No Child or Educator Left Behind
description
Transcript of No Child or Educator Left Behind
![Page 1: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
No Child or Educator Left Behind
January 29, 2003
![Page 2: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
WelcomeWhy Are You Here?
Welcome to Chicago … Why did you come? What is the No Child Left Behind
Act of 2001? What do you know about it?
![Page 3: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
![Page 4: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
So Many Acronyms So Little Time…
![Page 5: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Origins of NCLB Federal Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA) first enacted in 1965.
Periodic reauthorization by Congress has occurred, with the last one prior to NCLB being in 1994.
![Page 6: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
NCLB in Illinois
Finding Balance
![Page 7: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
NCLB This is the Federal Law (PL 107-110)
Signed into law January 8, 2002
Addresses complex issues.
Interpretations will be numerous.
Court challenges will likely occur.
Be prepared for major changes!!!
![Page 8: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
The Illinois Vision
The vision of the Illinois State Board of Education is that public schools will enable all students to succeed.
ISBE identified three priorities that are considered critical to meeting the vision for Illinois education. Eliminating the Achievement Gap Eliminating the Educator Gap – Quantity and Quality Eliminating the Funding Gap
The priority of the state board will be focused on guiding policy to accomplish the elimination of these gaps by addressing the 5 goals of NCLB.
![Page 9: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
![Page 10: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Five Goals
Achievement
Limited English Proficient
Highly Qualified Teachers
Safe Schools
Graduation
To achieve the 5 goals of NCLB, Illinois will focus on 3 previously identified GAPS.
Identified Gaps
Achievement Gap
Educator Gap
Funding Gap
![Page 11: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Key Dates for Illinois
January 2002
Fall 2002
Winter 2002-03
Spring 2003
Fall 2004
2003-04
2005-06
2007-2008
![Page 12: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Illinois School Code State laws must change to meet the requirements
and interpretations of NCLB.
Although most requirements currently apply only to Title I funded schools,
NCLB requires a single state accountability system… so…
Expect legislation in 2003
Illinois Public Act 92-604 has already been amended to address NCLB.
![Page 13: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Illinois Public Act 92-604 amends the School Code to align with NCLB
Effective immediately … NAEP*…all schools selected by USDE must participate
Report Card…will be made available on district web sites or upon request
Bilingual Education Notice…notifications to families include additional provisions beyond previous state law
Public School Choice…selection parameters now in place
Laws or court orders (e.g., desegregation) cannot be violated. Magnet schools transfers meet existing criteria or as a last resort. Student transfer cannot exceed school enrollment capacity.
*NAEP National Assessment of Education Progress (grades 4 and 8 reading and math)
![Page 14: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Review of the 5 Goals
Achievement
Limited English Proficient
Highly Qualified Teachers
Safe Schools
Graduation
![Page 15: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Performance Goal 1: Achievement
By 2013-14 all students will reach high standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics.
![Page 16: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Measuring Achievement
The Illinois state assessment system will need to be modified to assure testing in at least reading and mathematics for grades 3-8 (by 2005-06).
As of spring 2002, all tests counted!
Prairie State Achievement Exam (PSAE)
Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT)
Illinois Measure of Annual Growth in English (IMAGE)
for limited English proficient students.
Illinois Alternate Assessment (IAA) for students with
disabilities included in AYP for the first time.
![Page 17: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
AYP: Making Adequate Yearly Progress
Baseline for both reading and mathematics are projected to be at 40% meeting/exceeding standards based on 2001 AYP simulation.
All schools will have the same annual target.
Schools under the baseline need to meet the 2003 annual target (in composite and student demographic groups), then progress toward 100% meeting/exceeding standards by 2014.
Schools over the baseline have no required progression rate, but know that the target moves up annually…
![Page 18: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Elements of Making AYP
95% participation by all subgroups (40 as N size) and composite, per school, per district +
Making academic achievement goals + Meeting another academic indicator
High schools: graduation rate threshold Elementary and middle schools: attendance
rate threshold
![Page 19: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
This will apply to all schools in 2003 using disaggregated data!
20022003
20032004
20042005
20052006
20062007
20072008
20082009
20092010
20102011
20112012
20122013
20132014
100%
100%Target
2013 - 2014
20012002
40%
40%Baseline Target -
2002 data
![Page 20: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Illini Plan for Intermediate Goals
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
An
nu
al T
arg
et
Illini 40 40 42 45 50 56 63 70 77 84 90 95 100
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
![Page 21: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Minimal Size of Subgroup
States must set the size of the group in order to States must set the size of the group in order to
“…“…yield statistically reliable information…”yield statistically reliable information…”
States must produce a rationale for the selected “minimal size.” States must produce a rationale for the selected “minimal size.”
Using 40 for subgroups and 10 as minimum for reportingUsing 40 for subgroups and 10 as minimum for reporting
Low income status +Students with disabilities +Limited-English proficient +
Race/ethnicity 5 groups
![Page 22: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
ReadingReadingReadingReading
MathMath
AYP is determinedAYP is determined
by making it over all 18 hurdles by making it over all 18 hurdles
(9 hurdles for reading and 9 for (9 hurdles for reading and 9 for math) math)
by disaggregation of data.by disaggregation of data.
Composite
Composite
AmericanIndian
AmericanIndian
Asian
Asian
Black
Black
White
White
Hispanic
Hispanic
Students withDisabilities
Students withDisabilities
LowIncome
LowIncome
LEP
LEP
![Page 23: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
“Safe Harbor”
Safe Harbor “Safe Harbor” allows for schools to avoid being identified as “not meeting” the achievement benchmark as identified by
NCLB. Even if a school does not make AYP in the composite or any student demographic group, it can fulfill its progress
requirement per group by:
Decreasing by 10% the proportion of students who do not meet/exceed standards
AND
maintain or raise the graduation rate (for high schools)
OR maintain or improve attendance rates (for elementary/middle schools)
![Page 24: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
2001-2002 ISAT Reading - Grade 3
75.7
33.8
46.1
74.2
39.9
62.4
76.1
34.0
48.1
74.4
40.3
62.2
0
20
40
60
80
100
White, Non-Hispanic
Black, Non-Hispanic
Hispanic Not LowIncome
Low Income All
Per
cen
t M
eets
+ E
xcee
ds
2001 2002
![Page 25: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
72.3
32.037.2
70.5
35.6
58.7
72.6
33.440.5
71.4
37.4
59.1
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
White, Non-Hispanic
Black, Non-Hispanic
Hispanic Not LowIncome
Low Income All
Per
cen
t M
eets
+ E
xcee
ds
2001 2002
2001-2002 ISAT Reading - Grade 5
![Page 26: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
76.4
40.747.7
74.3
43.9
65.6
76.8
48.8 51.0
75.2
50.0
68.0
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
White, Non-Hispanic
Black, Non-Hispanic
Hispanic Not LowIncome
Low Income All
Perc
ent M
eets
+ E
xcee
ds
2001 2002
2001-2002 ISAT Reading - Grade 8
![Page 27: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Achievement Gaps
2002 PSAE Math
![Page 28: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
PSAE Reading - Students with Disabilities
% Meets and Exceeds
Students with Disabilities
Students w/out Disabilities
![Page 29: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Adequate Yearly Progress Accountability School Improvement Status (Federal) and System of Support (Illinois) Schools are identified as needing school improvement (School
Improvement I) and placed on Academic Early Warning List (AEWL) if they: Fail to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Are recipients of any Title I funding Continue to serve the same grade levels
After 2 consecutive years of no improvement, these schools join the Illinois System of Support (School Improvement II).
![Page 30: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Illinois Proposed Single Accountability System: School Improvement/Sanctions
State Academic Early Warning List Level 1
Misses AYP for 2 years
Federal School Improvement 1 Status
State Academic Early Warning List Level 2
Misses AYP for 3 years
Federal School Improvement 2 Status
State Academic Watch List
Misses AYP for 4 years
Federal Corrective Action Status
State Intervention Status
Misses AYP for 5 years
Federal Restructuring Status
Revised School Improvement Plans approved by local board
External Support Team
School & District Analysis
District/State Performance Agreement
Optional: Extended Day/Year Programs
Revised School Improvement Plans approved by local board and Regional Office of Education
External Support Team
School & District Analysis
District/State Performance Agreement
Optional: Extended Day/Year Programs
Revised School Improvement Plans approved by local board, Regional Office of Education and ISBE
School Improvement Panel appointed by State Superintendent
School & District Analysis
District/State Performance Agreement
Optional: Extended Day/Year Programs
Additionally for Title I schools:
•Classify the school as a charter school OR
•Replace principal and staff OR
•Select an outside management entity OR
•State takeover and management
In addition, Title I schools must Offer
School Choice
In addition, Title I schools must offer
School Choice
Supplemental Educational Services
In addition, Title I schools must offer
School Choice Supplemental Educational Services
Options for Title I schools also include:Extended school day/year and/orIncentives for HQ teachers and/orExternal curriculum modifications
Moderate Support
Intensive Support
•Regional Superintendent removes local school board OR
•State Superintendent appoints an Independent Authority to operate school or district
•State Board non-recognizes school or district, dissolving the entity OR
•State Superintendent reassigns pupils and administrative staff
![Page 31: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
What is the Illinois System of Support?
ISBE assistance to identified schools and districts:
School improvement planning
External support and partnerships
Additional funding and resources
Using scientifically-based research and proven practices for:
increasing student achievement
raising teacher quality
parent involvement
instructional leadership
allocating resources
![Page 32: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
ILLINOIS SINGLE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTABILITYCOMPLIANCE ACCOUNTABILITY
(Inputs)
PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY
(Outcomes)
School Code Requirements/ Regulations
Illinois Learning Standards
Monitoring
Annual Assurances
Full Compliance
Full Recognition
Incomplete Compliance
Pending Recognition
Probationary Recognition
Non-Recognition
State Assessments
Meeting AYP CriteriaNot Meeting AYP Criteria
State & Federal RewardsAcademic Early Warning List
Academic Watch List
Non-Recognition
![Page 33: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Illinois Proposed Single Accountability System: School Rewards/Recognition
PROGRESS RECOGNITIONAll Student Groups Meet AYP Requirements in Reading and
Mathematics
Public Reporting of Progress Attainment
Regulatory Flexibility
PERFORMANCE RECOGNITION>X% of student test scores
meet or exceed state standards for all student groups
for all tested subjects
DISTINGUISHED SCHOOLS RECOGNITION
•Title I school with year’s highest % of students reaching reading and
math proficiency•Title I school that made the year’s
most progress in closing achievement gaps in reading and
math across all student groups
Public Recognition
Established as a model school for
specific instructional strategies
State Board Showcase School
SPECIAL PROGRAM RECOGNITIONPrograms show measurable positive
results for students; e.g.,•Early Childhood
•Attendance•Truancy/Dropout Prevention
•Substance Abuse•Violence Prevention•Extended Day/Year
Public Reporting
Established as a model school for specific
program(s)
Public Reporting
School Banner
Regulatory Flexibility
THOSE WHO EXCEL RECOGNITIONSignificant closure of achievement gaps
among student groups ORExceeds AYP Targets
Public Reporting
Monetary Award for Instructional Use
BLUE RIBBON SCHOOLS RECOGNITION
•Schools having at least 40% of students from disadvantaged backgrounds that dramatically
improve reading and mathematics to high levels
•Schools whose students, regardless of background, achieve in the top 10% in reading and mathematics
STATE FEDERAL
Public Recognition
Established as a national model
school
![Page 34: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
District Accountability and AYP (never used in Illinois before)
All school information aggregated at district level
95% participation Disaggregated data (so may be subgroups
at district level while not at school level) Achievement information Use of additional indicator Use of safe harbor
![Page 35: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
35
National Accountability
363 public schools in Illinois were selected to participate in the 2003 Reading
and Math sample at grades 4 and 8.
Illinois law requires selected schools to participate.
NAEP tests are administered to a sample of students (approximately 64) in
each participating school.
US Department of Education will use State NAEP data to verify the results of
statewide assessments.
NAEP is administrated by Federal Contractors from January 27 – March 7.
Chicago participates in District NAEP.
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard
Participation in NAEP(National Assessment of Educational Progress)
![Page 36: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
36
Performance Goal 2: LEP
All LEP students will become proficient in English and reach high academic standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics.
![Page 37: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
37
LEP Requirements New Testing Requirements
LEP students who have attended school in US for three consecutive years and who participate in a language instruction program must be tested in English in reading and language arts. (Individual waivers will be allowed for students for up to two years after the initial three year period if special circumstances exist)
New Notice for Parents of LEP Detailed parental notification and documentation (with
the application for funding forms)
![Page 38: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
38
Performance Goal 3: Highly Qualified Teachers
By 2005-06 all students will be taught by highly qualified teachers.
Quality Educator Issues Title II/Part A
![Page 39: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
39
“The Teacher Effect Makes All Other Differences Pale
In Comparison “
Williams Sanders
![Page 40: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
40
All Talk: No ActionEducation Trust, August 2002
The amount of out-of-field teaching in the nation and states remains unacceptably high; no progress nationally from 1993-94 to 1999-2000 to reduce this amount. Classes in high poverty and high minority schools are much more likely to be assigned to a teacher lacking minimal academic qualifications in the subject area.High schools have unacceptably high rates of out-of-field teaching in core subjects.There is a significant problem in the middle grades in terms of teacher assignment and out-of-field teaching.The rates for out-of-field teacher assignments are particularly high in math.
![Page 41: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
41
Criteria on Highly Qualified Staff
Funding Source Location Duties
![Page 42: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
42
Highly Qualified Teachers--Funding Title I Teachers
Those teaching core academic subjects, teaching in a program supported by Title I funds, and hired after the first day of 2002-2003 school year must be highly qualified.
Targeted Assistance Schools Schoolwide Schools
All Teachers (regardless of funding source) By the end of 2005-2006 school year, all teachers
must be highly qualified.
![Page 43: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
43
Highly Qualified Teachers--Location
Title I Teachers Those teaching core academic subjects, teaching in a
program supported by Title I funds, and hired after the first day of 2002-2003 school year must be highly qualified.
Targeted Assistance Schools Schoolwide Schools
All Teachers (regardless of funding source) By the end of 2005-2006 school year, all teachers
must be highly qualified.
![Page 44: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
44
Highly Qualified Teachers--Duties
“…Those teaching core academic subjects…"
Reading or English LAMathematics
ScienceForeign Languages
CivicsGovernmentEconomics
ArtsHistory
Geography
![Page 45: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
45
Highly Qualified Teacher Issues
What we know: Teachers holding only Transitional Bilingual or Substitute certificates do not meet highly qualified definition.
ISBE is seeking further guidance from USDE on definition of highly qualified as it relates to middle school and special education teachers.
Once guidance is received, ISBE and ROEs will facilitate district training to identify highly qualified teachers.
![Page 46: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
46
Parental Notification Requirements
Beginning with 2002-2003 school year, districts receiving Title I funds must notify parents they have the right to request information on the professional qualifications of teachers.
Schools receiving Title I funds must provide timely notice to parents if a student is assigned for four (4) or more consecutive weeks to a teacher who is not highly qualified.
![Page 47: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
47
Suggestions for Notification
Include information on how the teacher is qualified;
Include information on NCLB timeline requirements—2005-2006;
Include information on how the school will assist teachers in becoming highly qualified;
Include information on why teacher was assigned to position.
![Page 48: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
48
Professional Development Requirements
State and districts receiving funds must ensure that increased numbers of teachers receive high quality professional development each year.
ISBE will align professional development provider evaluations to USDE/NCLB definition of professional development.
One-day or short-term workshops and conferences cannot be considered professional development for NCLB purposes.
![Page 49: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
49
Qualified Paraprofessionalsaraprofessionals The law addresses qualifications, duties and
responsibilities.
Paraprofessionals in programs supported with Title I funds newly hired after January 8, 2002 must meet one of the following 3 criteria:
2 years of post-secondary study at an Institute of Higher Education
An Associate’s degree
A rigorous standard of quality as demonstrated through a formal state or local assessment measuring the ability to assist in the instruction of math, reading and writing or math readiness, reading readiness or writing readiness.
Existing paraprofessionals hired before January 8, 2002 and working in programs supported with Title I funds have until January 8, 2006 to become qualified.
![Page 50: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
50
Latest Paraprofessional News!!!!!
Paraprofessional Assessment Guidance ETS’ ParaPro is acceptable means of meeting
requirements. Local assessment criteria is established. ACT WorkKeys will be considered when evidence
of ‘ability to assist in instruction’ is established. Find the guidance document at ISBE NCLB web
page www.isbe.net/NCLB
![Page 51: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
51
Principal’s Role Principals will have
to verify compliance
Attest annually in writing as to whether the school is in compliance or not
![Page 52: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
52
For More Information www.isbe.net/nclb www.isbe.net/teachers www.isbe.net/recertification www.isbe.net/profdevelopment www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/index.html Certification/Testing: 1-800-845-8749 Certificate Renewal: 1-866-238-2738 Professional Preparation: 1-217-782-4330
![Page 53: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
53
Performance Goal 4: Safe Schools
All students will be educated in learning environments that are safe, drug free, and conducive to learning.
![Page 54: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
54
Unsafe School Choice Option “Persistently Dangerous” is addressed by ISBE policy right now.
Legislation may be required. Students may exercise their choice option and transfer under the
“persistently dangerous” school provision when: Violence related expulsions are greater than 3%. One or more students have been expelled for gun or explosive
device. # of students exercising the choice option is greater than 3%. Any individual student who is a victim of “violent criminal
offense at school” (immediate transfer upon verification of the offense).
![Page 55: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
55
Performance Goal 5: Graduation
All students will graduate from high school.
![Page 56: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
56
Looking Deeper:
Reading First
Special Education
SIP and Data Analysis
Secondary Education
![Page 57: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
57
Reading First Eligible districts are those that have the
greatest percentage or number of 3rd grade students not meeting state standards for reading AND have the greatest % or # of students eligible for Title I, Basic.
Funds of $50,000-175,000 per school for the initial year, and then diminishing over time.
Focus on K-3
![Page 58: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
58
Students with Disabilities
IDEA is being reauthorized at this time… Student – all public school children will be
tested, including students with disabilities. The % of students with disabilities
participating in state assessments is increasing.
IMAGE and IAA results were included in the calculations of AYP in 2002.
![Page 59: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
59
Federal Funding Sources
Titles I, II, IV and V
21st Century Community Learning Community
Rural Education
Comprehensive School Reform and Title I Accountability
Community Service Grant
![Page 60: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
60
Federal $$$ To IllinoisTitle I up $67.6 M over prior year, to $434.4 MReading First at $32.8 M (statewide) new21st Century at $12.5 M (statewide*) newClass Size $/Eisenhower $ per se (-$85.7 M)Title II - Teacher Quality at $115.5MState Assessment Funds at $12.3 M newEducational Technology Grants up to $25.7 MUrgent School Repair (none now, -$42.6 M)IDEA up $55 M over the prior year, to $336 MTotal increase in federal $ over last year: $222.8 MEarmarks to LEAs to help with specific achievement gapsGRAND TOTAL IN ALL NCLB FUNDS NOW AT $800 M!!!
NO NEW APPROPRIATION YET
![Page 61: No Child or Educator Left Behind](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062809/568158c1550346895dc60b9e/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Resource Updates
ISBE Home Page – http://www.isbe.net
ISBE No Child Left Behind Page – http://www.isbe.net/nclb
ISBE No Child Left Behind e-mail – [email protected]
USDE home page- http://www.ed.govNewsletter: THE ACHIEVER
ROE/ ISC