Transcript Slide 1

POLICY & ADVOCACY
WHAT’S HAPPENING IN
WASHINGTON?
CEC Convention April 2013
1
Today’s Agenda
2

9-10:20am

Election, ESEA, Waivers, Teacher Evaluation, CCSS
Tests

10:20 – 10:30am BREAK

10:30-12pm

School Safety and Mental Health, Teacher Preparation
Accountability, Early Learning, Research, Gifted, IDEA,
WIA, Budget
ELECTION 2012:
WHAT DID WE LEARN?
3
The times they are a changing…
Overview of 2012 Election
Demography
4
Race and Gender
Women: Obama 55%
LGBT: Obama 76%
African American: Obama
93%
Hispanic: Obama 71%
Asian: Obama 73%
White: Romney 59%

Obama’s share of the
white vote shrank, but
the overall number of
white voters also shrank.
5
EDUCATION LEGISLATION
6
7






ESEA
IDEA
Workforce Investment Act (WIA)
CCDBG (17 years overdue!!)
Education Sciences Reform Act
Higher Education Act
ELEMENTARY & SECONDARY
EDUCATION ACT (AKA NCLB)
8
CEC’s ESEA Guiding Principles
9
 Supporting a Well Prepared Successful
Educational Workforce
 Meaningful Systems that Encourage
Collaborative and Supportive Measurement, Evaluation,
and Reward of Professional Performance
 Strengthening Assessment and Accountability for ALL
 Developing Improved Strategies that Create Positive
School Reform
Providing Full Funding to Execute the Goals and
Provisions of ESEA
Meeting the Unique Needs of Gifted Learners
Improving Outcomes for All Children Through the
Collaboration of All Educators
ESEA Reauthorization
10
2007…2008…2009…2010…2011…2012
11
American Association of Administrators, Policy Insider Oct 2011
12
White House Announces Waivers
September, 2011
Congress Acts!
13
Jan 2012
Oct 2011
Senate Help Committee





Eliminated AYP
Encouraged new
teacher eval
systems
Eliminated 2%
Modified Tests
Codified 1%
Alternate Tests
7 Turnaround
Models
House Ed





Committee
Eliminated AYP
Required new
teacher eval
systems
Cut funding for 43
programs
Changed funding
to block grant
Turnaround?
Javits
Grants
ESEA WAIVERS
14
So, waivers are our ESEA reauthorization
(At least for now …)
ESEA Waivers
15
 Remove
2014 AYP deadline
 Funding
Flexibility
 Changes
to Accountability
 Flexibility
for HQT Plans
ESEA Waivers
16

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
ESEA Waivers
17
To receive an ESEA waiver, states had to develop new
guidelines for teacher/principal evaluation that:
 “take(s)
into account data on student growth in significant
part” in determining teacher/principal performance”
levels.”
Measures of Student Growth in untested grades and subjects include:
“pre-tests, end-of-course tests, and objective performance-based
assessments, student learning objectives and other measures of student
achievement that are rigorous and comparable across schools within
an LEA”
ESEA Waivers
18



Blue States Have Waivers
Green States are Under Review
Plus, TX, WY,
PN, + 9 CA
Districts
Waiver Concerns
19
No 2 State applications are the
same. . .

MONITORING:
•
Every 3 Months?
New TA?
Amount of revisions?
New staffing needed?
•
•
•
TEACHER EVALUATION
20
Waiver concerns and beyond…
Policymakers: A Shift in Focus
21
Highly
Qualified
Highly
Effective
Inputs
Outputs
Policy Movers …
22
Race to the
Top
41 State Applications Proposed Changes to
Teacher Evaluation systems
Gates
Foundation:
MET Study
Private Investment of $45 Million in Several
Pilot Districts
Now
States are working it out.
System Components
Complex Role
Measure EvidenceBased Practice
Recognize Professionalism
Incorporate Research
Components of Special Education Teacher
Evaluations
23
Teacher Evaluation Systems Shall:
Identify the Complex Role of the Special Education Teacher



Evaluations must clearly identify and be based on a special education
teacher’s 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.
38
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 teacher’s 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 teacher’s contribution to student growth.
39
Value Added
Measurement
(VAM)
26
Use of IEP
Multiple indicators of special education
•
teacher effectiveness may include … IEP
development and implementation.
Evaluations should not use a student’s
•
progress on their goals, objectives, and
benchmarks in the IEP as a measure of a
special education teacher’s contribution to
student growth.
41
CCSS & THE FUTURE OF TESTING
28
New assessments, adaptive assessments, &
racing to the top
Race to the Top Assessment Contest
29

$330 Million

Aligns with Common Core Standards


Two Consortia for 1% of students with significant
cognitive disabilities
Two Consortia for 99% of students
1% Dynamic Learning Maps
30

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.
1% National Center & State Collaborative
31
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
99% Assessment Consortia: PARCC
32
Computer
Based
99% Assessment Consortia: Smarter
Balanced
33
Computer
Adaptive
TIMELINE
34

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
How long will it take students to take
the test?
35



7.5 -8 Hours
Over 5-9 Student Days
Schools will deliver 2 x a year and have a 20 day
window to complete each session
Computer Adaptive Tests
36


Definition: A test that uses the information it receives
during the test to determine which question to present
the test-taker with next.
Several states use them (HI, OR, DE, UT)


Only Oregon is approved for NCLB Purposes
Concerns:
Is every student tested on the full range of grade level
content?
 Is every student seeing a similar mix of questions that
measure cognitively complex skills?

Get online and check them out!!
37


http://sampleitems.smarterbalanced.org/itemprevi
ew/sbac/index.htm
http://www.parcconline.org/sample-assessmenttasks
Accommodation Possibilities …
38

Oregon – Braille Adaptive as of this school year
 Refreshable
displays
Accommodation Possibilities …
39
Signing Avatars
 Not used as an
accommodation
in any state;
Concerns about
use for high stakes
testing.

NEW OPPORTUNITIES IN
GIFTED EDUCATION POLICY
40
Federal initiatives
41
Sen. Grassley (R-IA)
Sen. Mikulski (D-MD)
Sen. Casey (D-PA)
Supporting
Educator
Development
to Ensure
Academic
Growth
Providing
Public
Transparency
of Student
Achievement
Data
42
TALENT
Act
Continuing
Research and
Dissemination
on Best
Practices in
Gifted Ed
Confronting
and
Addressing
the National
Excellence
Gap
The TALENT Act:
43
Is a Pragmatic
Approach
Weaves Gifted/High
Ability into Existing
ESEA Structure
Seeks to Raise Public
Awareness to GT
Population
Is a Conversation
Starter
IDEA
44
2020????
Total # Served
by IDEA Part B is Decreasing
- 4.8%
45
Total # with
Autism Spectrum Disorder is
Increasing
+ 10 % 17%
Annually
46
New Part B Consent (Medicaid) Rules!
47


New Regulations – Clearer, Easier Process
NEW PROCESS = Before beginning services:
 Provide
parents written notification that
 Explains
the protections available to parents
 Fully informs them of their IDEA rights
 Obtain
1 time parent consent to access benefits
 DONE!!
March 18,
2013
IDEA/ESEA Equitable Services
48

March 14, 2013 Guidance Letter from USDOE
 To
establish better public/private relationships USDOE
will :
 Host
conf calls 2x/yr with state directors
 Facilitation public/private communication
 Encourage states to create state level private school working
groups
 Identify examples of promising practices
 Host Webinars to improve stakeholder understanding
INCLUDING SWD
SCHOOL SPONSORED SPORTS
49
GAO: Good news!
50

Students with Disabilities are well represented in PE
classes both general PE classes and specialized
opportunities when needed!
Based on its findings, and projections from its
findings, the GAO determined that almost
100% of students with disabilities are taking
advantage of adaptive and general PE
through the country!
Creativity & Open Minds
51
Prevent: Discrimination
 Train Coaches
Ensure: Accommodations
 SWD – Hearing Impairment –visual cue
or interpreter
 SWD - Learning Disability – allowed to use
indicator other than grades
 SWD – Diabetes –provide trained staff to
administer insulin, just as during the school day
Act: Talk to your Athletic Director/ Reach out to the
Community
FEDERAL BUDGET
52
What can we expect??
The Federal Budget
53
U.S. Department
of Education =
1.32%
Budget: What does Congress Do?
54
Congress Funds the
Federal Gov. for the
Federal fiscal year
10/1-9/30
House & Senate
Agree to a Budget
Continuing
Resolution
“CR”
Debt Ceiling
Other Spending
Cuts…
Sequestration
Manages
Debt
Keep
things the
same!!
FY 2012 US DOE Budget
55
FY 2012: Where did we end up?
Total Amount
56
Change
IDEA Part B
$11,577,86
Increase of $78
Million
IDEA Part B
Section 619
$372,645
Level
IDEA Part C
$442,710
Increase
$5 Million
IDEA Part D
$242,508
Level
Javits
$0
Eliminated
SpEd Research
$49.9 million
Level
After ATRA
(Nov 2010) Elections
Tea
Party
(Aug 2011) Budget Control Act
Why do we have
sequestration?
SuperCommittee
(FAILED Nov 2011)
$1.2T
Sequestration (Jan. 2, 2013)
American Taxpayer Relief Act (ATRA)
(Jan 2, 2013)
8%
58
5%
(March 1)
Where are we now? Continuing
Resolution
59
 FY
2012 Levels – 5% Sequestration Cut =
IDEA Part B
$10,998,260
IDEA Part B
Section 619
$353,900
IDEA Part C
$420,439
IDEA Part D
$242,508
Javits
$0
SpEd Research
$47 million
Decrease $580
Million
Decrease of
$18,750 Million
Decrease of
$23 Million
Decrease of
$12 Million
Eliminated
Decrease of
$2.5 Million
Sequestration = Full
Funding Plunges to
14.5%
What happens next????
61



Have to decide how to fund next year’s (FY2014)
budget by Sept. 30 …
Have to decide whether to AGAIN raise the debt
ceiling by May 19 …
Have to decide how to deal with sequestration cuts
over the next 10 years …
62
CNN Poll conducted by ORC
International during
November 16-18, 2012
COMBAT UNCERTAINTY!!!
1. STAY INFORMED
63
CEC PI Blog and Twitter
64
65
@CECAdvocacy
Follow us on Twitter for up to the
minute policy updates!
2. ACT – CONTACT
CONGRESS
66
Use CEC’s legislative action center
Take Action: CEC’s Legislative
Action Center
67
www.cec.sped.org
Choose: Policy & Advocacy
Choose: Legislative Action Center
THANK YOU
68
@cecadvocacy