I heart #FBRC

Deadline approaching for individuals to serve on committee

I'd like to amplify the announcement from ED earlier this month that the Department is taking nominations for individuals to serve on the Negotiated Rulemaking Committee. The Committee will provide recommendations on several complex regulatory issues under Title I of ESEA/ESSA. 

Among the constituencies ED is looking for are members of state Boards of Education and local School Committees, paraprofessionals, teachers, historically underrepresented students, and the civil rights community.

There's a stated preference for potential Committee members with specific expertise in assessment and/or an understanding of school finance (supplement, not supplant). The two tasks for the Committee:

• Prepare proposed regulations that would update existing assessment regulations to reflect changes to section 1111(b)(2) of the ESEA, including:
• (i) Locally selected nationally recognized high school assessments, under section 1111(b)(2)(H);
• (ii) The exception for advanced mathematics assessments in 8th grade, under section 1111(b)(2)(C);
• (iii) Inclusion of students with disabilities in academic assessments, including alternate assessments based on alternate academic achievement standards for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, subject to a cap of 1.0% of students assessed for a subject;
• (iv) Inclusion of English learners in academic assessments and English language proficiency assessments; and
• (v) Computer-adaptive assessments. 

• Prepare proposed regulations related to the requirement under section 1118(b) of the ESEA that title I, part A funds be used to supplement, and not supplant, non-Federal funds, specifically:
• (i) Regarding the methodology a local educational agency uses to allocate State and local funds to each title I school to ensure compliance with the supplement not supplant requirement; and
• (ii) The timeline for compliance. These topics are tentative. Topics may be added or removed as the process continues.

Individuals selected for either of these panels should be aware of this request:

"An individual selected as a negotiator will be expected to represent the interests of his or her constituency and participate in the negotiations in a manner consistent with the goal of developing proposed regulations on which the committee will reach consensus. If consensus is reached, the negotiator and, if applicable, his or her employer organization, is bound by the consensus and may not submit a negative comment through the public comment process on the resulting proposed regulation." 

Many of us can easily think of potential candidates with the knowledge and skills ED is looking for to help shape ESSA regulations. Nominations for negotiators to serve on the committee must be received on or before Thursday, February 25, 2016. Details about how to submit nominations, as well as the dates, times, and locations of committee meetings are detailed in the notice.

Preview of BESE meetings next week

February Board Book

The Board Book arrived this weekend with the information and backup needed in preparation for the upcoming meetings on 2/22 and 2/23. The agenda hasn't been posted publicly, yet; absent requests from Board members to add to or adjust it, here's a preview of what we can reasonably expect:

At the special meeting in Malden Monday night (5-7 PM) we'll hear updates on the status of receiverships for Southbridge and Holyoke Public Schools. This is the first monthly update on Southbridge since the Board voted to bring the district into receivership last month. We'll hear about the search process for an external receiver, status on setting up the Local Stakeholder Group, and strategies for family and community engagement. The report on Holyoke includes an update on the Therapeutic Intervention Program (TIP) at the Peck School and an overview on the status of the turnaround plan. Following that we'll go into Executive Session to discuss strategy with respect to pending litigation.

At the regular meeting in Malden Tuesday morning (8:30-1:00 PM) we'll first hear comments from the Chair, the Commissioner, the Secretary, and the Public. Among the Commissioner's comments will be remarks about recent studies on curriculum and assessment:

• a study out of Harvard University on teachers' perspectives for the first full year of common core curriculum implementation in five states, including Massachusetts;

• from the Fordham Institute a study that examines how well MCAS, PARCC, SBAC, and ACT measure college-and-career-ready standards; and

• a similar study conducted by the Human Resources Research Organization. Spoiler alert (but perhaps not...!): both assessment studies found limitations with MCAS, while the "newer" assessments generally rated "higher".

As we'll be wrapping up "charter school season", the first five "Items for Discussion and Action" are related to charter schools, including a discussion on the Report to the Legislature (as required by MGL, c.71, s.89(kk) and recommendations for new charter schools (Libertas Academy Charter School, Springfield and New Heights Charter School, Brockton); discussion and VOTES on both schools.

The final four are "Other Business Items": 6.) discussion & VOTE on Greenfield Commonwealth Virtual School; 7.) discussion and VOTE on the Revised Definition of College-and-Career-Readiness, Incorporating Civic Learning; 8.) discussion of Governor Baker's State Education Budget Proposal for FY17; and 9.) discussion of the new student assessment process.

Intro to ESSA

At nearly 400 pages the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, the new iteration of ESEA/NCLB) intends to recalibrate the federal-state relationship (thrown out of whack with NCLB) and continues the commitment of the federal government to "quality and equality in the education that is offered to our young people". The law brings with it several key changes in policy for states and districts, including:

• State Assessment Programs support high-quality assessments through state and district assessment flexibility, federal funding, and a new pilot program to encourage innovation. Still in: the provision that at least 95% of students and 95% of each group of traditionally underserved students will participate in statewide assessments (grades 3-8, once in high school, in ELA & maths).

• State Accountability Systems focus resources on low-performing schools and traditionally underserved students who consistently demonstrate low academic performance. State goals and accountability systems must establish long-term goals for, at minimum:
• student achievement, high school graduation rates, and English language proficiency with measurements of interim progress.
• For the lowest-performing 5% of Title I schools and high schools with graduation rates at or below 67%, comprehensive, locally-determined, evidence-based intervention and targeted support and improvement will increase with need.

• Improving Teacher and School Leader Quality and Effectiveness: States and districts are responsible for improving quality and effectiveness of teacher/principal/other school leaders for increased student academic achievement, especially for students from "low-income families" and "students of color". ESSA eliminates the "highly qualified teacher" (HQT) provision (in NCLB), replacing with:
• School districts must describe how they will identify and address any disparities that result in students from low-income families and students of color being taught by ineffective, inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers at higher rates than other students.*
• States must collect and publicly report data on these disparities.*
• State plans must describe how students from low-income families and students of color will not be served at disproportionate rates by ineffective, out-of-field, or inexperienced teachers.*
• School districts must have mechanisms to notify parents regarding the professional qualifications of their child's teacher.
• States may use federal professional development funds to increase access to effective teachers for students from low-income families and students of color.
• Professional development (PD) - ESSA authorizes federal funding for states and districts to provide PD activities that support school leader effectiveness.
• Teacher and leader evaluations - States may (and are not required) use federal PD funds to implement teacher and leader eveluation systems based on student achievement, growth, and multiple measures of performance - and to inform PD.

*Note that this does not apply to students with disabilities and English language learners. COPAA (Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates) testified before the Committee on Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on Early Education, K-12, and Higher Education first hearing on implementing ESSA. Ms. Selene Almazan, Esq. testified on the "vital role" of ED in implementing ESSA to ensure high expectations of teachers and leaders for achievement of students with disabilities, students of color, and students who are English language learners. A letter by organizations representing parents, teachers, and state and local leaders, expressed strong support for and commitment to putting students first.

• Supporting and Improving the Quality of Low-performing High Schools: States and districts are responsible for supporting and improving the quality of low-performing high schools:
• High school graduation rate goals - for all students and student subgroups.
• Low-graduation-rate high schools - at least once every 3 years, states must identify high schools with graduation rates at or below 67% for comprehensive, locally-determined, evidence-based intervention.
• Funding for high schools - ESSA allows districts to target Title I funds to high schools.
• High school program - ESSA eliminates the High School Graduation Initiative (HSGI) included in NCLB and creates a new grant program for states and districts called the Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grant program.
• State and district plans must describe how the state will work with districts to provide for the effective transition of students from middle school to high school and from high school to post-secondary education, including integrating AP, IB, CTE and work-based learning, dual enrollment, and coordination with institutions of higher education and employers.

(Emphasis throughout mine).

Expanding jobs for youth

Last week the US Department of Labor announced a $20M competition: $2M each for 10 local workforce development boards to expand existing summer jobs programs into year-round employment, career pathway, and work experience programs for eligible youth.

The grants intend to strengthen alignment of partnerships under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act to encourage partners to collaborate and expand their capacity to serve youth entering the workforce in their local community.

The grants will require partnerships between Local Boards and local summer employment programs, employers, local education agencies, and re-engagement centers to expand summer into year-round employment and work experience programs for eligible youth.

The competition focuses on young people, both in school and out of school (ages 16-24) who have limited or no work experience. Applications are due on March 25.

More information is HERE.

US House: Next steps for implementing ESSA

US House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on Early Education, Elementary, and Secondary Education to hold hearing on restoring state and local control of K-12 education (implementation of ESSA), tomorrow, Wednesday, February 10, 10:00 AM.

Live proceedings of the hearing may be viewed HERE.

"Negotiated rulemaking" and its role in ESSA

In addition to releasing guidance on assessments (my previous post), the US Department of Education (ED) announced last week that it will engage in "negotiated rulemaking" for the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

Negotiated rulemaking is a process where ED appoints people to serve on a committee to help develop regulations, as opposed to "regular rulemaking" which is undertaken by ED staff. Negotiated rulemaking is intended to increase the likelihood that regulations will be accepted by all interested parties, in part by having them at the table during regulation development.

ESSA requires ED to use negotiated rulemaking in the areas of:

• assessments,
• standards, and
• the "supplement not supplant" provision (which involves funding).

Individuals appointed to the Negotiating Committee will represent a broad range of constituencies, including state and local educators, administrators, civil rights organizations, parents, students, the business community, and more. The negotiators selected to serve on the committee will convene for up to 3 multi-day meetings that will conclude by the end of April.

The committee will address several issues related to assessments, including:

• district flexibility to use a locally selected assessment in high schools for accountability purposes instead of the statewide assessment;

• inclusion of students with disabilities in academic assessments, including alternate assessments based on alternate academic achievement standards for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities;

• inclusion of learners of English in academic assessments and English language proficiency assessment;

• computer-adaptive assessments.

It's interesting to note that even though ED has the authority to use negotiated rulemaking to regulate on academic standards, the issue is not included within the announcement - could this, perhaps, be a signal that ED is unlikely to regulate in this area?

For the other provisions under ESSA, such as accountability, ED will go through the regular rulemaking process (which does not include a negotiating committee), most likely this spring.

ED will take nominations for members of the Negotiating Committee until February 25 and will only consider nominations from those individuals or organizations that responded to last month's request for information (RFI) on ESSA regulations.

More information on the negotiated rulemaking process may be found HERE (beginning in middle of second column).

ED releases guidance to states on assessments under ESSA

Last week the US Department of Education (ED) released guidance to Chief State School Officers on assessments under the new Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

The guidance document builds on President Obama's Testing Action Plan released last October, which included a set of principles for encouraging assessments that promote learning and equity, while scaling back on those practices that haven't served students - or educators - well.

Through new assessment flexibility, funding, and a new pilot program under ESSA, states are supported in their implementation of high quality assessments. While the law eliminates federal mandates for test-based teacher evaluation, states are still required to administer an annual assessment of students in grades 3-8 and once in high school in ELA and maths. With release of the guidance, states and districts are offered specific examples of ways to use federal funds to:

1. Conduct assessment audits to help eliminate low-quality or redundant assessments (outlining that federal dollars may be used to reduce the number and improve the quality of tests);
2. Facilitate educator professional development on using assessment results to improve instruction;
3. Increase timeliness and transparency of assessment information for parents and students; and
4. Improve the quality of assessments, including through replacing low-quality tests with performance assessments.

ED's guidance document may be accessed HERE.

FYI: A link within the cover letter leads to an ED blog highlighting promising practices from states. The John J. Doran Community School in Fall River was highlighted (September 30, 2015) for its approach to addressing non-academic barriers to learning.