Elementary

1
Elementary secondary education act Update
2
Welcome to CECs 1st Summer Policy session!
Deb Ziegler, Associate Executive Director, Policy
Advocacy
Kim Hymes, Senior Director, Policy Advocacy
3
Todays Agenda

• ESEA Reauthorization Waivers
• Update on Legislative Policy Proposals
• Next Generation of Assessments
• Teacher Evaluation

4
4
5
7 Senators are past educators
44 Representatives are past educators
6
2007200820092010201120122013?
What a difference 7 years makes!!
7
CECs ESEA Guiding Principles

• Supporting a Well Prepared Successful
  Educational
• Workforce
• Improving Outcomes for All Children Through the
• Collaboration of All Educators
• Strengthening Assessment and Accountability for
  ALL
• Meaningful Systems that Encourage
• Collaborative and Supportive Measurement,
  Evaluation,
• and Reward of Professional Performance
• Developing Improved Strategies that Create
  Positive
• School Reform

8
Lots of Talking
Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA)
9
American Association of Administrators, Policy
Insider Oct 2011
10

• White House Announces Waivers
• September, 2011

11
ESEA Waivers

• Remove 2014 AYP deadline
• Funding Flexibility
• Changes to Accountability
• Flexibility for HQT Plans

12
ESEA Waivers

• 4 Conditions
• Adopt College Career Ready Standards
• Develop Assessments that Measure Student Growth
• Develop Differentiated Accountability System
• Develop Guidelines for Local Teacher and
  Principal Evaluations Based on Effectiveness

13
ESEA Waivers

• 39 States Washington, DC have waivers

14
(No Transcript)
15
2013 House vs. Senate ESEA Bills

• Total Opposites!!

16
Where are we in the legislative process??
Passage by House Education Committee
Passage by Senate Education Committee
17
Student Success Act (HR 5) House Version of ESEA

• July 19, 2013 Passed House by 221-207 vote all
  Democrats and 12 Republicans voted against
• Two days of debate
• 18 amendments passed
• 4 amendments defeated
• 4 withdrawn

CEC Opposed, as did most of the education
disability communities
18

Student Success Act (HR 5) House Version of ESEA
Provisions in Student Success Act (HR 5) CEC Supports
Eliminates AYP 2014 Deadline
Maintains Disaggregation of Subgroup Data
19
Student Success Act (HR 5) House Version of ESEA
CEC Expressed Serious Concerns with Student Success Act (HR 5)
Reduces Accountability for Students with Disabilities
Eliminates Highly Qualified Teacher Provisions
Lacks focus on Professional Development
Reduces, Caps and Eliminates Funding Locks into place sequestration
Increases Privatization
Ignores High-Ability Students
20
Strengthening Americas Schools Act Senate
Version of ESEA

• Passed Senate Health, Education, Labor, Pensions
  (HELP) Committee June 12, 2013
• Passed with only Democrat support
• Two days of debate and amendments

CEC supported with some reservations, as did most
of disability community education community
split
21
Strengthening Americas Schools Act Senate
Version of ESEA
Provisions in Strengthening Americas Schools Act CEC Supports
Focus on early learning for entry ready to learn
Encourage equity through greater transparency and fair distribution of resources
Limits Use of Alternate Assessment
Changes to Accountability System, Focus on Bottom 15, Low Performing Subgroups, Maintains Subgroup Disaggregation, Student Growth Performance Targets Eliminates AYP 2014 Deadline
Early Intervening Services in General Ed, UDL, PBIS
Mental Health Supports
Includes Key Provisions of CEC-Endorsed, TALENT Act for High-Ability Students
22
Strengthening Americas Schools Act Senate
Version of ESEA
Provisions in Strengthening Americas Schools Act That Concern CEC
New Requirements without Adequate Resources
Accountability System Focus on Bottom 15 of Schools and Only Reporting for Remaining 85
Includes Turnaround Models that Promote Firing of Staff and Other Interventions
Overemphasis of Teacher Evaluation from Federal Level
Defining Highly Qualified to Include Individuals Still Enrolled in Alternate Route to Certification Programs
23
Whats Next for ESEA?
24
Common core state standards The Future of
Testing

• New Assessments, Adaptive Assessments, Racing
  to the Top

25
Race to the Top Assessment Contest
Aligns to the Common Core State Standards
26
Two Consortia 1

• Dynamic Learning Maps Alternate Assessment
  Program (DLM) Kansas University 22 million
• 13 States - Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Mississippi,
  Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oklahoma,
  Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Washington and
  Wisconsin.
• Accessibility - keyboard, drag-and-drop,
  touch-screen, and compatible with a variety of
  assistive technologies commonly used by students.

27
National Center State Collaborative

• 19 States Alaska, Arizona Connecticut, District
  of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Indiana,
  Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, North
  Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South
  Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Wyoming

28
Assessment Consortia PARCC
Computer Based
29
Assessment Consortia Smarter Balanced
Computer Adaptive
30
TIMELINE

• 2012-13 School Year First year pilot/field
  testing and related research and data collection
• Fall 2012 Small Scale Trials 500 schools in
  23 states
• February
• April
• 2013-14 School Year Second year pilot/field
  testing and related research and data collection
• 2014-15 School Year Full operational
  administration of PARCC assessments
• Summer 2015 Set achievement levels, including
  college-ready performance levels

31
Teacher evaluation

• Waiver concerns and beyond

32
Policymakers A Shift in Focus
Highly Qualified
Highly Effective
Outputs
Inputs
33
System Components
Complex Role
Measure Evidence-Based Practice
Recognize Professionalism
Incorporate Research
CECs Position Components of Special Education
Teacher Evaluations
34
Teacher Evaluation Systems Shall
Include Fundamental System-Wide Components

• All educators must be included in one evaluation
  system.
• Evaluation systems must identify appropriate
  professional development opportunities for
  teachers based on the results of their
  evaluations.
• Evaluations must support continuous improvement.
• Evaluation processes and all measures of teacher
  effectiveness must be open and transparent to the
  teacher being evaluated.

37
35
Teacher Evaluation Systems Shall

• Evaluations must clearly identify and be based on
  a special education teachers specific role and
  responsibilities during a given school year.
• Evaluations must take into account the population
  of children and youth and their range of
  exceptionalities that special education teachers
  instruct.
• Evaluations must be conducted by evaluators with
  expertise related to evidence-based service
  delivery models and individualized teaching
  practices and interventions in special education.

Identify the Complex Role of the Special
Education Teacher
38
36
Teacher Evaluation Systems Shall
Measure the Use of Evidence-Based Practices

• Evaluations must be based on multiple reliable
  measures and indicators that support valid
  measurement of special education teacher
  effectiveness.
• Evaluations should never be based solely on
  student growth.
• Statistical models that estimate a teachers
  contribution to student growth, such as
  value-added models, should not be applied to any
  teacher until there is a general consensus among
  researchers that the model provides a valid
  estimate of a teachers contribution to student
  growth.

39
37
CEC Resources
http//www.cec.sped.org/Policy-and-Advocacy
38
CEC Resources
_at_CECAdvocacy
www.policyinsider.org
39
Take Action CECs Legislative Action Center
www.cec.sped.org Choose Policy
Advocacy Choose Legislative Action Center
40
Mark Your Calendars!

• CEC CAN Summer Policy Series Continues
• July 24, 2013, 10-11am (est) Advocacy strategies
  for new CAN Coordinators
• August 1, 2013, 10-11am (est) Federal funding
  for special/gifted education programs

41
Thank you!!
Deb Ziegler Kim Hymes Associate Executive
Director Senior Director Policy
Advocacy Policy Advocacy debz_at_cec.sped.org
kimh_at_cec.sped.org