lae.org Legislative

The True Story on ESEA/NCLB

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) aka The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).

Student Testing: What the Law Says

• Starting in 2002-03 school year, States must biennially participate in National Assessment of Educational Progress 4th and 8th grade reading and math tests. No sanctions will be based on NAEP.
• Starting in 2005-06, requires annual testing in math and reading in grades 3-8 and at least once in grades 10-12.
• Prior to 2005-06, based on previous ESEA, requires reading and math tests at least once in each of grades 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12 remain in effect..
• Science tests required starting in 2007-08 in each of grades 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12.
  

Collective Bargaining Issues: Testing

• Provide for the association's input into the development of policies and procedures for the administration of student tests;
• Specify who will administer the tests, and ensure that if teachers and paraeducators administer the tests, they will be properly trained and compensated;
• Provide appropriate protections against penalties for errors in test administration;
• Ensure that teacher and/or student testing is not allowed as part of the evaluation process or linked to teacher transfers and/or firing; and
• Review transfer and assignment language in contracts to prohibit teachers from being transferred or assigned involuntarily into a low performing grade level in the same school.
  

Accountability: How it Works

• Each State determined minimum number of students needed to be statistically valid: HUGE IMPACT on disaggregation.
• Proficiency is determined by the State—a "cut score" on the State test — setting cut score is a major decision!
• Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) bar must be raised in equal increments within two years and at least every 3rd year thereafter.
• All students must be proficient by end of 2013-14 school year.
  

Accountability

• Schools must meet or exceed the State's annual measurable objectives with respect to all students and students in each subgroup.
• AYP must include at least one other factor:
  • Graduation rates for secondary schools
  • Another academic indicator set by State for elementary
• Meeting standard for other indicator cannot reduce the number of schools failing AYP.
• Failing to meet the other indicator CAN increase number of schools failing AYP.
  

Sample Minimum AYP Matrix for Schools and School Districts

Each State set the minimum "n". Ranges from 5 to 200.

Note: "other academic indicator" must be reported by subgroup, but only counts for AYP for "all students."

Accountability

• Can average test data from previous 1 or 2 years and/or across grades in a school.
• Safe Harbor: Schools can still make AYP if the % of students below proficient in a subgroup that fails AYP decreased by at least 10% and that subgroup made progress on the additional academic indicators.
  
  

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

Schools in the Eye of the Storm!

• 2003-04 school year: many states have majority of schools not making AYP:
  • AK: 58%, DE: 57%, FL: 87%, HI: 64%, ID: 73%, MS: 50%, MO: 50%, NC: 53%, SC: 76%.
  • Nationwide almost 25,000 schools have not made AYP for at least one year. Over 5,700 in school improvement.
    

Accountability: The Consequences

• Title I school fails to meet AYP for 2 years — in year 3, enters school improvement including public school choice.
  • LEA must spend between 5-15% of its Title I funds on transportation.
• Within 3 months develop a 2-year plan for improvement that is scientifically based.
• District must direct school to spend at least 10% percent of Title I allocation on professional development.
• School again fails to meet AYP — enters second year of school improvement (year 4):
  • Continue implementing plan, and
  • Continue school choice, and
  • District must offer supplemental services for low income children - between 5-15% of Title I allocation (maximum of 20% combined between choice and supplemental services).
• School still failing at the end of year 4:
  • Continues choice and supplemental services, and
  • Enters corrective action (year 5), including extending school year/day, hiring outside expert, changing curriculum, replacing staff relevant to the failure, and/or reducing local decision-making.
• School continues to fail to meet AYP — goes into the second year of corrective action (year 6), including developing and planning to implement a restructuring plan.
  

Year 7 Restructuring

• Replace all or most of the school staff (may include the principal) who are relevant to the failure to make AYP; or
• State takeover; or
• Turn over to private management; or
• Turn into a charter school; or
• Any other major reconstitution/restructuring.
  

Unsafe Public School Choice

• States must establish Unsafe School Choice policy — must be implemented by July 2003.
• Identify "persistently dangerous schools."
• Notify parents of children attending unsafe schools.
• Students attending such schools, or who were victims of a "violent criminal offense" on school grounds, have a right to transfer to a "safe" public school within the district.
• Only 52 schools nationwide identified.
  

Supplemental Services

• States create criteria and list of approved providers.
• Districts must:
  • notify parents at least annually,
  • help parents find service providers,
  • contract with providers, and
  • monitor and evaluate providers.
    

Implementation: Supplemental Services

• State and school district responsible for ensuring that some providers can serve students with disabilities and LEP students. If none, LEA must arrange for such services.
• NEA concerns:
  • Allows religious discrimination in hiring.
  • Exempts providers from most federal civil rights laws
  • Prohibits States from requiring providers to use only highly qualified teachers. States MAY require that programs are based on scientifically-based research.
    

Implementation: Collective Bargaining Protections

• MAJOR VICTORY: Statute (Sec. 1116(d)) says: "Nothing in this section [sanctions for failing to meet AYP] shall be construed to alter or otherwise affect the rights, remedies, and procedures afforded school or school district employees under Federal, State, or local laws (including applicable regulations or court orders) or under the terms of collective bargaining agreements, memoranda of understanding, or other agreements between such employees and their employers."
• Final regulation dropped proposed limit to agreements or laws in effect PRIOR to 1/8/02.
  

Collective Bargaining Issues: School Improvement

• Ensure that 10% of the Title I funds are used for enhanced Professional Development;
• Shape the Professional Development Plan design, implementation and resource allocation, with the Association taking greater control of training opportunities;
• Provide linkage between professional development and salary enhancement;
• Ensure that if public school choice is provided then transportation and class size are not negatively impacted; and
• Ensure local association input into the notification of the school's status to parents so that collective bargaining and/or employee rights are protected.
  

Collective Bargaining Issues: Second Year of School Improvement

• Ensure that supplemental services, including tutoring, may be provided by members – extra pay for extra time;
• Review the recognition clause to determine if others who provide supplemental services are covered;
• Review subcontracting language to determine if non-member providers of supplemental services violate the contract; and
• Work with the school district to require that providers of supplemental services are state certified teachers.
  

Collective Bargaining Issues: First Year of Corrective Action

• Limit the options available under the 1st year of corrective action;
• Ensure teacher input into the development of new curriculum;
• Ensure that local decision-making is not negatively impacted;
• Ensure that the extension of the school day/year is subject to collective bargaining with focus on extra pay, compensatory time off, and additional leave days;
• Ensure that the employee rights of all staff are protected regarding replacing staff relevant to failure;
• Ensure teacher input into the selection of an outside expert; and
• Ensure teacher input into the restructuring of the internal organization.
  

Collective Bargaining Issues: Second Year of Corrective Action

• Limit the options of restructuring or reconstitution available;
• Ensure teacher input into restructuring or reconstitution;
• Ensure that the employee rights of all staff are protected regarding replacing staff relevant to failure; and
• Ensure that the employee rights of all staff are protected regarding:
  • Reopening as a charter school;
  • Turning the school over to a private management company;
  • Turning the school over to the state; or
  •  Other major restructuring.
• Review the collective bargaining agreement or local policies and consider adding or strengthening language in the areas of:
  • successor language;
  • "designees and assigns" in the recognition clause;
  • teacher assignment and transfer; and
  • collective bargaining re-openers to improve language in the above areas.
    
    

Teacher Quality

Teacher Quality: What the Law Says

• Beginning with 2002-03 school year, each LEA receiving Title I funds must ensure all teachers hired after the first day of the school year and teaching in a program supported with Title I funds are "highly qualified."
• Each State must develop a plan to ensure that all teachers (not just Title I teachers) teaching "core academic subjects" are highly qualified no later than the end of the 2005-06 school year.
  

Teacher Quality

• Highly Qualified = Teachers of core academic subjects must have a Bachelors degree and be fully certified or licensed under State law and demonstrate competency.
• All elementary teachers newly entering the profession must take a written test. New secondary teachers must either take a test or have an academic major or advanced degree in area of assignment. Certification/licensing tests may satisfy this requirement.
• Current teachers can show competency by having an academic major in area of assignment (secondary), or by passing a test in the subject area, or by demonstrating high level of competence through a "High Objective Uniform State Standard of Evaluation" (HOUSSE).
• Charter school teachers in some States exempt from certification/licensure.
• Alternative routes to certification allowed.
  

Special Education Teachers

• Special education teachers who are providing instruction in core academic subjects must meet the "highly qualified" definition in all of the subjects they teach
• Special educators who do not directly instruct students on any core academic subject or who only provide consultation to highly qualified teachers of core academic subjects in adapting curricula, using behavioral supports and interventions, and selecting appropriate accommodations do not need to meet the same "highly-qualified" subject-matter competency requirements
  

Teacher Quality: Implementation

• NEA concerns:
  • USED Regs create a major loophole for people seeking alternate certification — allows people to be considered highly qualified PRIOR to even completing alternate route.
  • Prohibit States from requiring SES providers from using highly qualified teachers
  • Problems for special ed teachers, bilingual education, and rural middle school teachers.
• States reported to USED data on % of classes taught by "highly qualified" (HQ) teachers.
• Ranged from 16% (Alaska) to 99% (WI).
• Also data in % of classes taught by HQ teachers in high-poverty schools.
• Ranged from 16% (Alaska) to 99% (Wyoming).
  

What Can You Do?

• Work to get union representation on the state committee of practitioners
• Work with state department of education on the definition of a highly qualified teacher
• Work with the state department of education on how veteran teachers will meet the new requirements–the HOUSSE
  
• Parents' Right to Know
• At the beginning of each school year, school districts must notify parents of students in Title I schools that parents may request information on the professional qualification of their child's teachers - including information on paraprofessional qualifications.
• Title I schools must also provide "timely notice" to parents if the child has been taught for 4 or more consecutive weeks by a teacher who is not "highly qualified".
  

Collective Bargaining Issues: Teacher Quality

• Ensure greater teacher input into the professional development plan design, implementation and resource allocation;
• Establish a clear linkage of "highly qualified" status to salary enhancement;
• Influence teacher evaluations, including guarding against peer review and an over-reliance on student test scores to rate teachers;
• Influence local policies governing public disclosure and other actions regarding data on teacher qualifications;
• Play a meaningful role in establishing district responses if and when goals for "highly qualified" teachers are not met;
• Ensure the rights of substitutes teachers in the bargaining unit;
• Influence local policies on transfers, reassignments, layoffs, and maintenance of bumping rights as ESEA-related policies are put in place.
• Ensure that employee rights of all teachers are protected regarding:
  • Tenure systems ( just cause language, due process, short probationary periods); Teacher testing;
  • Merit-based performance systems;
  • Differential and bonus pay;
  • Teacher advancement initiatives that emphasize multiple career paths and pay differentiation;
  • Mentoring programs (extra pay and release time); and
  • Employee background checks.
    

What Else Can You Do?

• Work with district to draft letters to parents
• Make sure district has accurate information on its teachers' qualifications
• Require district to provide the opportunity for teachers to verify that data on their qualifications are up-to-date and accurate before letters are sent to parents
  
  

Paraprofessional Quality

• All new paraprofessionals working in Title I supported program and performing instructional duties must:
  • have an Associate degree, or
  • have 2 years of post secondary education, or
  • be a high school graduate who can demonstrate on a State or local assessment the skills to assist in teaching reading, writing, and math.
• Existing Title I paraprofessionals must meet one of these requirements by 1/8/06.
• Instructional Duties:
  • One-on-one tutoring for eligible students, if the tutoring is not during the regular school day.
  • Assisting in classroom management.
  • Assisting in computer instruction.
  • Conducting parent involvement activities.
  • Providing instructional support in a library or media center.
  • Acting as a translator.
  • Providing instructional support services.
• School-wide Title I programs (about 23,000): ALL paras with instructional duties are covered by new standards, whether salary is paid by Title I or not.
• New standards DO NOT apply to paras in non-instructional capacities, including translation, parental involvement activities, food service, cafeteria/playground supervision, personal care services, technical computer support.
• But, paras performing just translation or parental involvement activities must have a high school diploma or equivalent.
  

What Can You Do at the State Level?

• Inform local affiliates that represent paraprofessionals about the new requirements
• Work with the state department of education to establish a standards-based training and assessment program
• Work with institutions of higher education to facilitate the establishment of paraprofessional certificate or degree programs
• Work with institutions of higher education to grant "life credits" to paraprofessionals for work experience
  

What Can You Do At The Local Level?

• Inform paraprofessional members about the new requirements of the law
• Determine how many and which of your members will need assistance with meeting the new requirements
• Work with the district to establish training and assessments
• Offer preparation for the state or local assessment
  

Collective Bargaining Issues: Paraeducator Quality

• Recognize any associate's degree, technical certification, or in-service training to qualify as postsecondary education;
• Ensure association input into any academic assessment tools designed to meet the "high standard" qualifications;
• Explicitly define paraeducator;
• Ensure greater paraeducator input into the professional development plan design, implementation and resource allocation;
• Establish a clear linkage of professional development to salary enhancement;
• Ensure that the employee rights of all paraeducators (existing and new) are protected regarding the new qualifications;
• Address the full range of working conditions, including job demands, benefits, and compensation;
• Subsidize or reimburse appropriate and meaningful on-site training;
• Explicitly define "direct supervision of teachers"; and
• Develop pay schedules for paraeducators who may function as substitute teachers.
  
  

Progress on NEA Legislation

• NEA has drafted proposed amendments in legislative bill form – the Great Public Schools for Every Child Act.
• Seeking introduction of and cosponsors for specific bills.
• Nine bills based on NEA's proposals have been introduced.
  

NEA Supports:

• S.956, Student Testing Flexibility Act [Sen. Feingold (D-WI)] — requires waiver of annual testing if state significantly closes achievement gap or exceeds AYP standards for 2 consecutive years – 3 cosponsors.
• S.1189, Federal Education Fair Accountability Act (FedFAIR) [Sen. Durbin (D-IL)] — defers "sanctions" when federal government provides less than 95% of amounts authorized for Title I.
• HR 947, School Capacity Relief Act [Rep. Weiner (D-NY)] — allows districts to prohibit transfer of students from schools identified for improvement if receiving school is at capacity or transfer would increase class size above what the state prescribes – 4 cosponsors.
• HR 2107, Keep Our Promise to America's Children and Teachers Act (Keep our PACT Act) [Rep. Van Hollen (D-MD)] — guarantees full funding for NCLB and IDEA – 25 cosponsors.
• HR 2394, Keeping Our Promises to America's Children Act [Rep. Moore (D-KS)] — allows states/school districts to suspend, modify or defer AYP sanctions when Title I is not funded at authorized level – 50 cosponsors.
• HR 3049, the Student Testing Fairness Act [Rep. Strickland (D-OH)] — improves assessment and AYP, including by requiring multiple measures of student achievement – 21 cosponsors.
• HR 3341, Adequate Yearly Federal Funding Report Act [Rep. Allen (D-ME)] — requires annual GAO report on whether NCLB funding is adequate to meet its requirements – 16 cosponsors.
• HR 3450 [Rep. Wu (D-OR] — restores as a separate program the Class Size Reduction program that was consolidated with professional development programs by ESEA/NCLB – 20 cosponsors.
• HR 3582, Every Child Created Equal Act [Rep. Baldwin (D-WI)] — strengthens civil rights protections under ESEA/NCLB - 25 cosponsors.
• S. 1248, Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2003 [Sen. Gregg (R-NH)] — partially fixes special education teacher definition. Reported from Sen. HELP Committee.
  • Special ed teachers providing just consultation exempt from HQ
  • Allows secondary special ed teachers who teach multiple subjects to children with "significant cognitive abilities" to meet elementary level HQ criteria
  • Requires a special education HOUSSE
    

Check NEA website for up-to-date information: http://www.nea.org/greatschools/

For more information, contact Joel Packer, Manager for ESEA Policy, at 202-822-7329 or Jpacker@nea.orgJanuary 2004 — Great Public Schools for Every Child