Education Commission of the States • 700 Broadway, Suite 1200 • Denver, CO 80203-3460 • 303.299.3600 • Fax: 303.296.8332 • www.ecs.org

Education Trust (Ed Trust)
Summary of Recommendations
NCLB Reauthorization

To better inform the national debate on No Child Left Behind (NCLB) reauthorization, ECS collected and synthesized recommendations by national organizations to improve the federal law.

ECS' database is organized around 16 issue areas that captured most recommendations. Some organizations did not offer recommendations for all issues, at least according to our analysis. And several recommendations appear more than once since they applied to multiple issue areas.

The summary Education Trust's (Ed Trust) original recommendations are listed in this report. Please see the main database page for additional reports.

Highlights
Issues addressed: 10 of 16
Adequate Yearly Progress; Assessment, Standards and Curriculum; Capacity Building, Innovation and Research & Development; Consequences and Interventions; Data Systems and Reporting; Finance; High Schools; Other Programs; School Leadership; and Teaching Quality.

Issues not addressed: 6 of 16
Early Childhood; English Language Learners; Safe Schools; Students with Disabilities; Supplemental Education Services; and Miscellaneous/Overarching.

Areas of emphasis:
Funding; Teaching Quality; Adequate Yearly Progress; Consequences and Interventions; and Data Systems and Reporting.

Source:
Education Trust Recommendations for No Child Left Behind Reauthorization (April 2007)


Visit ECS' Database on NCLB Reauthorization main page for more information, explanations and access to organizations' original reports. Please note that ECS plans to expand the database as more information becomes available.

Database Last Updated: July 2007
 
This database was created and compiled by Mary Fulton, ECS policy analyst.
For questions and comments: 303.299.3679 or mfulton@ecs.org
NCLB Reauthorization : Education Trust (Ed Trust)
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
AYP 1 - Summary of Recommendation Consider disaggregated high school graduation rates as AYP indicator equal with achievement indicators.
AYP 2 - Summary of Recommendation Require high schools/districts with graduation rates of less than 90% to increase overall rates and reduce gaps between groups.  
AYP 3 - Summary of Recommendation Provide options to measure AYP, including growth models and college- and career-ready level standards. Require states to adopt subgroup “n” size no greater than 30 and confidence intervals no greater than 95%.
AYP 4 - Summary of Recommendation Require states with high discrepancies of students scoring proficient on statewide tests vs. NAEP to increase by 50% the percentage of students reaching “advanced/exceeds proficient” level on state assessments by 2014.
AYP 5 - Summary of Recommendation Allow states to use growth models for AYP, but require states to have sophisticated data systems, stable assessment systems, student progress targets and comprehensive high school assessments. 
AYP 6 - Summary of Recommendation Allow states to use achievement of college- and career-ready standards as alternative measure for AYP as long as states meet several specified requirements. States that raise these standards would be allowed to adjust AYP timelines and targets.
Assessment, Standards and Curriculum (ASC)
ASC 1 - Summary of Recommendation Require Congress to create $750 million Curriculum Development Fund for states to develop high quality curriculum materials, provide professional development around curriculum and create assessments based on curriculum.
ASC 2 - Summary of Recommendation Continue Congressional support to improve quality of state assessments, including for ELL students and students with disabilities; create classroom assessments tied to state standards; and design college- and career- ready assessments.
ASC 3 - Summary of Recommendation Allow states to use achievement of college- and career-ready standards as alternative measure for AYP as long as states meet several specified requirements. States that raise these standards would be allowed to adjust AYP timelines and targets.
Capacity Building, Innovation and Research & Development (CIRD)
CIRD 1 - Summary of Recommendation Increase school improvement set-aside to 20% (from 5%) if states match and devote the amount to increase their capacity to assist struggling schools, including contracts with non-profit providers.
Consequences and Interventions (CI)
CI 1 - Summary of Recommendation Increase school improvement funding and require that 70% of these federal and state funds target schools “In Need of Comprehensive Improvement.”
CI 2 - Summary of Recommendation Require that, within three years, districts close gaps between state and local funds provided to schools “In Need of Comprehensive Improvement” and average funding for non-Title I schools.
CI 3 - Summary of Recommendation Increase school improvement set-aside to 20% (from 5%) if states match and devote the amount to increase their capacity to assist struggling schools, including contracts with non-profit providers.
CI 4 - Summary of Recommendation Create differentiated consequences for schools based on type and percentage of students that miss AYP targets. "In Need of Comprehensive Improvement” and "In Need of Focused Improvement” categories would include different requirements, timelines and sanctions.



CI 5 - Summary of Recommendation Revise current NCLB school improvement plan process and require a Comprehensive Improvement Time Line for schools that do not made AYP in overall student category or for group(s) that represent 50% or more of school enrollment.
  • Year 1: Develop comprehensive improvement plan
  • Year 2: Implement plan and report progress. Schools given flexibility with staffing and professional development
  • Year 3: Parents given priority to transfer their children from schools in need of improvement
  • Year 4: Improvement plan implementation continues
  • Year 5: Comprehensive Restructuring plan developed. The “other” choice in current law eliminated
  • Year 6: Comprehensive Restructuring plan implemented.
CI 6 - Summary of Recommendation

Revise current NCLB school improvement plan process and require a Focused Improvement Time Line for schools that do not make adequate yearly progress (AYP) for student groups representing less than 50% of enrollment.

  • Year 1: Develop a Focused Improvement plan
  • Year 2, 3 and 4: Implement Focused Improvement plan and issue annual progress reports
  • Year 5: Develop Focused Restructuring
  • Year 6: Implement Focused Restructuring plan
  • Year 7: Devote 75% of Title I funds to extended day programs for student groups that are not proficient.
Data Systems and Reporting (DSR)
DSR 1 - Summary of Recommendation Create grants for state longitudinal data systems that would incorporate the Data Quality Campaign's ten elements. Progress toward such a system could determine a state's ability to use growth models for AYP, apply for grants and receive full funding under NCLB.

DSR 2 - Summary of Recommendation Require states to report annually on progress of developing the statewide longitudinal education data system proposed by Education Trust.
DSR 3 - Summary of Recommendation Require states to report additional teacher qualification, distribution and attrition information for districts with highest and lowest minority and low-income student enrollment. Require annual reports of district/school needs for qualified teachers, actions to close teacher quality gaps and efforts to measure teacher effectiveness.
DSR 4 - Summary of Recommendation Require districts to publish, on school report cards, the amount by which state and local funding for Title I schools is below district average. Require districts to publish plans for ensuring equitable school-to-school funding within three years.
DSR 5 - Summary of Recommendation

Require states that choose growth models for AYP to include the following information on all level of report cards:

  • Overall percentage of students attaining and on trajectory toward proficiency
  • Percentage of students in each group attaining and on trajectory toward proficiency.
DSR 6 - Summary of Recommendation Require states and districts to annually publish overall graduation rates and goals and for each student group for all districts or high schools.
Early Childhood Education (ECE)
ECE 1 - Summary of Recommendation No recommendations identified for this issue.
English Language Learners (ELL)
ELL 1 - Summary of Recommendation No recommendations identified for this issue.
Funding Issues (FI)
FI 1 - Summary of Recommendation Prohibit transfer of Title II funds for teacher and principal quality to other Titles under NCLB.
FI 2 - Summary of Recommendation Require, within five years, districts participating in Title I to show that non-federal funds (including teacher salaries) are equitably distributed across schools. Districts must report funding gaps until parity is achieved and ensure schools in need of improvement receive their fair share of funding.

FI 3 - Summary of Recommendation Require districts to only allocate actual expenses to Title I budgets, including teacher salaries.
FI 4 - Summary of Recommendation Expand Education Finance Incentive Grant (EFIG) Program to encourage and reward equitable state education funding policies. Grants also should reflect state effort/capacity and regional cost of education.
FI 5 - Summary of Recommendation Focus Title II funds on high poverty schools, divided equally between district and principal-led efforts to improve teacher effectiveness.
FI 6 - Summary of Recommendation Increase school improvement funds and require that 70% of these federal and state funds target schools “In Need of Comprehensive Improvement.”
FI 7 - Summary of Recommendation Require that, within three years, districts close gaps between state and local funds provided to schools “In Need of Comprehensive Improvement” and average funding for non-Title I schools.
FI 8 - Summary of Recommendation Target 50% of new Title I funds at high schools and use 50% of proposed Curriculum Development Fund for high school level materials.
FI 9 - Summary of Recommendation Require districts to publish, on school report cards, the amount by which state and local funding for Title I schools is below district average. Require districts to publish plans for ensuring equitable school-to-school funding within three years.
High Schools (HS)
HS 1 - Summary of Recommendation Target 50% of new Title I funds at high schools and use 50% of proposed Curriculum Development Fund for high school level materials.
HS 2 - Summary of Recommendation Require states to use uniformly calculated graduation rates and to identify percent of students graduating within four and five years. Require states to report accuracy of graduation-rate data and calculations to Education Department.
HS 3 - Summary of Recommendation Require high schools and districts with group graduation rates of less than 90% to increase four- and five-year overall graduation rates. Growth targets must raise overall graduation rates and reduce gaps between groups.
Other Programs (OP)
OP 1 - Summary of Recommendation Provide new tools for parents to become more engaged in their children's education, including: access to additional school data, decision making role in use of SES funds and the ability to enforce their rights under NCLB.
Safe Schools (SS)
SS 1 - Summary of Recommendation No recommendations identified for this issue.
School Leadership (SL)
SL 1 - Summary of Recommendation Allow principals in low-performing schools to refuse “involuntary” teacher transfers.
Students with Disabilities (SWD)
SWD 1 - Summary of Recommendation No recommendations identified for this issue.
Supplemental Education Services (SES)
SES 1 - Summary of Recommendation No recommendations identified for this issue.
Teaching Quality (TQ)
TQ 1 - Summary of Recommendation Require states to report additional teacher qualification, distribution and attrition information for districts with highest and lowest minority and low-income student enrollment. Require annual reports of district/school needs for qualified teachers, actions to close teacher quality gaps and efforts to measure teacher effectiveness.
TQ 2 - Summary of Recommendation Require districts to use Title II funds to address inequities in teacher distribution and support principals' efforts to boost teacher quality.
TQ 3 - Summary of Recommendation Prohibit transfer of Title II funds for teacher and principal quality to other Titles under NCLB.
TQ 4 - Summary of Recommendation Close High Objective Uniform State System of Evaluation (HOUSSE) loophole by clarifying that this provision applies to veteran, not novice, teachers.
TQ 5 - Summary of Recommendation Require states and districts to assess distribution of qualified teachers across schools, develop plans and goals to address inequities and publish progress reports.
TQ 6 - Summary of Recommendation Withhold Title II funds from states not making progress toward equitable distribution of teachers and require distribution of funds to schools/districts with most acute needs.
TQ 7 - Summary of Recommendation Allow principals in low-performing schools to refuse “involuntary” teacher transfers.
TQ 8 - Summary of Recommendation Encourage states to use student achievement measures to evaluate teacher effectiveness. Establish Incentive Fund to provide state grants for teacher evaluation, professional development, assignment and performance-based compensation initiatives.
TQ 9 - Summary of Recommendation Focus Title II funds on high poverty schools, divided equally between district and principal-led efforts to improve teacher effectiveness.
Miscellaneous/Overarching (Misc.)
Misc. 1 - Summary of Recommendation No recommendations identified for this issue.



© 2008 by the Education Commission of the States (ECS). All rights reserved. ECS is a nonprofit interstate compact that helps state leaders shape education policy.

To request permission to excerpt part of this publication, either in print or electronically, please fax a request to the attention of the ECS Communications Department, 303.296.8332 or e-mail ecs@ecs.org.

Helping State Leaders Shape Education Policy