Advocating clark


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Ment officials
  • Advocating clark

    1. 1. 2012 NATIONAL ELECTION OUTCOMES & EDUCATION POLICY PROSPECTS Alternative Accountability Forum School for Integrated Academics and Technologies November 15 – 17, 2012 Rick Clark National Policy and Program Liaison School for Integrated Academics and Technologies 6012 Telegraph Road Alexandria, VA 22310 703-960-8689
    2. 2. NATIONAL ELECTION OUTCOMES & EDUCATION POLICY PROSPECTSNOTE: Focus of remarks on dropout recovery –substantial application to at-risk youth in general
    3. 3. ELECTION OUT COME ASSESSMENT - 5 MILE VIEW General outlook: On paper its status quo o Little to no change in outlook for the House and Senate o More polarized than last Congress o Function of unprecedented gerrymandering o Education among reputed best prospects for cooperation o - Mythological opinion, base on imperial evidence
    4. 4. House of Representatives Elect Reps - 234, Dems - 195, 23 member majority differential Not significant gain by Dems, nor loss by Republicans for shift in House alignment Conservative, “Blue Dog” Dems a dying, if not extinct breed
    5. 5. Senate - Elect Dems 55, Reps. 45 – not filibuster proof Despite Democratic majority, bi-partisanship required Conservative, “Blue Dog” Dems also a dying, if not extinct breedo Need five (or more) Republicans to break filibuster
    6. 6. HOUSE AND SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE[S]STATUSElection virtually maintained existing alignment of House and Senate CommitteesHouse: Education and the Workforce Committee- 23 Reps to 17 Dems in 112th - maintenance- Anticipate minimum of 7 new members- Won’t slow down Committee since mostly Dems- No change anticipated in House Committee leadership- Key players : Chairman John Kline (MN), Subcommittee Chair, Duncan Hunter (CA),Virginia Foxx (NC), Rep. McKeon (CA)- Extremely partisan leadership in 112th – unprecedented- Mark-ups on education and workforce bills were triple P – painful, partisan, polarized
    7. 7. HOUSE AND SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE[S]STATUSSenate: Health, Education, Pensions, and Labor Committee - Minimum of 1 or 2 new members - 12 Dems to 10 Reps in 112th - Senate leadership and membership expected to undergo some change - Key players in Senate: Senators Harkin, Enzi, Alexander, and Bingaman [only Bingaman will be gone – retired] - New Committee dynamics: Sen Alexander ascending to ranking minority - did not support bi-partisan Committee bill in 112th - More respectful, more bi-partisan leadership in the Senate [vs. House]
    8. 8. US Department of Education(Expected to ) o Support and incentivize implementation of common core standards o Continue implementation and oversight of the waivers already granted to 35 states (including DC) - as funding tightens, waivers will be a primary way of leveraging reform - Republicans in House Ed Committee challenged waiver authority - usurpation of power, circumvention of Congress - Secretary Duncan on of fairly solid legal grounds - Senate acquiescence : no moves by Democratic leadership to coalesce with House in taking back authority [price too high] o Waivers problematic with challenges of monitoring and enforcing implementation - 2 year renewal review
    9. 9. PARTY LINE POLICY PERSPECTIVESGeneral Republican goals/strategies (observations): o To minimize federal role in education o Return control over education to the states o Block or undermine administration initiatives, e.g., Race to the Top, Innovation grants, by defunding or minimizing funding o Limit politically sacred formula programs to most needy schools/students
    10. 10. DEMOCRAT PARTY GOALS o Thwart Republican goals and strategies to neutralize federal mandates with exceptions o Respond to the pressures for NCLB reform by Democratic party constituents ∀ e.g., over dependence on testing, unrealistic proficiency goals, and onerous sanctions o Keep critical control over education, especially in areas like civil rights, special education, education of the poor /Title 1 o Maintain funding for Administration initiatives o Acquiescence in Administration’s current reforms/strategies involving: - data driven decision making, improved teacher evaluations, removal of impediments to charter school development, etc. o What we don’t know is what dynamics of the process will be
    11. 11. ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT(NCLB) STATUS ESEA Reauthorization pending since 2007 Senate and House reported bills in 112 th Congress Neither achieved floor action Despite inaction: - Strong signal of the major metamorphosis, if not end of the No Child Left Behind Era  new name for ESEA [ESEA]  new priorities for education reform advanced in House and Senate Committee bills waiver process flexibility
    12. 12. OTHER EDUCATION RELATED POLICY ISSUES FORLAME DUCK SESSION AND 113th CONGRESS Sequestration – threat of 8.2 percent cut to federal ed programs (DOE) - Formula program grants to the states [key part of state ed funding] - Title 1 cuts at 1.3 billion (of 15.7 plus bill) - Spec Ed cuts at 1 billion (of 12.6 plus bill) FY 2012 Appropriations – Continuing Resolution thru March Pell Grant Funding - $7 billion short-fall Student loan interest rate increase –– One year extension at 3.4 %, to double in August to 6.8 %
    13. 13. Other education related reauthorization issuesfacing past/near future expiration dates Higher education Special education - IDEA Career and technical education Child care
    14. 14. Work Force Investment Act Special attention WIA programs like Job Corps and YouthBuild have academic components including high school diploma credentialing Could be a vehicle for model legislation on alternative accountability - consistent with Administration call for interagency cooperation, and program transparency where multiple agencies involved - reforms would be limited to WIA programs, but could be vehicle for important precedents
    15. 15. Administration Perspective on ESEA Unclear what, if any priority Administration will give to ESEA reauthorization – politically, not rhetorically Don’t know where incentive for priority action lies if can achieve goals through waivers, and existing programs New, and extension of existing initiatives tough sledding due to role Republicans would need to play in funding them No money anyway
    16. 16. IMPLICATIONS FOR DROPOUT RECOVERY andALTERNATIVE ACCOUNTABILITY FOR RECOVERYSCHOOLS 112th Congress – provided lay of the land ESEA Bills reported by both House and Senate Committees Numerous education issues raised by members of both Committees Not a single focused hearing on recovery: subject rarely mentioned, except rhetorically ∀ Won’t be a focus again unless WE (collectively), make it a focus
    17. 17. TRADITIONAL POLITICAL HURDLES TORECOVERY AND ALTERNATIVE ACCOUNTABILITY (Fiscal) Unattractiveness of tens of thousands of youth back on education rolls Lack of policy maker distinction between prevention and recovery Premium placed on high stakes testing over other ways of measuring progress One size fits all policy mentality, e.g., 90 percent graduation rate [without a distinction for recovery schools] - Dropout schools have 100 percent concentration of failure of traditional schools - Community college success of remedial students at community 0 Non recognition of differences in alternative schools - Dedicated recovery school serving out-of-school youth, not same as alternative school for in-school youth
    18. 18. Preoccupation – understandably - with solving the in-school at risk student problem, i.e., prevention o No excuse for uninformed or non attention to alternative accountability for reengaged youth serving schools [sympathetic advocacy groups as guilty as policy makers…some movement among stakeholder groups]o Non organized status of dropout recovery stakeholders compared to other education stakeholder groups: Special ed English language learners Technology in schools advocates Stem education advocates School Funding advocateso Mistaken assumption that reforms being put in place with respect to accountability, and dropout and graduation rates are pertinent to all schools serving at-risk students
    19. 19. WHAT POLICY MAKERS DON’T GET (OR IGNORE) :SHORT SIGHTED VISION 3.4 million dropouts, aged 16 -24; “Opportunity Youth” at 6.8 million Can’t reach dropout crisis goals w/o focus on dropout prevention and recovery Policy arena fraught with disincentives to recovery Billions of dollars of lost revenue (and high social costs) o documented in several reports from the Alliance for Excellent Education, (Commissioned report) White House Council on Community Solutions – See ADDENDUM
    20. 20. OTHER POLICY ISSUES/CHALLENGES/CONSIDERATIONS IN MAKING ANUANCED CASE FOR RECOVERY AND ALTERNATIVEACCOUNTABILITY Ending seat time requirement – may be declining problem o Open entry open exit hampered by traditional Carnegie units o Modifications or waivers a priority condition Mainstreaming of competency based instruction Growth model considerations: individual student based, consider individual enrollment date [not just spring to spring]; also, length of stay A graduation rate of 40 percent can represent success for open entry, open exit school - National graduation rate for reengaged students averages half of the above figure (?) – 90 percent goal, even current 75 percent [fantasyland] - Secretary Duncan makes no distinction in his 90 percent goal - work to be done on his blanket statements
    21. 21. Issues, Challenges, con’t Dropouts are a special population o Profile of dropout is very different from in-school youth o (Examples) Must work, have children, are self-sufficient, don’t live at home, have limited hours to devote to schooling, don’t have broadband access where they reside Dedicated dropout recovery schools [majority to 100 percent] are unique - Unique among alternative schools - often lumped with alternative schools serving in-school youth - Serve students already failed by traditional school - are 100 percent encumbered by reasons for traditional school failureO Differentiated, individualized learning essential – not one size fits allO New graduation rate calculation [NGA, CCSSO] is either not relevant, or marginally relevant to certain recovery schoolsO GED – don’t penalize recovery schools
    22. 22. ADDENDUMADVOCACY OPTIONS / OPPORTUNITIES:DROPOUT RECOVERY AND ALTERNATIVEACCOUNTABILITY ACTION OPTIONS: DROPOUT RECOVERY AND ALTERNATIVE ACCOUNTABILITY Note: Most of the following suggestions for raising the profile of dropout recovery and alternative accountability are already in some greater or lesser degree of implementation. The objective is to sophisticate, expand, and intensify the continuation (and /or initiation) of advocacy activities. Discussion ideas for raising profile of alternative accountability. O Group Priorities: Follow up to this Policy Forum - Maintain communication lines among the willing through formal or informal coalition or working group participation - Prepare and Circulate Forum Report - Crystallize messaging - Develop plan of action including strategic goals, e.g., Congressional hearing on dropout recovery and/or alternative accountability, staff briefing, Congressional forum - Media plan development
    23. 23. - Create personal game plan for continued involvement and contributionNational Level Network Contacts, and Activities, and Messaging Targets o [Highest priority] Identification of inside supporters in Congress, state houses, educationagencies -- including staff o Alliance formation and agenda setting with: - Policy groups in Congress, e.g. Progressive Caucus, Black and Hispanic Caucuses, Friends of Job Corp - Executive Branch groups: National Office of Rural Affairs, White House Council on Community Solutions - Key, national advocacy groups: Alliance for Excellent Education, America’s Promise Alliance/Grad Nation, Opportunity Nation, National Youth Employment Coalition, Jobs for the Future, National Job Corps Association, YouthBuild, American Youth Policy Forum, Center for Law and Social Policy - National associations of government officials and policymakers, e.g., National Governors Association, National Conference of State Legislatures, Council of Chief State School Officers o Media Representative outreach: Editorial writers, education writers o Hearing promotion and participation o * Identification and liaison with prospective insider advocates [highest priority]
    24. 24. State Level Network Contacts, Activities, and Messaging Targets* State Education Agencies* Legislative Education Committees* Waiver Implementation process involvement* Policymaker association networking: National Governors Association, National Conference of State Legislatures* State education advocacy groups and associations* America’s Promise Alliance affiliates
    25. 25. DROPOUT PREVENTION AND RECOVERYDOCUMENTSNational Governors Association: “Graduation for All – A Governors Guide to DropoutPrevention and Recovery” (2009)National Conference of State Legislators (NCSL) : “ A Path to Graduation for EveryChild: State Legislative Roles and Responsibilities” (2011)NCSL: “Going to Scale: Working with State Legislators to Prevent and ReengageDropouts” (2010)America’s Promise Alliance: “Building a GRAD Nation – Progress and Challenge inEnding the High School Dropout Dilemma – 2012 Update”White House Council on Community Solutions (and Civic Enterprises): “TheEconomic Value of Opportunity Youth” (2012)White House Council on Community Solutions: “Opportunity Road” (2012)Alliance for Excellent Education: Education and the Economy: “Boosting State andNational Economies by Improving High School Graduation Rates” (2011)Alliance for Excellent Education: “Boosting the Metro Area Economies by ImprovingHigh School Graduation Rates – Metro Area Profiles” (2011)