WHAT’S HAPPENING IN
WASHINGTON?!
CEC-CAN Summer Policy Series ▪ July 2013
TODAY’S AGENDA
2
 ESEA Reauthorization & Waivers
 Update on Legislative & Policy Proposals
 Next Generation of Assessments
 Teacher Evaluation
 Special Education Funding Outlook
3
3
7 Senators
are past
educators
44
Representatives
are past
educators
4
2007…2008…2009…2010…2011…2012…2013?
What a difference 7
years makes!!
CEC’S ESEA GUIDING PRINCIPLES
6
• 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
LOTS OF TALKING…
7
Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA)
8
American Association of Administrators, Policy Insider Oct 2011
9
White House Announces Waivers
September, 2011
ESEA WAIVERS
10
– Remove 2014 AYP deadline
– Funding Flexibility
– Changes to Accountability
– Flexibility for HQT Plans
ESEA WAIVERS
11
• 4 Conditions:
– Adopt College & Career Ready
Standards
– Develop Assessments that
Measure Student Growth
– Develop Differentiated
Accountability System
– Develop Guidelines for Local
Teacher and Principal
Evaluations Based on
Effectiveness
ESEA WAIVERS
12
• 41 States +
Washington, DC
have waivers
13
2013 HOUSE VS. SENATE ESEA BILLS
14
Total Opposites!!
WHERE ARE WE IN THE LEGISLATIVE
PROCESS??
President Signs!
Conference Committee Works Out
Differences!
Passage by Full House
of Representatives
Passage by Full
Senate
Passage by
House Education
Committee
Passage by
Senate Education
Committee
Student Success Act (HR 5)
House Version of ESEA
• July 19, 2013: Passed House by 221-207 vote; all Democrats
and 12 Republicans voted against
• Two days of debate
– 18 amendments passed
– 4 amendments defeated
– 4 withdrawn
CEC Opposed, as did most of the
education & disability communities
Student Success Act (HR 5)
House Version of ESEA
17
Provisions in Student Success Act (HR 5) CEC Supports
Eliminates AYP & 2014 Deadline
Maintains Disaggregation of Subgroup Data
Student Success Act (HR 5)
House Version of ESEA
18
CEC 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
Strengthening America’s Schools Act
Senate Version of ESEA
• Passed Senate Health, Education, Labor, Pensions (HELP)
Committee June 12, 2013
• Passed with only Democrat support
• Two days of debate and amendments
CEC supported with some reservations,
as did most of disability community;
education community split
Strengthening America’s Schools Act
Senate Version of ESEA
20
Provisions in Strengthening America’s 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 America’s Schools Act
Senate Version of ESEA
21
Provisions in Strengthening America’s 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
WHAT’S NEXT FOR ESEA?
22
COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS &
THE FUTURE OF TESTING
New Assessments, Adaptive Assessments, & Racing to the Top
23
24
RACE TO THE TOP ASSESSMENT
CONTEST
Next Generation of Assessments
1%
Dynamic
Learning
Maps
1%
National
Center &
State
Collaborative
99%
Smarter
Balanced
Consortia
Aligns to the Common Core State Standards
99%
PARCC
Consortia
TWO CONSORTIA: 1%
25
• Dynamic Learning Maps Alternate
Assessment Program (DLM) – Kansas
University $22 million
– 13 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.
NATIONAL CENTER & STATE
COLLABORATIVE
26
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
ASSESSMENT CONSORTIA: PARCC
27
Computer
Based
28
ASSESSMENT CONSORTIA:
SMARTER BALANCED
Computer
Adaptive
TIMELINE
29
• 2012-13 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 collegeready performance levels
TEACHER EVALUATION
It’s a New World!!
30
POLICYMAKERS: A SHIFT IN FOCUS
31
Highly
Qualified
Highly
Effective
Inputs
Outputs
System Components
Complex Role
Measure EvidenceBased Practice
Recognize Professionalism
Incorporate Research
CEC’s Position: Components of Special
Education Teacher Evaluations
32
PROCESS: HOW DID WE GET HERE?
Political Context
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 Work Begins - 2009
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 Drafts Position - 2012
CEC worked for over a year with members and
experts in the field to draft a Position Statement.
CEC MEMBER & OUTSIDE EXPERT
INPUT
Timeline:
9/2011 – Board of Directors Approved Concept
1/2012 – Small Expert Panel Identified
Issues/Challenges
3/2012 – Representative Assembly Commented;
– CEC Members and Convention Attendees
Commented at 2012 Convention Town Hall
6/2012 – CEC CAN Network Commented;
– Over 600 CEC Members Commented Online
7/2012 – PAS Team Developed Draft Position
Statement
8/2012 – Close to 40 National Experts Commented
9/2012 – Representative Assembly Commented
10/2012 – Board of Directors Approved
TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEMS
SHALL:
Include Fundamental System-Wide Components
• All 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.
37
TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEMS
SHALL :
Identify the Complex Role of the Special Education Teacher
• Evaluations must clearly identify and be based on a special
education teacher’s 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.
38
TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEMS
SHALL:
Measure the Use of Evidence-Based Practices
• Evaluations 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 teacher’s 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 teacher’s contribution to student growth.
39
CEC TOOLS FOR YOU!
Visit:
www.cec.sped.org
Policy & Advocacy
CEC Position on Special
Education Teacher
Evaluation
Teacher Evaluation
Toolkit for Special
Educators!
CEC TOOLS FOR YOU!
Learn, Understand, Navigate New Teacher
Evaluation Systems with the Help of your
CEC Colleagues Through this Online
Dialog!
Visit: www.cec.sped.org
SPECIAL/GIFTED
EDUCATION FUNDING
The Story of Sequestration
How did Special/Gifted
Education Fare in FY
2013?
What to Expect for FY
2014
At Home Advocacy -August Recess!!
3
2010
Congressional
Elections
Bring Fiscal
Conservatives
(Tea Party) to
Washington
August 2011
Budget
Control Act
Cut $1.2
Trillion
November 2011
2013
Super
Committee
Sequestration
Fails!
Takes Effect
Lasts from
(2013-2021)
5
SEQUESTRATION HITS…
20132021
$1.2 Trillion
Cut
2013
• $85 B Cut
• $600 M
from
Special
Education
2014
Cut $36.6 B
from NonDefense
Discretionary
Programs
7
FEDERAL BUDGET FY 2012
Education
2%
Medicaid
7%
Other
Mandatory
13%
Medicare
15%
45
Chart Courtesy of Committee for Education Funding
Interest
6%
Defense
19%
Social Security
22%
Nondefense
discretionary
(other than
education)
16%
2013
Funding Cuts Due to Sequestration
In millions
$0
-$65
-$87
-$124
-$86
-$129
-$401
-$500
-$620
-$727
-$1,000
-$1,500
-$2,000
-$2,500
-$2,478
Total
Dep't. of
ED
Title I
Impact
Aid
Teacher
Quality
IDEA
Grants
Career,
Tech,
Adult
Student
Aid
Higher
Ed
Head
Start
9
2013
Special/Gifted Education Funding
Levels in FY 2013
IDEA Part B
$10.97 Billion
IDEA Part B
Section 619
$353.24 Million
IDEA Part C
$419.65 Million
IDEA Part D
$225.14 Million
Javits
$0
SpEd Research
$47.30 million
Decrease of
$602 Million
Decrease of
$19 Million
Decrease of
$23 Million
Decrease of
$13 Million
Decrease of $2.5
Million
Sequestration = Full
Funding Plunges to
14.5%
49
50
51
Impact 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
Tell CEC How Sequestration/Budget Cuts Are Impacting You!
Email: pubpol@cec.sped.org
51
2014
Special/Gifted Education Funding
Levels in FY 2014
S
E
N
A
T
E
52
H
O
U
S
E
2014
53
Special/Gifted Education Funding
Levels in FY 2014
IDEA Part B
$11.722 Billion
IDEA Part B
Section 619
$371.901 Million
IDEA Part C
$462.710 Million
IDEA Part D
$237.085 Million
Javits
$15 Million
SpEd Research
$69.905 million
Senate
Appropriations
Committee Votes
to Reject
Sequestration!
Pre-sequestration
Levels and some
increases!
54
CNN Poll conducted by ORC
International during
November 16-18, 2012
CEC RESOURCES
• CEC Issue Briefs on Funding and
ESEA
• CEC's 2014 Federal Outlook for
Exceptional Children
• Personalized Stories from Your
Network!
55
56
CEC Policy Insider Blog
Get the latest special/gifted
education news
www.policyinsider.org
57
@CECADVOCACY
Follow us on Twitter for up to the
minute policy updates!
58
TAKE ACTION: CEC’S
LEGISLATIVE ACTION
CENTER
www.cec.sped.org
Choose: Policy & Advocacy
Choose: Take Action!
THANK YOU!!
CEC Policy Staff
Deb Ziegler
Associate Executive Director
Policy & Advocacy
debz@cec.sped.org
59
Kim Hymes
Senior Director
Policy & Advocacy
kimh@cec.sped.org
Rose Heller-Kaplan
Program Assistant
Policy & Advocacy
rosehk@cec.sped.org