2

ESEA Flexibility:An Overview of the NCLB Waiver

Approved for Virginia

August 2012

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Waiver

• Revised accountability system that applies only to the NCLB federal Annual Measureable Objectives (AMOs) benchmarks.

• The AMOs do not apply to Virginia's accreditation standards.

3

4

Purpose of Flexibility

ESEA scheduled for

reauthorization in 2007

Congress failed to

reauthorize

Disproportionate percentage of

schools identified as

underperforming

Flexibility offered to promote reform

and respond to state concerns

5

Flexibility is offered in the following areas...

• Determining annual measurable objectives (AMOs)

• Improvement status and sanctions for divisions and schools that fail to meet AMOs (i.e. Public School Choice, SES, etc.)

• Improvement planning process for divisions not meeting Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) requirements

• Certain restrictions on use of specific federal program funds (i.e. 20% set a side, school improvement grants, etc)

6

In exchange for the waivers, states must submit plans to implement three educational reform principles outlined by the U.S. Department of Education-

1. College and career-ready standards and assessments2. *Differentiated accountability systems3. Teacher and principal evaluation systems *Focus of PowerPoint

Principle 2:Differentiated Supports and

Interventions for Underperforming Schools

7

System of Differentiated Recognition, Accountability,

and Support

8

2012-2013

School Year Implement revised federal accountability requirements

System of Differentiated Recognition, Accountability,

and Support

9

Revised Annual Measurable Objectives for:• All students• Three proficiency gap groups• Other individual subgroups

Schools – Divisions – State

Hispanic students, of one or more races*

Black students, not of Hispanic origin*

System of Differentiated Recognition, Accountability,

and Support

10

Students with DisabilitiesEnglish Language Learners

Economically Disadvantaged

Gap Group 1(unduplicated)

Gap Group 2

Gap Group 3

*to include students with disabilities, English language learners, and economically disadvantaged students

System of Differentiated Recognition, Accountability,

and Support

11

Other individual subgroups:• All students• Students with disabilities• English language learners• Economically disadvantaged students• White students• Asian students

School Report Cards

12

Annual Accreditation Resultsbased on SOA expectations

**Proficiency Gap Group performance in meeting

AMOs or reducing proficiency gaps

**Individual subgroup performance will continue to be reported: All students, white, Asian, students with disabilities, economically

disadvantaged students, English language learners

Annual Measurable Objectivesfor Elementary and Middle Schools

13

1) Meet a test participation rate of 95 percent for reading and mathematics; and

2) Meet AMO targets in reading and mathematics, or reduce failure rate by 10 percent.

All students, proficiency gap groups, and individual subgroups must:

Annual Measurable Objectivesfor High Schools

14

1) Meet a test participation rate of 95 percent for reading and mathematics;

2) Meet AMO targets in reading and mathematics, or reduce failure rate by 10 percent; and

All students, proficiency gap groups, and individual subgroups must:

3) Meet the federal graduation indicator.

State and Division Accountability

• Share the same participation and performance expectations as schools

• Also expected to meet Title III Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) for English learners (ELs):• AMAO 1 – Progress• AMAO 2 – Proficiency• AMAO 3 – Reading and Mathematics

15

AMOs are established based on available data from the following:

Mathematics2011-2012 Revised assessments

Reading2010-11 Assessments(will be adjusted after administration of revised 2012-13 assessments)

Newly Established AMOs

16

*The new Math AMOs will be readdressed at this month’s state Board of Education meeting (Sept 27) and revisions are expected to be made

New group size will move from 50 students to 30 students

Reward, Priority, and Focus Schools

• Recognition will be provided to reward schools

• Supports and interventions will be provided to priority and focus schools

• Monitor and support schools that do not meet AMOs

17

18

Reward Schools• High performing, High Progress

• Virginia Index of Performance• National and State Title I Distinguished Schools• Blue Ribbon Schools

Priority Schools• 5% of state’s Title I schools (36 total)

• Low reading and math performance of “all students”• Federal graduation rates• Failure to meet 95% participation rate in reading

and/or math for 3 consecutive years

Focus Schools• 10% of state’s Title I schools (72 total)

• 10% of other non-priority schools having highest Proficiency gap points or

• Not meeting 95% participation rate

In Summary…

19

FOCUS STATUS:Based on reading and mathematics performance of

Proficiency Gap Groups

PRIORITY STATUS: Based on reading and mathematics performance

and graduation rates for All Students

IMPROVEMENT PLAN:Any school not identified as priority or focus with a subgroup

missing one or more AMO(s)

(All students, proficiency gap groups, or other individual subgroups)