All this information is taken from A Blueprint for Reform: The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act available at www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprintPoint 4- Maybe NCLB “labeled failure” but so does the media, parents…. NCLB also rewarded success.
The “better assessments” do not yet exist. Who’s developing/deciding/working on this?Language proficiency standards- NEW ideaData must now follow student after graduation? How? Who pays? Who’s responsible?
New accountability standards- need some clarification.What about holding families accountable for their part?Sharing of effective strategies- sounds like part of the rationale for charter schools/competition.“Challenge’ and “Warning” schools- new labels for failure?How do you “build capacity”? What exactly does that mean?“common to a significant number”- moving toward a National Curriculum?
These change models are similar to plans in NCLB
Who is developing these labels/definitions- effective and highly effective?Will data about teachers be public? published?
Point #1- what do you do with the teachers no one seems to want?Call it what it is- Merit PayAccountability for higher ed. / teacher prep. programs
“Universal Design for Learning” ???
Still places premium on Language Arts and MathGrant money available to support the arts and other curriculaSupports collaboration/communication between secondary and tertiary institutions
Do subgrants mean that the states have the power in deciding how to dole out funds?Encourages collaboration with various levels of government/funding sources
“Evidence-based” – NCLB called it “research based” (semantics)
A “needs assessment of ALL children in the community’- Sounds expensive and intrusive and ripe for fraud.
Still supports Charter schools (sounds so Republican!)What about schools that are not award RttT funds (the losers) ?
“Three-tiered framework”- Where do I see/learn more about this?Required to form partnerships with private sector?
“Increased flexibility in return for improved outcomes” and “replicate their success” - taken almost verbatim from Chartering policy
1. A Blueprint for ReformThe Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act<br />About the Education Plan of President Obama- 2010<br />
2. The Obama Education Plan:<br /><ul><li>America was once the best educated nation in world. A generation ago, we led all nations in college completion, but today 10 countries have passed us. It is not that their students are smarter than ours. It is that these countries are being smarter about how to educate their students. And the countries that out-educate us today will out-compete us tomorrow.
3. A world class education is also a moral imperative- the key to securing a more equal, fair, and just society.
4. We know that from the moment students enter a school, the most important factor in their success is not the color of their skin or the income of their parents- it is the teacher standing at the front of the classroom….We must do better to recruit, develop, support, retain, and reward outstanding teachers in America’s classrooms.
5. Instead of labeling failures, we will reward success. Instead of a single snapshot, we will recognize progress and growth. Instead of investing in the status quo, we must reform our schools to accelerate student achievement, close achievement gaps, inspire our children to excel, and turn around those schools that for too many young Americans aren’t providing them with the education they need to succeed in college and a career.</li></li></ul><li>“My administration’s blueprint for reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Act is not only a plan to renovate a flawed law, but also an outline for a re-envisioned federal role in education. This is framework to guide our deliberations and shared work- with parents, students, educators, business and community leaders, elected officials, and other partners- to strengthen America’s public education system.”<br /> - President Barack Obama <br />
6. Funded by theAmerican Recovery and Reinvestment Act<br /><ul><li>$5 billion for early learning programs
7. $77 billion for reforms to strengthen elementary and secondary education, including $48.6 billion to stabilize state education budgets
8. $5 billion in competitive funds to spur innovation and ambitious reform to close “the achievement gap”
9. Over $30 billion to address college affordability and improve access to higher education</li></li></ul><li>Six sections of the Blueprint<br />College- and Career-Ready Students<br />Great Teachers and Great Leaders<br />Meeting the Needs of English Learners and Other Diverse Learners<br />A Complete Education<br />Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students<br />Fostering Innovation and Excellence<br />
10. College- and Career-Ready Students<br /><ul><li>4 of every 10 college students, including half of those at 2-year institutions, take remedial courses.
11. Many employers comment on the inadequate preparation of high school graduates.
12. While states have developed assessments aligned with their standards, in many cases these assessments do not adequately measure student growth or the knowledge and skills that students need, nor do they provide timely, useful information to teachers.
13. This blueprint challenges governors to develop college- and career-ready standards (Language Arts and Math).
14. The plan calls for better assessments, aligned with the standards.
15. The plan calls for English language proficiency standards for English learners.
16. As an accountability measure, states will be required to have data systems in place to gather information about student progress. This data must also include graduation rates, college enrollment rates, and rates of graduates needing remediation.</li></li></ul><li>College- and Career-Ready Students<br /><ul><li>Not just school accountability, but also accountability for districts and states for providing principals and teachers with the support they need.
17. Focus most rigorous support and interventions on the lowest performing schools and districts.
18. Not just looking at absolute performance/proficiency, but at individual student growth and progress over time.
19. Reward “communities of practice” for sharing best practices and strategies to assist lower-performing schools.
20. Establishes “Challenge” schools (lowest 5%) and “Warning” schools (next lowest 5%) for targeted intervention and oversight.
21. Blueprint promises to “build state and district capacity” to support schools, school leaders, teachers, and students.
22. Beginning in 2015, formula funds will be available only to states that are implementing assessments based on college- and career-ready standards that are “common to a significant number of states”.</li></li></ul><li>College- and Career-Ready Students<br /><ul><li>To address the lowest performing “Challenge” schools, states will award some of their funds “to districts, or partnerships of districts and nonprofit organizations to implement one of four intervention models, to be selected locally, to ensure significant changes in the operation, governance, staffing, or instructional program of a school:”
23. Transformation model (replace principal, strengthen staffing, implement research-based instructional program, provide extended learning time, implement new governance and flexibility)
24. Turnaround model (replace principal and at least half of staff, implement research-based instructional program, provide extended learning time, implement new governance and flexibility)
25. Restart model (convert or close and reopen school under an effective charter operator, CMO, or EMO)
26. School closure model (Close the school and enroll students who attended in other higher-performing schools in the district)</li></li></ul><li>Great Teachers and Great Leaders<br />“Research shows that top-performing teachers can make a dramatic difference in the achievement of their students, and suggests that the impact of being assigned to top-performing teachers year after year is enough to significantly lower the achievement gap.”<br /><ul><li>Money can be spent on efforts to improve teacher and principal effectiveness.
27. Calls for statewide definitions of “effective teacher” and “highly effective teacher.
28. State data systems will include information about teacher and principal preparation programs to job placement, student growth, and retention outcomes of graduates.
29. Funds can be used for recruitment and development of effective teachers.
30. Supports ongoing, job-embedded, professional development targeted to student and school needs.
31. Districts not showing improved equity in the distribution of effective teachers will be required to submit plans for which funds will be spent solely on ensuring effective teacher evaluation systems.</li></li></ul><li>Great Teachers and Great Leaders<br /><ul><li>“School districts must put into place policies to help ensure that principals are able to select and build strong a strong team of teachers with shared vision and that teachers are choosing to be a part of a school team.”
32. “Grantees may use funds to reform compensation systems to provide differentiated compensation and career advancement opportunities to educators who are effective in increasing student academic achievement.”
33. Calls for an elimination of incentives that have not been shown to be linked to student performance.
34. Competitive grants are available to organizations, colleges, and universities that are offering/reforming high-quality preparation programs that are equipping educators for high-need schools and subject areas.
35. The Secretary of Education will carry out a teacher recruitment campaign, to recruit talented candidates to the teaching profession.</li></li></ul><li>Meeting the Needs of English Learners and Other Diverse Learners<br /><ul><li>ESEA includes programs that help to meet the needs of all students- English language learners, students with disabilities, Native Americans, homeless students, children of migrant workers, neglected or delinquent students.
36. Obama’s proposal will continue and strengthen the federal commitment to serving all students, providing assistance to certain high-need regions in areas, including rural districts, and districts affected by federal property and activities.
37. Better assessments and high-quality instructional supports that incorporate the principles of “universal design for learning”.
38. Formula grant assistance for English language learners which includes new criteria for identification of students, eligibility, placement, and duration of programs based on reliable proficiency assessment. Funding may also be used to evaluate and support programs for effectiveness and help drive decisions by districts in selecting effective programs.
39. Districts that are not improving the performance of English language learners will lose flexibility concerning the use of funds under this program and must work with the state in implement more effective strategies..</li></li></ul><li>A Complete Education<br />To make higher standards meaningful, we must ensure that states, districts, schools, and teachers have the resources and assistance they need to help student s reach these standards, such as instructional supports, high-quality professional development, and teaching and learning materials aligned with those standards.<br />Strengthen instruction in literacy and in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), aligned with improved standards that build toward college- and career-readiness.<br />Supporting teachers and students in teaching and learning toward more rigorous standards.<br />Improving access to a well-rounded education for students in high-need schools.<br />Expanding access to college coursework and other accelerated learning opportunities for students in high-need schools.<br />Includes competitive grants to high-need districts, and nonprofit partners to strengthen the arts, foreign languages, history, civics, financial literacy, environmental education, and other subjects.<br />Priority will be given to applicants that propose to integrate learning across subjects, use technology to address student challenges, and at the high school level, to work with colleges or universities to ensure that coursework is truly aligned with those institutions’ expectations.<br />
40. A Complete Education<br />Literacy<br /><ul><li>Priority will be given to states that have adopted common, state-developed, college- and career- ready standards. Priority may also be given to states that use technology to address student learning challenges, which may include the principles of “universal design for learning”.
41. Competitive subgrants (from state) to supports schools with the greatest need. Programs must include effective professional development for teachers and school leaders.
42. Priority will be given to districts that propose to align other local, state, and federal resources to improve literacy instruction.</li></li></ul><li>A Complete Education<br /><ul><li>STEM
43. Substantial support for high-need schools to implement high-quality instruction in at least math and science (and may include technology and engineering).
44. States will be required to develop comprehensive, evidence-based plans to align federal, state, and local funds to provide high- quality STEM instruction.
45. Priority may also be given to states that use technology to address student learning challenges, which may include the principles of “universal design for learning”, cooperative with outside expertise, or propose to prepare students from underrepresented groups for advanced study and careers in STEM.
46. Competitive subgrants (from state) to supports schools with the greatest need. Programs must include effective professional development for teachers and school leaders.</li></li></ul><li>Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students<br /><ul><li>Providing a “cradle through college and career” continuum in high-poverty communities that provides effective schools, comprehensive services, and family supports.
47. Supporting programs that redesign and expand the school schedule, provide high-quality afterschool programs, and provide comprehensive supports to students.
48. Using data to improve students’ health, safety, and well-being.
49. Grantees will conduct a needs assessment of all children in the community in order to establish baseline data against with the grantee will aim to improve outcomes, and will promote and coordinate community involvement, support, and buy-in, including securing and leveraging resources from the public and private sectors.
50. Encourages partnerships between school districts and nonprofit organizations.</li></li></ul><li>Fostering Innovation and Excellence<br /><ul><li>Develops, validates, and improves promising and proven educational strategies (best practices).
51. Expands educational options to increase choice within the public school system through high-performing new schools and meaningful public school choice.
52. Charter schools funded under this program must be subject to the same accountability systems as traditional public schools, as well as increased accountability for improving academic achievement.
53. Race to the Top (RttT)
54. Competitive grants to states and districts willing to take on ambitious and comprehensive reforms.
55. Flexibility for using funds in alignment with their plans. Continued funding only if they implement proposed plans effectively and meet their performance targets.
56. Includes rigorous evaluation of ongoing performance and reform efforts.</li></li></ul><li>Fostering Innovation and Excellence<br /><ul><li>Investing in Innovation (i3)
57. Competitive grants to expand the implementation of, and investment in, innovative and evidence-based practices, programs, and strategies that significantly improve student outcomes.
58. Three-tiered framework that directs the highest levels of funding to programs with the strongest evidence, and also includes a willingness to undergo rigorous evaluation of programs.
59. Grantees will be required to form partnerships with the private sector to secure matching funds.</li></li></ul><li>Other Priorities & Conclusion<br />“Throughout this proposal, we have sought to redefine the federal role in: shifting from a focus on merely compliance to allowing state and local innovation to flourish, rewarding success, and fostering supportive and collaborative relationship with states, districts, and nonprofit partners.” This includes:<br /><ul><li>Increased flexibility in return for improved outcomes.
60. A focus on key priorities across programs (Literacy, STEM, evidence, efficiency, high-need area, and supporting all learners)</li></ul>Where grantees are successfully improving outcomes for students, we should not only reward them, but replicate their successful practices.<br />