthropies and education advocates to create recommendations that would address the opportunity gap.
CHICAGO — The Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC) has released a new booklist called Comforting Reads for Difficult Times. This list includes titles meant to help children understand and heal from challenging situations like the death of loved ones, unexpected moves, catastrophic illness, and more.
The four-page list is available for free download on the ALSC website and includes titles for children ages K-8 grade. Also included are links to resources for adults to provide guidance on talking about sensitive topics with children.
“Librarians are trained to find just the right story for a variety of purposes,” says ALSC President Nina Lindsay. “With the Comforting Reads for Difficult Times booklist, ALSC hopes to share books that will help children and tweens see that they aren’t alone in whatever they are experiencing.”
Titles on the 2017 Comforting Reads for Difficult Times List were compiled and annotated by ALSC’s Quicklists Consulting Committee.
The 2017 Comforting Reads for Difficult Times List was funded through the Friends of ALSC and titles were compiled and annotated by ALSC’s Quicklists Consulting Committee.
About ALSC The Association for Library Service to Children is the world’s largest organization dedicated to the support and enhancement of library service to children. ALSC’s network includes more than 4,000 children’s and youth librarians, children’s literature experts, publishers, education and library school faculty members, and other adults dedicated to engaging communities to build healthy, successful, futures for all children.
President Trump released his proposed FY18 Budget. Sadly, this proposal eliminates several important Federal education programs. Of particular interest to state digital learning leaders is the elimination of the Student Support and Academic Enrichment (SSAE) Grants, also known as Title IVa of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). The SSAE Grant program focuses on Whole Child Education, Safe and Healthy Students, and the Effective Use of Technology. When ESSA was authorized, Title IVa was authorized at $1.65 billion. However, for FY 17 only $400 million was budgeted. This limited funding model would mean that many school districts would receive very little or no funds at all unless a state awards the funds via block grants to enable a few districts to use the funds for meaningful work. The FY17 funding level is the rationale used by the President to justify elimination of the grant program.
“Learning in the 21st Century means leveraging digital content, tools, and applications to best meet each student’s needs. However, teachers need to understand how to effectively harness these resources to maximize student learning,” notes Tracy Weeks, Executive Director of SETDA. “This budget takes away a vital funding source for schools, districts, and states.”
SETDA calls on Congress not only to continue to fund Title IVa, but to fund it at its fully authorized level of $1.6 Billion.
CHICAGO — Every librarian knows that public policies at the national, state and local level can have a huge impact on how resources are allocated to their library. However, many librarians have not been trained or encouraged to engage in advocacy at those levels. The Library Leadership and Management Association (LLAMA) will present “Evidence-based Advocacy at the National, State and Local Levels,” at 1:30 – 3 p.m. (Central time) on Wednesday, June 7.
On Tuesday evening, members of the House cast a party-line 72-59 vote to pass the education finance omnibus bill. It includes things like a 1.5 percent funding increase to the basic education formula — a number that falls short of the 2 percent increase opponents say is needed to help schools keep up with the cost of inflation. It also earmarks dollars for school readiness funding and early learning scholarships, but doesn’t include funding for the expansion of Gov. Mark Dayton’s signature voluntary pre-K program. And it abolishes the Perpich Center for Arts Education, redirecting resources to establish an arts outreach division at the Department of Education.
There’s another item in the bill having to do with school accountability that’s far less attention-grabbing, but still significant. In brief, state legislators want to review the state’s new federal accountability plan — the Every Student Succeeds Act, commonly known as ESSA — at least 30 days before it gets submitted to the U.S. Department of Education for approval this fall. Language in the bill directs the commissioner to ensure there’s alignment with the existing state school accountability system, the World’s Best Workforce, “to the extent practicable.” That’s an aim that most can agree on.
But when it comes to selecting which new indicator should be adopted to create a more holistic definition of school quality and student success, it appears that the Department of Education’s preferred frontrunner — chronic absenteeism — may be up against an unexpected hurdle.
“I just think chronic absenteeism has become trendy,” Rep. Sondra Erickson, R-Princeton, chair of the House Education Innovation Policy Committee, said, noting it’s included in several other draft ESSA plans from states who hit the first deadline for submission. “Why doesn’t Minnesota do something different? If absenteeism is really what we think we should do in a school quality indicator, lets look at it a little differently.”
Why chronic absenteeism?
From a technical standpoint, Commissioner of Education Brenda Cassellius points out, state legislators are laying out parameters that contradict federal law. As currently written in the education omnibus bill, “The school quality or student success accountability indicator required by ESSA must be an academic indicator.”
“That’s against federal law,” Cassellius said in a phone interview. “The federal law requires that the school quality or student success accountability indicator be nonacademic. It’s not that it can’t be academic. It’s just that it also has to include a nonacademic measure.”
One of ESSA’s distinguishing characteristics is that it gives states greater flexibility in setting student achievement goals and directs them to look beyond test scores to gauge school performance. This addition of a so-called “fifth indicator” — which measures things like the number of minutes students spend in physical education, parent engagement, social-emotional learning or some other factor outside of test scores and graduation rates — signals a widely hailed shift away from the more punitive, test-centric No Child Left Behind law. States can opt to add more than one of these new indicators to their accountability plan.
To be clear, the addition of a fifth indicator to round out how schools are evaluated doesn’t mean the hallmark school accountability data sets — proficiency in reading and math, along with high school graduation rates — go to the wayside. Rather, states must now track these measures, along with academic growth (which Minnesota already does in reading and math) and English-language proficiency, plus at least one other indicator of school quality or student success. Also, as states assign a weight to each indicator, ESSA specificities that the indicator of school quality or student success must count much less toward a school’s score than the combined weight of the other indicators.
The commissioner’s preference for using chronic absenteeism as a fifth indicator was guided by a pretty intensive community engagement process. She toured the state seeking feedback on all aspects of the new ESSA plan. And folks at the state Department of Education conducted dozens of meetings over the past year and a half with community members, education advocates, teachers, administrators, parents and data experts who served on two ESSA accountability committees.
The two groups explored the possibility of tracking postsecondary readiness, access to student support services, school climate, student engagement, social-emotional learning and more. They reached a general consensus around tracking chronic absenteeism for a couple of main reasons. First of all, it’s a data set that doesn’t require a heavy lift. Using attendance numbers that are already collected for the Minnesota Automated Reporting Student System (MARRS) reports, state department staff can simply divide each students’ number of days attended by the number of days they were enrolled.
Secondly, there’s value in paying better attention to which students are missing out on a critical portion of their education. This new use of existing data would reveal which students are missing 10 percent or more days of the school year — a threshold that puts them at greater risk of falling behind. In Minnesota last year, for instance, nearly a quarter of students enrolled in the free or reduced priced meal program were chronically absent. Rates also largely broke down along racial lines, with minority students missing more school days. The thinking is that as disparities are identified, schools can dig into the underlying causes and better direct resources to support students.
The state education omnibus bill spells out four academic options legislators would rather see the state Education Department adopt as part of its ESSA plan, all of which can be pulled from existing state accountability assessments. That list includes: reading and math growth for students performing in the bottom quartile, third grade reading proficiency, eighth grade mathematics proficiency, and science proficiency.
This push to fall back on existing data points prompts an important question: Is Minnesota going to stick with the status quo? Or is it going to use new, innovative, data points to tackle one of the worst achievement gaps in the nation?
Time to make a decision
Erickson says the options listed out in the education bill focus on what’s most important: academic outcomes that highlight what teachers are doing in the classroom. She has concerns that focusing on chronic absenteeism will put pressure on schools to change their attendance policies and will distract from what’s going on in the classroom.
“I don’t know how we solve this chronic absenteeism other than kids have to be in school,” she said. “And usually they’re not because they don’t have a parent at home who’s making sure they get to school. We can’t legislate parenting. I guess I would have to say it’s going to take the school district …. actually getting out there and visiting the homes of the children who are not showing up at school, and finding out what the reason is, and helping the parent to get more organized. Maybe social work gets involved.”
Erickson says she realizes the commissioner will likely move forward with adopting chronic absenteeism anyway. But she also laid out a third guideline in the bill, regarding the state’s ESSA plan, directing the commissioner to include a measure for college and career readiness. For instance, tracking student success or attainment in advanced placement or international baccalaureate examinations would be one way of looking at which students are not only accessing, but also succeeding in courses designed to prepare them for a postsecondary education.
It’s a popular indicator that’s made the cut in a number of state ESSA plans that have already been submitted for federal review. And it has quite a bit of popular support in Minnesota. The holdup, at least for now, says Cassellius, is figuring out a meaningful, reliable way to collect that data, statewide.
“We need to be digging into those numbers and finding out who has access and who doesn’t have access to those classes, but we don’t have a reliable way to collect that yet. Once we’re able to get good compliance in school districts on their Minnesota course catalog, we’ll be able to see all of that information,” she says, noting less than half of schools currently report their course information. “We’ll also be able to see, because of our STAR report, who’s teaching that and what tier those teachers are at, teaching those subjects, in the future. But we’re building those systems now.”
Once the Education Department is equipped to better support this data collection, she says, she can write to the U.S. Department of Education and add new indicators by simply amending the state’s ESSA accountability plan.
Madaline Edison, executive director of the Minnesota branch of Educators for Excellence, who’s been a part of the ESSA meetings held at the department of education, is hoping for a compromise that takes alignment with World’s Best Workforce and the opportunity to innovate into account.
“The spirit of the law is really about going beyond your typical graduation scores and test rates to look at other measure of the student experience in school that are deeply correlated to academic and life outcomes,” Edison said. “It’s not surprising that the legislature would like to play a role in such an important decision in our state as this. But it is troubling to me this is happening so late in the process. In hindsight, I wish the department and legislators would have been working together throughout this whole process.”
Draft Plan Emphasizes Fostering Equity in Education for All Students
Expands Measures for School Accountability & Student Success
Requires School-Level Improvement Plans for Lowest-Performing Schools Overall and Among Certain Student Populations
Public Comment Accepted Through June 16
The New York State Education Department today presented to the Board of Regents and released for public review and comment the draft Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plan (summary available here), Commissioner MaryEllen Elia announced today. The draft plan emphasizes fostering equity in education for New York’s students; expands measures for school support and accountability, and student success; and requires school-level improvement plans for the lowest performing schools overall as well as schools with the lowest performance for certain student populations. The plan also includes strategies for supporting the professional growth of educators and ensuring that all students, including English language learners/Multilingual learners, immigrant students, migratory youth, homeless youth, and neglected and delinquent youth have access to a well-rounded education that supports their academic and social-emotional development.
“We must seize this opportunity to reimagine the role accountability plays in improving teaching and learning in our schools,” Board of Regents Chancellor Betty A. Rosa said. “ESSA gives us the chance to shift to a more holistic approach to accountability – an approach that looks at multiple measures of school and student success that will evolve over time. It allows us to look at critical, but often overlooked, indicators of success, like children’s social and emotional growth and development. This is about educating the whole child.”
“Over the past year and half, we have taken a deliberative, transparent and inclusive approach to develop New York’s ESSA plan,” Commissioner Elia said. “Our goal is straightforward – we will submit to the U.S. Department of Education a plan that supports the development of highly effective schools, so our children will be equipped to lead successful lives. I cannot emphasize enough that this plan is a draft – that means it’s not yet done and we want feedback on it. We will make changes to strengthen it based on those comments.”
NYSED held more than 120 stakeholder and public meetings to gather input to help inform the development of the draft plan. The Department is also hosting 13 public hearings on the plan from May 11 through June 16 and is accepting public comment on the plan through June 16.
The full draft plan and a summary are posted on the Department’s ESSA webpage. The summary document outlines the Department’s stakeholder engagement process and highlights key proposals from the full plan.
Highlights of the Draft Plan
Fostering Equity in Education
In addition to meeting ESSA requirements, New York’s draft ESSA plan supports the Board of Regents’ goal of increasing equity in educational opportunities for all students across the state. To that end, New York explicitly designed the State accountability system to require schools and districts to:
reduce gaps in performance among certain populations for students;
incentivize districtsto provideopportunities foradvanced coursework to all high school students;
continue to support studentswho need more than four years to meet graduation requirements; and
work with students who have left school so that they can earn a high school equivalency diploma.
Further, under the draft plan, the state will:
publish annual reports on per-pupil spending and equitable access to effective teachers per district;
identify inequities in resources available to schools and require districts to address these inequities in their improvement plans;
use Title I School Improvement Funds to increase diversity and reduce socio-economic and racial/ethnic isolation in schools;
develop state and local policies and procedures to ensure homeless youth are provided equal access to appropriate educational supports, services and opportunities;
create uniform transition plans for students exiting juvenile justice facilities; and
leverage the creation of P-20 partnershipsto improve the quality and diversity of the educator workforce.
School Accountability Methodologies and Measurements
New York strives for an accountability system that supports all students, is transparent, prioritizes the measures that New York’s educators and families value, recognizes the good work that schools are doing, and accurately identifies schools that need the most help. The proposed revisions to New York’s school accountability and support system will improve teaching and learning and increase educational equity.
The Board of Regents is committed to evolving the state’s accountability and support system over time to add additional measures of school quality and student success. To achieve this, the Regents will form a workgroup to make recommendations on further measures to be added in the future.
School accountability strategies New York will implement in the draft ESSA plan include to:
expand accountability measures beyond English language arts and mathematics to also include science, social studies, acquisition of English proficiency by English language learners/Multilingual learners, and chronic absenteeism.
expand access to advanced coursework, particularly for students in less-affluent school districts, through the creation of a College, Career and Civic Readiness index;
add additional measures of school quality and student success over time. These could include such measures as students access to specific learning opportunities such as in the arts, science or technology courses; high school readiness for middle level students; postsecondary success of high school graduates; school climate and supports for students’ social, emotional and academic learning, as measured by student surveys and suspension rates; student access to highly qualified teachers; student access to diverse learning environments; and measure of student civic engagement;
establish five-year, long-term goals for closing achievement gaps; and
ensure a continued focus on students who need extra time to meet graduation requirements by including five- and six -year graduation rates in the accountability system.
Supports and Improvement for Schools and Districts
Under the draft ESSA plan, every three years the State will identify Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) schools based on the performance of all students and Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI) schools based on the performance of subgroups of students. CSI and TSI schools will be required to develop school-level improvement plans in partnership with stakeholders. The State will also annually recognize schools that are high performing or rapidly improving. In addition, the State will identify school districts for targeted support that have one or more CSI or TSI school or, as a district, has certain populations of students who performs at a CSI or TSI level.
The draft plan outlines the supportive role that the State will take in working with identified schools and districts and establishes a system that promotes best practices while also allowing schools to identify the most appropriate solutions to the barriers they face, rather than prescribing an abundance of one-size-fits-all requirements. The State will approach school improvement as a set of stages to be in done in partnership with identified schools and districts, as opposed to approaching school improvement as a set of stages to be imposed on schools and districts. As part of this partnership, the State will provide multiple supports and opportunities for technical assistance to help schools identify and implement the specific solutions they need to address their specific challenges.
Requirements for identified TSI and CSI schools include to:
undergo a Comprehensive Diagnostic Needs Assessment that examines school quality, school data and resource allocation;
develop an annual improvement plan based on the Needs Assessment;
provide professional development connected to the improvement plan; and
determine the effectiveness of their improvement efforts through an annual review and parent, teacher and student surveys.
The State will provide a robust system of supports to identified schools and districts to assist them throughout each of these stages. Additionally, after the initial year of identification, the State will prioritize its support each year to any CSI school not making gains. While this differentiated approach is intended to provide the most support to the schools that need the most assistance, should a CSI school be re-identified as a CSI school, the school will be placed in receivership whereby the district superintendent or an independent receiver will have enhanced authority to manage the school. Schools that are currently “Priority Schools” will immediately be placed under receivership if they are identified as CSI.
Supporting Excellent Educators
The Department’s efforts to improve all students’ access to effective educators includes work with preparation programs, higher education providers, districts, BOCES and educators. To support educators and improve the quality of teaching and learning, the Department will:
leverage partnerships among institutions of higher education, other preparatory programs and public schools to create additional opportunities for candidates in teacher and school building leader preparation programs to have robust, field-based experiences that allow them to apply what they learn in the classroom and demonstrate that they have acquired the necessary knowledge, skills and abilities to provide effective instruction and effective leadership earlier in their careers.
examine existing pathways to certification for both teachers and school leaders to ensure that existing structures are not creating unintended barriers for promising candidates to enter the profession.
assist school districts in creating comprehensive systems of professional learning, support and advancement for all educators – including those who are new to the field – along the entire continuum of their careers.
Supporting English Language Learners/Multilingual Learners
Of New York’s 2.6 million public school students, 8.8 percent are English language learners/Multilingual learners. New York will seek to improve teaching and learning as well as educator effectiveness by setting challenging, but attainable, goals for the state’s ELLs/MLLs. The draft ESSA Plan will enable ELLs/MLLs to develop English language proficiency, as well as access the state’s Next Generation Learning Standards, through the provision of high-quality instruction and support. The Department proposes to:
exempt recently arrived ELLs/MLLs in their first year of enrollment from the ELA exam. In addition, New York will propose to use such students’ ELA scores in the second year of enrollment only to set a baseline for future growth and achievement in the third year. In past practice, ELLs/MLLs’ ELA scores in the second year were used to measure achievement, rather than to set a baseline;
use a Transition Matrix Table for incorporating ELLs/MLLs’ growth toward attainment of English language proficiency into state accountability determinations; and
determine each district’s effectiveness in providing ELLs/MLLs with academic instruction that meets their needs through a self-evaluation tool.
Supporting All Students
New York believes that the highest levels of learning can occur when students and educators learn and teach in environments that are safe, supportive, and welcoming to all. To support this belief, New York will:
support districts to reduce bullying, harassment and the overuse of punitive and exclusionary responses to student misbehavior while promoting positive disciplinary practices, improving school climate and providing students with social-emotional supports;
work with districts to build positive school climates based on inclusive, equitable school cultures that recognize student diversity;
promote strategies to effectively engage parents and family members in their child’s education at the state, district and school levels; and
require schools and districts to collaborate with relevant community partners when conducting a comprehensive needs assessment and creating improvement plans based on such assessments.
Challenging Academic Standards and Assessments
New York is completing a two-year collaborative process with educators to revise the Next Generation English Language Arts and Mathematics Learning Standards to ensure that they continue to be rigorous and challenge New York’s students. In December 2016 New York adopted new science standards that have a focus on experiential learning; those standards become effective in 2017-18.
Once the application is released by the U.S. Department of Education, New York will apply to participate in the Innovative Assessment Demonstration Authority that will provide states the opportunity to work with selected school districts to pilot new approaches to assessment. During the pilot period these assessments can be used to meet federal participation and accountability requirements.
Stakeholder Engagement
For the past year, NYSED has coordinated and engaged diverse groups of stakeholders to solicit recommendations on how to craft an ESSA plan that best meets the needs of the state’s students, schools and communities. In these efforts NYSED established an ESSA Think Tank with representatives from more than 100 organizations, including district leaders, teachers, parents, community members and students and consulted with national education experts regarding ESSA, including Linda Darling-Hammond (Learning Policy Institute), Scott F. Marion (National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment), and Michael Cohen (Achieve).
In addition, NYSED held more than 120 fall and winter regional in-person meetings across the state in coordination with the state’s 37 Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) and the superintendents of the state’s five largest City School Districts, which were attended by more than 4,000 students, parents, teachers, school and district leaders, school board members, and other stakeholders.
Next Steps & Process for Submitting Public Comment
NYSED is accepting public comment on the draft plan through June 16 in writing and at 13 public hearings. Department staff will provide a summary and response to the comments received to the Board of Regents at the July meeting. It is expected the Board will vote on adopting a final version of the ESSA State plan in September.
Once the Board approves the ESSA plan, the State Education Department will submit the plan to the USDE for review and approval on September 18, 2017. After the plan is approved by the USDE, the Department will work with BOCES District superintendents, superintendents, the ESSA Think Tank and other stakeholder groups to develop and provide guidance on implementing the ESSA plan.
Comments can be submitted via email to ESSAComments@nysed.gov(link sends e-mail) with “ESSA Comments from (sender/organization name)” in the subject line. Comments submitted via mail should be sent to the attention of Dr. Lisa Long, New York State Education Department, Office of Accountability, 4th Floor, 55 Hanson Place, Brooklyn, New York 11217. Comments will be accepted through June 16.
Draft Plan Emphasizes Fostering Equity in Education for All Students