Where Congress Stands on ESEA and IDEA Reauthorization

1
Where Congress Stands on ESEA and IDEA
Reauthorization

• Leigh Manasevit, Esq.
• Brustein Manasevit, PLLC
• Spring Forum 2011
• lmanasevit_at_bruman.com

2
ESEA Reauthorization
3
110th Congress Second Session ESEA
Reauthorization
4
ESEA Background

• President Johnsons legacy The War on Poverty,
  announced on January 8, 1964
• Original Elementary and Secondary Education Act
  (ESEA) was signed into law by President Johnson
  in 1965
• ESEA in 1965 32 pages
• NCLB of 2001 670 pages

5
ESEA Reauthorization 2007, ouch!

• House Draft Bill imploded for many reasons
• Urgency prior to 2008 elections
• Complexity of House Discussion Draft
  identification schema
• Complexity of House Discussion Draft intervention
  schema
• Union antagonism toward teacher effectiveness
  provisions
• Gone is the post 9/11 partisan moment. Strange
  bedfellows are, again, strangers.

6
ESEA Reauthorization Two Four Years Later

• Evolution of data systems and growth models
• Progress (some) with school turnaround
• Change in union leadership and strategy Better
  relationships under Secretary Duncan?
• Democratic/Republican majorities Healthcare
  outcome?

7
ESEA Reauthorization Timeline

• NCLB Jan 2001 to Jan 2002

8
ESEA Reauthorization Recovery Act and current
ESEA Structure

• In addition to program changes, there may be
  fiscal changes
• Reexamine comparability
• Reconsider the fundamental structure of federal
  fiscal support - Formula vs. Competitive
• Is the 1965 ESEA model appropriate to the
  contemporary education reform focus?

9
ESEA Reauthorization Congressional Strategy

• Original architects, particularly George Miller
  (D-CA) remain central
• Vulnerable Democrats are strategic
• Newly elected Republicans looking to introduce
  conservative principles
• Success of Race to the Top
• Recovery Act accountability fatigue
• Inverse relation to Health Care?

10
ESEA Reauthorization Congressional Strategy

• Republican strategy
• Returning to federalist roots?
• House Committee on Education and Labor Ranking
  Member Representative John P. Kline (MN) - Now
  Chair
• "I'm not looking to tweak No Child Left Behind,"
  Kline said. "As far as I'm concerned, we ought to
  go in and look at the whole thing." (Nick
  Anderson, GOP Leaving No Child Behind,
  Washington Post, July 13, 2009)

11
Education Committees

• House Education Workforce
• Chairman John Kline (R-MN)
• Ranking Member George Miller (D-CA)
• Senate HELP Committee
• Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA)
• Ranking Member Michael Enzi (R-WY)

12
Senate

• Senator Harkin draft by Easter?
• Wants 1 big bill

13
House

• No official timeframe
• Hearings started
• February overview
• March regulations
• 6-8 months possible
• Will approach 12 election year
• Chairman Kline possible numerous small bills

14
White House

• President Obama, Secretary Duncan
• Reauthorization this year
• Chairman Kline
• Cannot allow an arbitrary deadline to undermine
  quality reforms

15
Battles

• Formulas, especially Title I, Title III
• RTT and other competitive programs
• Republicans dont like broad agency discretion,
  but do like the idea of locally-driven reform
• Level of Federal engagement and funding generally
• Accountability

16
Battles

• Vouchers
• Will definitely be in play
• Unlikely to be part of Reauthorization Bill
• But general discussion of school choice will play
  an important role

17
Statement of Principles to Fix the ESEAIssued by
10 moderate Senate Democrats and Independent
Joseph Lieberman

• Increase local flexibility
• Higher standards but more flexibility to meet
  them
• Consolidate programs
• Spur innovation
• Scale up success
• Reward success
• NCLB did not reward growth
• Transparency and Equity
• Better Reporting

18
Statement of Principles to Fix the ESEAIssued by
10 moderate Senate Democrats and Independent
Joseph Lieberman

• Growth Model
• Support SIG 4 models
• Transformation
• Restart
• Close
• Turnaround
• Teachers and Leaders
• Improve pathways to classroom
• Evaluate teacher prep by how graduates do
• Innovations
• Support RTT, Investing in Innovation (i3), and
  high quality Charters
• Close the comparability loophole

19
Statement of Principles to Fix the ESEAIssued by
10 moderate Senate Democrats and Independent
Joseph Lieberman

• Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO)
• Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC)
• Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK)
• Sen. Thomas Carper (D-DE)
• Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE)
• Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA)
• Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI)
• Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
• Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV)
• Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA)
• Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT)
• (caucuses with Democrats)

20
Secretary Duncans Blueprint http//www2.ed.gov/p
olicy/elsec/leg/blueprint/blueprint.pdf
21
A Blueprint for Reform - 7 Sections

1. College Career Ready Students
2. Great Teachers and Great Learners
3. Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners
4. A Complete Education
5. Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students
6. Fostering Innovation and Excellence
7. Additional Cross Cutting Priorities

22
Blueprint

• College Career Ready Students
• Revise standards to align with college career
  readiness
• Evaluate schools differential interventions
• Great Teachers/Great Leaders
• Statewide (new) definitions
• HQT but less emphasis on credentials
• More on student achievement

23
Blueprint

• English Language Learners and Other Diverse
  Learners
• More SWD integration to regular program
• Bilingual education
• 4. A Complete Education A New Approach
• Literacy
• STEM
• Common State Standards

24
Blueprint

• Successful, Safe, Healthy Students
• Promise neighborhoods
• Community services
• Family support
• Community-wide needs assessment

25
Blueprint

• Innovation and Excellence
• Expanded options
• Charters
• Autonomous public schools
• 7. Additional Cross-Cutting Priorities
• Flexibility for success????

26
Possible Changes GAO Report

• Comparability
• Elementary and Secondary Education Act Potential
  Effects of Changing Comparability Requirements.
  GAO-11-258, January 28.
• http//www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-258

27
Possible Changes GAO Report

• Reviewed 3 States, 3 Districts in each

28
General Rule- 1120A(c)

• An LEA may receive Title I Part A funds only if
  it uses state and local funds to provide services
  in Title I schools that, taken as a whole, are at
  least comparable to the services provided in
  non-Title I schools.
• If all are Title I schools, all must be
  substantially comparable

29
GAO Report - Possible Changes

• Districts commonly use student teacher ratios
  but other factors drive resource allocation
• Weakness in oversight by States

30
GAO Report - Possible Changes

• Changes in requirements would drive more to
  some Title I schools but difficult to implement
  
• Challenges
• Union contracts
• Teacher seniority rights

31
GAO Report - Possible Changes

• Use of per pupil expenditures by school

32
Race to the Top

• Highly Competitive
• Focus on low(est) performing schools
• Highly structured and detailed
• Incentives () to implement ED priorities
• Secretary Duncan specifically defended the 4 SIG
  turnaround models
• RTT coordinated with SIG

33
Race to the Top

• Eligibility Requirements
• No bar to linking teacher and principal
  evaluation to student achievement (absolute)
• No barriers to Charter Schools (competitive)

34
School Improvement Grants SIG-1003g

• 2 pages in the Law Section 1003g
• Historically not well funded
• ARRA provided 3 billion
• Secretary Duncan issued 86 page guidance document
  February 2011
• http//www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/sigguidance022320
  11.pdf

35
SIG-1003g

• Very prescriptive
• 3 tiers of schools
• 4 intervention models Secretary Duncan defends
  4 models
• SASA team reviews for 2011 to focus only on SIG

36
SIG-RTT Common Elements

• Whole school approach
• All students
• All staff including principals
• Focus on lowest performing schools
• Intense embedded PD

37
Other Reauthorization Issues

• AYP Admin Scrap and Replace
• With college and career readiness
• Benchmark - certainly move to growth model

38
Other Reauthorization Issues

• Failure to make AYP
• Center for Education Policy Study
  http//www.cep-dc.org/cfcontent_file.cfm?Attachmen
  tUsher_FourYearsAYPTrends_121610.pdf
• Districts Failing AYP
• 2006 29
• 2009 36
• Schools Failing AYP
• 2006 29
• 2009 33
• 2013- 2014 SY 100 proficient Required
• Causing sharp increases in target levels

39
Other Reauthorization Issues

• Secretary Duncan
• 82 of schools could fail AYP this year (10-11)

40
Other Reauthorization Issues

• Class size reduction
• Secretary says may not be that important

41
Other Reauthorization Issues

• HQT
• Move to RTT type evaluation based on student
  achievement

42
US ED SASA Monitoring Top Ten Findings in
Frequency

• Private Schools
• Consultation
• Failure to evaluate
• Failure to maintain control
• Contracting
• Student selection
• (not based on poverty!!!)
• Parental Involvement
• 95 of reservation to schools
• Equitable participation
• Parental Involvement
• Choice/SES notifications
• Teacher qualifications

43
Top Ten Findings (cont)

• Fiscal
• comparability
• supplanting
• time and effort
• District Report Cards
• missing elements
• Choice
• options not on website
• State Report Cards
• missing elements

44
Top Ten Findings (cont)

• Parental Notification
• Choice and SES options
• Paraprofessional qualifications
• SES
• Information not on websites

45
IDEA Reauthorization

• Last 2004
• Next ??
• Little movement
• Chairman Klein supports full funding
• McMorris-Rodgers amendment to spending bill undid
  proposed cuts in draft spending bill
• Republican rank and file support?
• May go before ESEA

46
This presentation is intended solely to provide
general information and does not constitute legal
advice or a legal service.  This presentation
does not create a client-lawyer relationship with
Brustein Manasevit, PLLC and, therefore,
carries none of the protections under the D.C.
Rules of Professional Conduct.  Attendance at
this presentation, a later review of any printed
or electronic materials, or any follow-up
questions or communications arising out of this
presentation with any attorney at Brustein
Manasevit, PLLC does not create an
attorney-client relationship with Brustein
Manasevit, PLLC.  You should not take any action
based upon any information in this presentation
without first consulting legal counsel familiar
with your particular circumstances.