Slide 1

Whats Happening in Washington?!CEC-CAN Summer Policy Series July 20131Todays AgendaESEA Reauthorization & Waivers

Update on Legislative & Policy Proposals

Next Generation of Assessments

Teacher Evaluation

Special Education Funding Outlook

223

3

444 Representatives are past educators7 Senators are past educatorsWhat did we learn from the election??? We are educators always looking to learn right?? 42007200820092010201120122013?

What a difference 7 years makes!!

Its been seven years since ESEA/NCLB has been up for Congressional action. A lot has changed in seven years just think about it in terms of a childs growth!!5CECs ESEA Guiding Principles6

Supporting a Well Prepared Successful Educational Workforce

Improving Outcomes for All Children Through the Collaboration of All Educators

Strengthening Assessment and Accountability for ALL

Meaningful Systems that Encourage Collaborative and Supportive Measurement, Evaluation, and Reward of Professional Performance

Developing Improved Strategies that Create Positive School Reform

Meeting the Unique Needs of Gifted Learners

Providing Full Funding to Execute the Goals and Provisions of ESEA

CECs guiding principles serve as the foundation for our ESEA recommendations and are the lens that we review all ESEA related proposals. CECs ESEA Reauthorization Recommendations were developed with CEC member feedback and approved by the CEC Board. They were first developed in 2007 and then updated in 2010 to reflect some emerging issues such as pay-for-performance and charter schools. 6

Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN)Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA)

Lots of Talking

7Over the last seven years, since ESEA has been up for reauthorization, there has been lots of talking but little action as a result states and school districts languished in an unworkable system known as AYP

(Sen. Alexander is the highest ranking republican on the Senate Education Committee; Sen. Harkin is the Chairman of the Senate Education Committee )7American Association of Administrators, Policy Insider Oct 2011

8Massive number of schools not meeting AYP which has gotten worse over the years. With Congress dragging its feet the Obama Administration took matters into their own hands !! 9White House Announces Waivers September, 2011

In September 2011, the White House announced it would allow states to submit waivers to some of ESEA/NCLBs most controversial provisions.(see next slide)9ESEA Waivers10Remove 2014 AYP deadline

Funding Flexibility

Changes to Accountability

Flexibility for HQT Plans

Some of the controversial provisions the waivers are listed here. Obviously, this made it very appealing for states to want a waiver!10114 Conditions:Adopt College & Career Ready StandardsDevelop Assessments that Measure Student GrowthDevelop Differentiated Accountability SystemDevelop Guidelines for Local Teacher and Principal Evaluations Based on Effectiveness

ESEA WaiversBut nothing comes without a price states that requested a waiver would have to abide by four conditions listed here. 1141 States + Washington, DC have waivers

12ESEA Waivers

41 States + DC have been approved4 State applications are pending

Accountability ChangesSuper SubgroupsMonitoring Technical Assistance

1213

What do you know?? Lightening strikes and Congress gets itself in gear132013 House vs. Senate ESEA Bills14

Total Opposites!!During June and July 2013, the House and Senate started to move forward in the ESEA Reauthorization process, using two very different approaches.14Where are we in the legislative process??Passage by House Education CommitteePassage by Senate Education CommitteeSenator Harkin has said publically that he would like to have the full Senate debate and vote on ESEA this fall but it is unknown whether that will actually happen. 15July 19, 2013: Passed House by 221-207 vote; all Democrats and 12 Republicans voted against

Two days of debate18 amendments passed4 amendments defeated4 withdrawnStudent Success Act (HR 5)House Version of ESEACEC Opposed, as did most of the education & disability communities

16

17Student Success Act (HR 5)House Version of ESEAProvisions in Student Success Act (HR 5) CEC Supports Eliminates AYP & 2014 Deadline

Maintains Disaggregation of Subgroup Data

A couple of provisions CEC supported in HR 5.1718CEC Expressed Serious Concerns with Student Success Act (HR 5)

Reduces Accountability for Students with Disabilities Eliminates Highly Qualified Teacher Provisions Lacks focus on Professional Development Reduces, Caps and Eliminates Funding; Locks into place sequestration Increases Privatization Ignores High-Ability Students

Student Success Act (HR 5)House Version of ESEAMany provisions CEC opposed. HR 5 would allow any student with a disability to take an alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards. CEC opposed this provision because it would take us back to the days when students with disabilities were not included in the accountability system, when there was a parallel education system for students with disabilities, and would carve special education out of important education decisions.

Representatives spoke on the House floor about the loopholes in HR 5 for students with disabilities. Rep. Polis (D-CO) said the loopholes in HR 5 for students with disabilities are so large you could drive a bus through them! 18Passed Senate Health, Education, Labor, Pensions (HELP) Committee June 12, 2013

Passed with only Democrat support

Two days of debate and amendmentsStrengthening Americas Schools ActSenate Version of ESEACEC supported with some reservations, as did most of disability community; education community split

1920Provisions in Strengthening Americas Schools Act CEC Supports Focus on early learning for entry ready to learn Encourage equity through greater transparency and fair distribution of resources Limits Use of Alternate Assessment Changes to Accountability System, Focus on Bottom 15%, Low Performing Subgroups, Maintains Subgroup Disaggregation, Student Growth & Performance Targets; Eliminates AYP & 2014 Deadline Early Intervening Services in General Ed, UDL, PBIS Mental Health Supports Includes Key Provisions of CEC-Endorsed, TALENT Act for High-Ability Students

Strengthening Americas Schools ActSenate Version of ESEA2021Provisions in Strengthening Americas Schools Act That Concern CEC

New Requirements without Adequate Resources Accountability System Focus on Bottom 15% of Schools and Only Reporting for Remaining 85% Includes Turnaround Models that Promote Firing of Staff and Other Interventions Overemphasis of Teacher Evaluation from Federal Level Defining Highly Qualified to Include Individuals Still Enrolled in Alternate Route to Certification Programs

Strengthening Americas Schools ActSenate Version of ESEA21Whats Next for ESEA?22

Stay tuned we will need all voices to make sure that students with disabilities and gifts and talents are adequately addressed as the process moves forward. 22Common core state standards & The Future of TestingNew Assessments, Adaptive Assessments, & Racing to the Top2323Race to the Top Assessment Contest24Aligns to the Common Core State Standards1% tests are for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities99% test are for all other students (including students who were previously taking the alternate assessment based on modified achievement standards AKA 2% test)24Two Consortia: 1%Dynamic Learning Maps Alternate Assessment Program (DLM) Kansas University $22 million13 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.

25FYI:

Jan. 12, 2012Contact:Mike Krings, KU News Service,785-864-8860Dynamic maps key to improving assessments for students with disabilitiesMore InformationCenter for Educational Testing and EvaluationDynamic Learning MapsLAWRENCE The University of Kansas has made progress in developing a new generation of assessments for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. The $22 million grant, the largest in KU history, was given to the Center for Educational Testing and Evaluation in 2010 by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Training Programs.The grant was awarded to fund development of the Dynamic Learning Maps Alternative Assessment System, known as DLM. Thirteen states are participating in the project: Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin.Set for large-scale use during the 2014-2015 school year, the DLM alternate assessment system will let students with significant cognitive disabilities show what they know in ways that traditional multiple-choice tests cannot. The system is designed to more validly measure what students with significant cognitive disabilities know and can do. The assessment system is structured around a learning map, which models many potential pathways students may take on their path to gaining academic content.The map is populated by a connected network of thousands of sequenced learning targets, or skills, that students need to learn by the end of high school. It is dynamic because it selects test items and tasks for a student based on that students previous responses. It is a connected network because skills build upon other skills, and students need to demonstrate prerequisite knowledge and ability before advancing from one skill to another.The center is ahead of schedule, having developed seven grade levels of the learning map in the first year of the grant period. As part of the maps development, educators from across the country examined the map during a two-day content review in September and gave it overwhelming praise.It [the learning map] is so intricate because you can see the pathways and how some individual might go one way, and another individual might go another way, said Jeff Crawford, an educator from Washington. The learning map is unbelievable. Its very complex and very detailed.The learning map itself is very helpful for teachers in learning alternative routes for students to end up at the same destination, said Terri Portice of Michigan.The map will undergo two more reviews by special education and cognitive psychology experts in 2012 and then be validated through the extensive collection of student data in the 13 participating states.The next stage of DLM work, development of instructionally relevant item types that go beyond traditional multiple-choice items, has already begun. Historically, tests have been designed to measure skills efficiently, but in the face of high-stakes accountability systems, many teachers have begun teaching to tests. DLM has been working with master teachers to design test items that model good instructional activities so that if teachers do teach to the test, the tests will be worth teaching to. Prototypes of the new item types are under development and will be tried out with students and presented to teachers for feedback over the next few months.DLM is a comprehensive assessment system grounded in research evidence and emerging theory about assessments for students with significant cognitive disabilities. It breaks new ground in universal design for assessment, learning map development, instructionally embedded assessment and technology-based, instructionally relevant item types. The projectwebsiteprovides more information.A learning map is a network of sequenced learning targets. Often, we think of learning as one skill building on another single skill. A dynamic learning map, by comparison, shows a learning landscape in which multiple skills are related to many other skills. Dynamic learning maps not only show the relationships between skills but also show multiple learning pathways. Instead of assuming that all children learn a skill in the same way, allowing for multiple pathways recognizes that there are alternate ways to learn the same skill. By using dynamic learning maps as the basis for assessments, the DLM system will give teachers a clearer view of each student's knowledge.

25National Center & State Collaborative

19 States: Alaska, Arizona Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana,Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Wyoming

26The National Center and State Collaborative (NCSC) is a project led by five centers and 19 states to build an alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. The goal of the NCSC project is to ensure that students with the most significant cognitive disabilities achieve increasingly higher academic outcomes and leave high school ready for post-secondary options.More

26Assessment Consortia: PARCC27

Computer BasedComputer based is like a computerized version of a pen and paper test.

The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) is a consortium of 19 states plus the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands working together to develop a common set of K-12 assessments in English and math anchored in what it takes to be ready for college and careers. These new K-12 assessments will build a pathway to college and career readiness by the end of high school, mark students progress toward this goal from 3rd grade up, and provide teachers with timely information to inform instruction and provide student support. The PARCC assessments will be ready for states to administer during the 2014-15 school year.

PARCC received an $186 million grant through the U.S. Department of Education'sRace to the Top assessment competitionto support the development and design of the next-generation assessment system. Read the applicationhere.

The PARCC VisionPARCC states have committed to building a K-12 assessment system that:Builds a pathway to college and career readiness for all students,Creates high-quality assessments that measure the full range of the Common Core State Standards,Supports educators in the classroom,Makes better use of technology in assessments, andAdvances accountability at all levels.

PARCC StatesCollectively the states in PARCC educate about 22 million students. The PARCC states include:Arizona,Arkansas,Colorado,District of Columbia,Florida,Illinois,Indiana,Kentucky,Louisiana,Maryland,Massachusetts,Mississippi,New Jersey,New Mexico,New York,Ohio,Oklahoma,Pennsylvania,Rhode Island, andTennessee.

27Assessment Consortia: Smarter Balanced28Computer Adaptive

Computer adaptiveSmarter Balanced is committed to delivering a fully functional assessment system that will be ready for implementation in the 2014-15 school year.

8. How is Smarter Balanced different from current assessments?Smarter Balanced is guided by the belief that a balanced, high-quality assessment systemincluding formative, interim, and summative componentscan improve teaching and learning by providing information and tools for teachers and schools to help students succeed. Timely and meaningful assessment information can offer specific information about areas of performance so that teachers can follow up with targeted instruction, students can better target their own efforts, and administrators and policymakers can more fully understand what students know and can do, in order to guide curriculum and professional development decisions.Smarter Balanced assessments make use of computer adaptive technology, which is more precise and efficient than fixed-form testing. Teachers, principals, and parents can receive results from computerized assessments in weeks, not months. Faster results mean that teachers can use the information from optional interim assessments throughout the school year to differentiate instruction and better meet the unique needs of their students.Smarter Balanced assessments will go beyond multiple-choice questions and include short constructed response, extended constructed response, and performance tasks that allow students to complete an in-depth project that demonstrate analytical skills and real-world problem solving.For more information, download the Smarter BalancedTheory of Action.

28TIMELINE2012-13 School Year: First year pilot/field testing and related research and data collection

2013-14 School Year: Second year pilot/field testing and related research and data collection

2014-15 School Year: Full operational administration of PARCC / Smarter Balances assessments

Summer 2015: Set achievement levels, including college-ready performance levels29Both Consortia have been working on their Accessibility and Accomodations Guidelines. CEC has provided feedback and is currently awaiting the final documents. 29Teacher evaluationIts a New World!!30

30Policymakers: A Shift in FocusHighly QualifiedHighly EffectiveInputsOutputs3131System ComponentsComplex RoleMeasure Evidence-Based PracticeRecognize ProfessionalismIncorporate Research

CECs Position: Components of Special Education Teacher Evaluations32In 32Process: How did we get here?The Obama Administration, with bipartisan support from Congress, included incentives to change teacher evaluation systems in signature education programs like Race to the Top and ESEA Waivers.

CEC convened an expert advisory workgroup to inform its discussion of new teacher evaluation systems. CEC developed preliminary recommendations for its ESEA Reauthorization Recommendations.

CEC worked for over a year with members and experts in the field to draft a Position Statement.Political ContextCEC Work Begins - 2009

CEC Drafts Position - 201233CEC Member & Outside Expert InputTimeline:

9/2011 Board of Directors Approved Concept1/2012 Small Expert Panel Identified Issues/Challenges3/2012 Representative Assembly Commented; CEC Members and Convention Attendees Commented at 2012 Convention Town Hall6/2012 CEC CAN Network Commented; Over 600 CEC Members Commented Online7/2012 PAS Team Developed Draft Position Statement8/2012 Close to 40 National Experts Commented 9/2012 Representative Assembly Commented 10/2012 Board of Directors Approved

34All educators must be included in one evaluation system.

Evaluation systems must identify appropriate professional development opportunities for teachers based on the results of their evaluations.

Evaluations must support continuous improvement.

Evaluation processes and all measures of teacher effectiveness must be open and transparent to the teacher being evaluated.Include Fundamental System-Wide Components37Teacher Evaluation Systems Shall:35Evaluations must clearly identify and be based on a special education teachers 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. Teacher Evaluation Systems Shall:Identify the Complex Role of the Special Education Teacher 3836Evaluations 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 teachers 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 teachers contribution to student growth.

Measure the Use of Evidence-Based Practices39Teacher Evaluation Systems Shall:37CEC Position on Special Education Teacher Evaluation CEC Tools For you!

Teacher Evaluation Toolkit for Special Educators! Visit: www.cec.sped.orgPolicy & Advocacy 38Learn, Understand, Navigate New Teacher Evaluation Systems with the Help of your CEC Colleagues Through this Online Dialog!

Visit: www.cec.sped.org

CEC Tools For you! This is a members-only website that is accessed by visiting CECs homepage: www.cec.sped.org

This online conversation builds on CEC's recently released Position on Special Education Teacher Evaluation intended to help CEC Members understand and navigate the systems by which they are evaluated, how to address the unique challenges they face and highlight the unique skills they as special educators bring to the table in their respective evaluation systems.39Special/Gifted education fundingThe Story of Sequestration

How did Special/Gifted Education Fare in FY 2013?

What to Expect for FY 2014

At Home Advocacy -- August Recess!!

40

3How many of us have seen this constantly increasing calculation telling us the size of the national debt? 41

5In 2011, addressing the debt becomes engulfed in the debate to raise the debt ceiling.

Congress passes and President signs into law the Budget Control Act which says $1.2 Trillion must be cut from budget by either a super committee that decides which programs to cut; or by a process called sequestration whereby every program would be cut by the same amount.

42

The President and Speaker of the House John Boehner tried everything

They played golf together (this picture looks unposed, right?!) They had a beer together They brought in Mr. Friendly, Vice President Biden (thats him with the sunglasses) Not to mention their official conversations.

But nothing could take away from the fact that there are many Members of Congress who were calling for deep budget cuts

43Sequestration Hits744Federal Budget FY 2012

Chart Courtesy of Committee for Education Funding45What does the federal budget as a whole fund? Here is a pie chart that shows you every area that receives money. You can see that Education, is one of the smallest parts of the entire budget.45Funding Cuts Due to Sequestration2013

946Special/Gifted Education Funding Levels in FY 20132013IDEA Part B$10.97 BillionDecrease of $602 MillionIDEA Part BSection 619$353.24 MillionDecrease of $19 MillionIDEA Part C$419.65 MillionDecrease of $23 MillionIDEA Part D$225.14 MillionDecrease of $13 MillionJavits$0SpEd Research$47.30 millionDecrease of $2.5 Million47

Sequestration = Full Funding Plunges to14.5%

114849

4950

50Impact of Sequester Budget Cuts on Jobs May be Exaggerated- March 20, 2013

The Overhyped, Overblown, & Overly Politicized Sequester Fears- May 30, 2013

Sequester Scorecard: A Month Later, Effects Still Up In Air- April 5, 2013

5151Tell CEC How Sequestration/Budget Cuts Are Impacting You! Email: pubpol@cec.sped.org To combat news stories that the impact of sequestration has been exaggerated, please email CEC to share your story about how sequestration/budget cuts are impacting you, your students, your school! Email: pubpol@cec.sped.org 51

Special/Gifted Education Funding Levels in FY 20142014SENATEHOUSE52The process has begun for setting funding levels for FY 2014. But the House and Senate are taking very different approaches. 52Senate Appropriations Committee Votes to Reject Sequestration! IDEA Part B$11.722 BillionIDEA Part BSection 619$371.901 MillionIDEA Part C$462.710 MillionIDEA Part D$237.085 MillionJavits$15 MillionSpEd Research$69.905 millionSpecial/Gifted Education Funding Levels in FY 20142014Pre-sequestration Levels and some increases!53The Senate Appropriations Committee is proposing to increase funding in education programs and the House has yet to put forth its proposal (though all indications are they will propose additional, deep cuts to education programs).

Green shaded boxes indicate proposed increases by the Senate Appropriations Committee.

53

CNN Poll conducted by ORC International during November 16-18, 201254Will Congress Act like Spoiled Children? Or Responsible Adults?54CEC Resources CEC Issue Briefs on Funding and ESEA

CEC's 2014 Federal Outlook for Exceptional Children

Personalized Stories from Your Network!

5555

56CEC Policy Insider Blog

Get the latest special/gifted education news

www.policyinsider.org56@CECAdvocacy

Follow us on Twitter for up to the minute policy updates!

5757Take Action: CECs Legislative Action Center

www.cec.sped.orgChoose: Policy & AdvocacyChoose: Take Action!

5858Thank you!!59CEC Policy Staff

Deb ZieglerKim HymesRose Heller-KaplanAssociate Executive DirectorSenior DirectorProgram AssistantPolicy & AdvocacyPolicy & AdvocacyPolicy & Advocacydebz@cec.sped.org kimh@cec.sped.org rosehk@cec.sped.org59Chart157680563773557251482223

Fiscal Year 12Defense19%Nondefense discretionary(other than education)16%

Sheet1Fiscal Year 12Education57Discretionary Defense680non-defense discretionary (other than education563Social Security773Medicare557Medicaid251Other Mandatory482Interest223

Chart1-2478-727-65-124-620-87-86-129-401

In millionsColumn1

Sheet1Column1Total Dep't. of ED-2478Title I-727Impact Aid-65Teacher Quality-124IDEA Grants-620Career, Tech, Adult-87Student Aid-86Higher Ed-129Head Start-401

Chart17030

SalesHow will Congress Behave about the Fiscal Cliff?

Sheet1SalesSpoiled Children70Responsible Adults30To update the chart, enter data into this table. The data is automatically saved in the chart.