no child left behind act of 2001

NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACTOF 2001

Public Law 107-110

OVERARCHING PURPOSE OFNO CHILD LEFT BEHIND . . .

To close the achievementgap with accountability,flexibility, and choice, so that no child is left behind.no child is left behind.

No Child Left BehindUshers in Sweeping Reforms Based Upon the Following Priorities:

Stronger Accountability for Results Expanded Options and Choice for Parents Emphasis on Teacher Quality Emphasis on Teaching Methods that Work Consolidation and Flexibility

Goals of No Child Left Behind…

All students will reach high standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading and mathematics by 2013-2014.

All limited English proficient students will become proficient in English.

Goals of No Child Left Behind…

By 2005-2006, all students will be taught by highly qualified teachers.

All students will be educated in learning environments that are safe, drug free, and conducive to learning.

All students will graduate from high school.

ASSESSMENTS AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN NEW TITLE ITitle I, Part A, Sections 1111 and 1116

Builds on prior Title I assessment provisions, adding requirements with specificity.

Clearly defines expectations for states, local school systems, and schools.


The goal of the state accountability system is to have all students reaching proficient levels on the state assessments by 2014 (12 years).


Requires states to have in place a statewide accountability system that applies to all public schools, including charter schools.

STATE ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS Title I, Part A, Sections 1111 and 1116

Requires that states administer assessments and that these assessments be administered to all students in all public schools in the state.


Beginning with school year 2005-2006, states must assess reading/language arts and mathematics every year from 3rd through 8th grade, as well as one year in the 10th – 12th grade span.


Beginning with the 2007-2008 school year, states must administer a science assessment annually in at least one grade in each of the following grade spans: 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12.


States must report scores in terms of three proficiency levels – advanced, proficient, and basic.

The assessments must produce individual student reports.

Defining Adequate Yearly Progress

Define the starting point.

Set intermediate goals of 3 years or less in equal increments to reach the 12-year target.

Define annual measurable objectives within the intermediate goals.

Defining AYP:The Starting Point

01-0202-03

03-0406-07

09-1008-09

07-0805-06

04-05

Goal: All Proficient

10-1111-12

12-1313-14

Starting Point

School Year

Defining AYP:The Starting Point

Starting PointData from 2001-02 assessments

USE THE HIGHER VALUE

% of students Proficient in lowest achieving group:

-Economically disadvantaged

-Major racial/ethnic groups

-Students with disabilities

-Students with limited English proficiency

Rank all schools by % Proficient.

Then, count up to reach 20% of total enrollment

The % of students Proficient in that school is the starting point.

How a School or District makes AYP

Each group of students meets or exceeds statewide annual objective– Exception:

The number below proficient reduced 10% from prior year and,

Subgroup made progress on other indicators

For Each group, 95% of students enrolled participate in the assessments on which AYP is based

AND

STATE ACCOUNTABILITY REQUIREMENTS Title I, Part A, Sections 1111 and 1116

Adequate Yearly Progress

Achieving gains for all subgroups constitutes AYP for the state. If even one subgroup fails to meet its AYP objective, the state fails to meet its AYP objective.


Adequate Yearly Progress State must define what constitutes AYP

for local school systems and schools. Measurement will be based on state assessment, plus - for elementary schools, one additional indicator; for secondary schools, the indicator is graduation rates.

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT AND CORRECTIVE ACTION

Title I, Part A, Sections 1111 and 1116

School Improvement:

1. Title I schools not making AYP for two consecutive years must provide “public school choice.”



School Improvement: 2. For schools that do not make AYP for three consecutive years, the school system must • continue to offer school choice to all students

in the failing school and, • provide low achieving, disadvantaged students

within the school supplemental educational services from a provider of their choice.

• MSDE must develop a list of providers.



Corrective Action: If the identified school continues to fail to meet AYP for four consecutive years, the local school system must implement certain corrective actions to improve the school, such as replacing certain staff, as well as continue to offer public school choice and provide supplemental services to students.


Restructuring: A school that continues to fail to meet AYP for five consecutive years would be subject to significant penalties such as reconstitution, State takeover, the hiring of a private management contractor, converting to a charter school, or significant staff restructuring. Public school choice and supplemental services would continue to be required.


Safe Harbor for Improving Schools: A “safe harbor” would be created for schools in which students overall make AYP, but where one or more subgroups fail to make AYP indicators adopted by the state.


Safe Harbor for Improving Schools: These schools will be deemed to meet the AYP requirement if: 1. The percentage of students in the subgroup(s)

who failed to reach proficient level has declined by at least 10 percent;

2. For secondary schools, the targeted increase in graduations was met;

3. For elementary schools, progress on the state’s other academic indicator was met; and,

4. Progress was also met on any additional indicators adopted by the state.

Annual State Report Card

Will include: Disaggregated student achievement results by

performance level. Comparison between annual objectives and

actual performance for each student group. Percent of students not tested, disaggregated. 2-year trend data by subject, by grade tested. Data on other indicators used to determine AYP.

Annual State Report Card (con’t)

Graduation rates Performance of districts making AYP, including

the number and names of schools identified for school improvement

Professional qualifications of teachers, percent with provisional credentials, percent of classes not taught by highly qualified teachers including comparison between high- and low-poverty schools

Optional information provided by State


Report Cards: Local school systems must modify their reports to contain the same information beginning in school year 2002-2003.

National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

The State will participate in biennial NAEP assessments of reading and math– Grades 4 and 8– Beginning 2002-2003– Secretary pays the cost of administration

District plan includes assurance that if selected for NAEP, the district will participate

EDUCATOR QUALITYTitle I, Part A, Section 1119 for accountability provisionsTitle II, Part A, Subparts 1-4

No Child Left Behind addresses educator quality in two ways:

1. New accountability provisions for qualified teachers and paraprofessionals that are embedded in Title I.

2. Revamped Title II grant program that aims to improve teacher quality and increase the number of highly qualified teachers, principals, and vice principals.

Beginning with the first day of the 2002-2003 school year, all new Title I teachers must be certified and teaching in their content areas.

By the end of the 2005-2006 school year, all teachers teaching core academic subjects in all public schools in Maryland must be highly qualified.


Teacher Quality: Parents have the right to know and to request information from schools about the qualifications of teachers.

• Licensing for grade level and subject• Emergency or provisional status• B.A. major and graduate degrees• Paraprofessionals and qualifications

Requires Local School Systems to notify parents if students have a teacher for 4 weeks that is not “highly qualified”.


To accomplish this goal, MSDE must establish annual measurable objectives for each local school system and school, including an annual increase in the percentage of highly qualified teachers at each LSS and school and an annual increase in the percentage of teachers who are receiving high-quality professional development.



Paraprofessionals (Teacher’s Aides): As of January 8, 2002, all newly hired paraprofessionals must meet new qualification requirements.

By December 2005-2006 school year, all paraprofessionals must have: (1) completed at least two years of study at an institution of higher education; (2) obtained an associate’s or higher degree; or (3) met a rigorous standard of quality established at the State or local level, which includes an assessment of math, reading, and writing.



Paraprofessionals (Teacher’s Aides): Existing paraprofessionals paid with Title I funds must meet the requirements within 4 years.


Title II: Preparing, Training, and Recruiting High Quality Teachers and Principals


Title I and Title II: Professional development programs focus on teacher and principal training and the use of technology to promote student academic progress.

ENHANCING EDUCATION THROUGH TECHNOLOGYTitle II, Part D, Subpart 1

Goals• To improve student academic achievement

through the use of technology in elementary and secondary schools

• To assist every student in becoming technologically literate by the end of 8th grade

• To encourage the effective integration of technology resources and systems with professional development and curriculum development


Eligibility To Apply– Formula grants (50%)

Local school systems that receive Title I funds OR LSSs that apply as part of a consortium with LSSs that receive Title I funds

– Competitive grants (50%)A “high-need local educational agency” OR an

“eligible local partnership”


Use of Funds– Required Use

At least 25% of funds must be used to provide ongoing, sustained, and intensive, high-quality professional development (formula and competitive grants)

– Other Possible Uses Increasing access to technology Adapting or expanding applications to technology Implementing proven and effective courses and curricula

that include integrated technology


– Other Possible Uses (cont’d.) Using technology to promote parental involvement and foster

communication among students, parent, and teachers Preparing one or more teachers in schools as technology

leaders Enhancing existing technology and acquiring new technology Acquiring connectivity linkages, resources, and services Using technology to collect, manage, and analyze data Implementing enhanced performance measurement systems Developing, enhancing, or implementing information

technology courses


Other Requirements– Technology Plan - a new or updated long-range strategic

local educational technology plan must be submitted with the other required elements in the application for funds. (Applies to both the formula and competitive portion of the program)

– CIPA Certification - A local school system seeking Ed Tech funds must certify to its State Education Agency that one of the following conditions exists:

Every “applicable school” has complied with the CIPA requirements in subpart 4 of Part D of Title II of the ESEA


CIPA Certification (cont’d.)– Not all “applicable schools” have yet complied with the

requirements in subpart 4 of Part D of Title II of the ESEA, however, the LEA has been granted a one-year waiver from the U.S. Secretary of Education

– The CIPA requirements in the ESEA do not apply because no funds are being used to purchase computers to access the Internet, or to pay for direct costs associated with accessing the Internet

Title III Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students

English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act

Improving Language Instruction Educational Program

Emergency Immigrant Program

English Language Acquisition

Districts are required to provide informed parental notification as to why their child is in need of placement in a specialized language instruction program.

Parents have the right to choose if more than one program is offered and the right to remove their child from a program for LEP children.

Districts must also implement effective means of parental outreach to encourage parents to become informed and actively involved in their child’s educational program.

21st CENTURY PROGRAMTitle IV, Part A

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Retains with some changes, state formula

grants and national discretionary activities for drug and violence prevention.

Requires states to report on school safety to the public.

Requires local school systems to implement drug and violence prevention programs of demonstrated effectiveness.

EXPANDED PARENTAL OPTIONS Title I, Part A, Sections 1111 and 1116 Title IX, Section 9532

Title I School Transfer Options Supplemental Services

Title IXIf a student is a victim of crime, or attends a public school designated by the state as unsafe, students would be permitted to transfer to a safe public school.

21st CENTURY PROGRAMTitle IV, Part B

21st Century Community Learning Centers• Provides funds for before- and after-school

programs, summer school, and enrichment programs for students, particularly those in low performing schools.

• Expands eligibility to school districts, community organizations, and other public or private entities.

• Provides funds to support charter schools, magnet schools, and public school choice.

READING FIRSTTitle I, Part B

Provides funds to help states and local school systems implement comprehensive reading instruction grounded in scientifically based reading research for children in grades K-3. (Replaces Reading Excellence Act)

READING FIRSTTitle I, Part B

Funded districts may only serve schools that have a high number or percentage of children in grades K-3 below the poverty line or schools that have a percentage of children reading below grade level and have been identified for school improvement.

CONSOLIDATION AND

FLEXIBILITY

Title IV, Part A 1. Transferability: Local school systems may

transfer up to 50 percent of the money from several major ESEA programs; funds may be transferred into, but not out of, Title I. States may transfer up to 50 percent of state-activity funds between several major ESEA programs.

CONSOLIDATION AND

FLEXIBILITY

Title I, Part A, Section 1114

1. Schoolwide Programs: Public Law 107-110 reduces the poverty threshold for eligibility for schoolwide programs under Title I from 50 percent to 40 percent.

“Reform is no longer about access or money. It is no longer about compliance or excuses. It is about improving student achievement by

improving the quality of the education we offer American students.”

Rod Paige

Secretary of Education

For additional information about the No Child Left Behind Act…

Please contact:Dr. Ronald E. Friend

Office of Comprehensive Planning and School Support

Maryland State Department of Education

200 West Baltimore Street

Baltimore, Maryland 21202

Telephone: 410-767-0278

FAX: 410-333-8148

E-mail: [email protected]

NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACTOF 2001

Public Law 107-110

no child left behind act of 2001

Documents

students proficient

state assessments

child left behindall

school year

state accountability

new title ititle

proficient levels

prior title