Leaving NCLB Behind

The recent race for educational gains outlined by the federal government under No Child Left Behind has turned from a long distance run to a sprint; only the runners have turned around from the predetermined finish line established by the US Department of Ed to run their own local races with the approval of waivers.

As reported July 6, 2012 on the ED.gov, Washington and Wisconsin are the latest to be approved by the Obama Administration bringing the number of approved waivers to 26 States with 10 additional states and the District of Columbia currently under review.

Each waiver request has been based on the disconnect between the expected goals and the reality of their position in the race with some states lagging far behind the leaders and no real front runner expected to finish.  "It is a remarkable milestone that in only five months, more than half of the states in the country have adopted state-developed, next-generation education reforms to improve student learning and classroom instruction, while ensuring that resources are targeted to the students that need them most," said U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan. "A strong, bipartisan reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act remains the best path forward in education reform, but as 26 states have now demonstrated, our kids can't wait any longer for Congress to act."[1]

US Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan
agrees with flaws in current NCLB model.

The 26 states that have been approved for waivers from NCLB include: Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.

The 10 other states (plus Washington, D.C.) with outstanding requests for waivers include: Arizona, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, Oregon and South Carolina.
Education Secretary Arne Duncan said he is taking action because of “universal clamoring” from officials in nearly every state, who say they cannot meet the unrealistic requirements of the nine-year-old federal education law.Washington Post - August 2011 - U.S. to grant waivers for No Child Left Behind

Everyone enjoys a good race; however, state after state begins to see their runners tiring as the hurdles continue to grow in number and size with escalating demands, culminating in the goal of 100 % proficiency for all students in reading and math by 2014.  Failure to reach this goal will result serious sanctions for their schools, including the loss of federal aid.

As reported in the Post:  “Educators say that the pressure of trying to reach 100 percent proficiency has created an unhealthy focus on standardized tests, with continual drilling in the classroom and a narrowing of curriculum that excludes anything beyond math and reading. Some also blame the law for creating a warped atmosphere that led educators to allegedly rig test results in Atlanta, Baltimore and the District of Columbia.”

This growing viewpoint is also shared by the officials as Duncan relayed the following message to the coaches, “The law’s weaknesses have undermined education reform, Duncan said. Since the law allows states to create their own standards and measures of proficiency, some have “dummied down” standards to inflate test scores, Duncan said.

The purpose of The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)/Improving America's Schools Act (IASA), was signed into law on January 8, 2002. NCLB continues many of the goals set forth in IASA and incorporates additional principles and strategies for strengthening the pre K-12 academic environment. The measures included in NCLB require the following: 1) increased accountability for all responsible authorities - states, school districts, and schools; 2) greater school choice for parents whose children are attending low-performing schools; 3) more flexibility for states and LEAs in their use of federal education funds; and 4) a focus of resources on proven educational methods, particularly relating to early reading programs.

Title I, Part A:  Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies earmarks funds to provide activities that are supplemental to the regular classroom instruction and provide additional educational services, such as tutoring, to eligible students to help them achieve academic proficiency and meet New Jersey's Core Curriculum Content Standards (CCCS). Academic proficiency, measured by annual state assessments in grades 3 to 8 and 11, is used to determine a measure of adequate yearly progress (AYP). Key elements of Title I, Part A include the following:

Scientifically based instructional programs and strategies.

Highly qualified teachers and paraprofessionals who work in a program supported with Title I funds.

Parental involvement and notification requirements including the Parents' Right-to-Know.

Professional development requirements for teachers and other staff to address academic content and instructional strategies.

Parental options including school choice and supplemental educational services for schools in need of improvement.

Additional requirements for schools in corrective action and restructuring.

While establishing Program Goals, districts are required to identify both Priority Problems and Target Populations that are pertinent to the Title in which the applicant LEA is working. Once the above determination is made, the district must select at least one Allowable Use per Priority Problem and Target Population for only those Priority Problems and Target Populations pertinent to the Title.  See below:

. Closing the achievement gap

D. Economically disadvantaged G. Racial/ethnic I. Immigrant J. LEP R. Gifted & Talented

Program: Balanced Literacy Program: Corrective Reading Program: Study Island Lit Instr Strat: In-class supp Instr Strat: Diff learning PI Strat: Parent Communications

 Flexibility and Accountability have been at the heart of the movement as the first major action undertaken in late 2011 was a bi-partisan effort under Senator Tom Harkin, Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee along with Senator Mike Enzi, its ranking member. 

Increased flexibility at the state and local level is consistent with the administration’s policy on waivers and the ‘Blueprint for Reform’

However, the committee’s work was found to lacking in the accountability department according to Duncan, along with no clear acceptable plan for effective teacher evaluations.  Both requirements have been critical in determining the approval of any states request.

According to one respondent, 53 Responses to Reforming NCLB  “The sad truth is that unfortunately it is the diversity that makes the US a great country, also, is preventing us from providing all students with equality and equal education in our schools.” 

This reinforces the need to ensure adequate yearly progress for all students regardless of group.  AYP status is also calculated each year for the following student subgroups: White, Hispanic, African American, Native American, Asian/Pacific Islander, Economically Disadvantaged, Students with Disabilities and English Language Learners.

In the last amendment on record for New Jersey, the state requested changes in the Timeline for adequate yearly progress (AYP) determinations and resetting annual measurable objectives (AMOs) (Element 3.2b) Amendments to New Jersey's Accountability Plan

---

[1] US Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan