Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Education Week: High School Alternatives
the trend is moving in this direction...there may be a new resurgence in interest in these programs in the next year
Education Week: High School Alternatives
Education Week: High School Alternatives
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Top News - Senate bill supports 21st-century skills
We may need to get a copy of these skills into our curriculum.....soon!
Top News - Senate bill supports 21st-century skills
Top News - Senate bill supports 21st-century skills
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Building a Solid Foundation | The New America Foundation
This is not new but it is important for our state to consider....At least by someone.....
Building a Solid Foundation | The New America Foundation
Building a Solid Foundation | The New America Foundation
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
More on National Standards....
I wish we had heard "anything" "something" about this....This will move very fast now that it is out.
46 States, D.C. Plan to Draft Common Education Standards
By Maria GlodWashington Post Staff WriterMonday, June 1, 2009
Forty-six states and the District of Columbia today will announce an effort to craft a single vision for what children should learn each year from kindergarten through high school graduation, an unprecedented step toward a uniform definition of success in American schools.
The push for common reading and math standards marks a turning point in a movement to judge U.S. children using one yardstick that reflects expectations set for students in countries around the world at a time of global competition. Today, each state decides what to teach in third-grade reading, fifth-grade math and every other class. Critics think some set a bar so that students can pass tests but, ultimately, are ill-prepared.
Led by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, the states, including Maryland and Virginia, are aiming to define a framework of content and skills that meet an overarching goal. When students get their high school diplomas, the coalition says, they should be ready to tackle college or a job. The benchmarks would be "internationally competitive."
Once the organizers of the effort agree to a proposal, each state would decide individually whether to adopt it.
The nearly complete support of governors for the effort -- leaders in Texas, Alaska, Missouri and South Carolina are the only ones that have not signed on -- is key. Many Republicans oppose nationally mandated standards, saying schools should not be controlled by Washington. But there is broad support for a voluntary effort that bubbles up from the states.
"This is the beginning of a new day for education in our country," U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan said. "A lot of hard work is ahead of us. But this is a huge step in a direction that would have been unimaginable just a year or two ago."
Duncan has said that today's patchwork system amounts to "lying to children and their parents, because states have dumbed down their standards." He and other critics say that disparity becomes clear in places where students earn high marks on state tests but fall short on national exams.
In Mississippi, for instance, 90 percent of fourth-graders passed the state reading exam in 2007, according to U.S. Department of Education data. But only 51 percent had at least "basic" or "partial mastery" on the test known as the Nation's Report Card.
In Maryland, 86 percent of fourth-graders passed the reading test, while 69 percent earned a basic score or better on the national test, according to federal data. And in Virginia, about 87 percent of fourth-graders passed the state test, while 74 percent reached at least a basic score on the national exam.
Gene Wilhoit, executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers, said the new expectations would be "higher, clearer and fewer."
There would be political pressure for states to show their children aren't at the bottom of the pack. But Wilhoit said the shift also would help improve schools. Companies and researchers could more easily create textbooks and professional training that meshed with the curriculum coast to coast. States under financial strain could pitch in scarce resources.
Margaret Spellings, who was education secretary under President George W. Bush, said in a recent interview that she supports states coming together to raise the bar for students. But she worries that the effort could distract attention from students who are failing today.
"We have a speedometer, and it says we're going too slow," Spellings said. "Should we get a more precise speedometer? Sure. But the most important thing is speeding up."
The governors and schools chiefs have set an ambitious agenda. By July, groups of experts already at work are expected to unveil "readiness standards" for high school graduates in reading and math, Wilhoit said. Then, with each grade considered a steppingstone toward that goal, they will set out the skills students must master each year to stay on track.
There will be no prescription for how teachers get there, avoiding nettlesome discussions about whether phonics or whole language is a better method of teaching reading; whether students should be drilled in math facts; or whether eighth-graders should read "The Great Gatsby" or "To Kill a Mockingbird."
Education experts say there will still be plenty to argue about.
"All the groups, the math educators and the English professors and the liberals and the conservatives will want to weigh in," said Michael J. Petrilli, vice president for national programs and policy at the nonprofit Thomas B. Fordham Institution. "There are fundamental disagreements in our society about what kids should learn."
For now, the organizers are keeping secret the names of experts who are combing education research and putting together the standards, to protect them from being bombarded by reporters and interest groups. Later, a separate national "validation" panel, made of up of experts nominated by the states, will review the proposal.
Even if the project sails through with few fights, students wouldn't see the results immediately, because states would have to determine whether to adopt the standards.
Duncan and others also said that even the highest goals lose their punch if there's not an accurate way to gauge whether students measure up. That means revamping state tests -- a cumbersome and expensive process. So far, the states have committed only to working to develop the standards.
"If you agree to common standards but you don't agree to tests, it's like buying a car without a motor," said Jack Jennings, president of the D.C.-based Center on Education Policy. "It's buying the outside without getting the thing to work."
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by EduTech's MailScanner Vaccine3, and is believed
46 States, D.C. Plan to Draft Common Education Standards
By Maria GlodWashington Post Staff WriterMonday, June 1, 2009
Forty-six states and the District of Columbia today will announce an effort to craft a single vision for what children should learn each year from kindergarten through high school graduation, an unprecedented step toward a uniform definition of success in American schools.
The push for common reading and math standards marks a turning point in a movement to judge U.S. children using one yardstick that reflects expectations set for students in countries around the world at a time of global competition. Today, each state decides what to teach in third-grade reading, fifth-grade math and every other class. Critics think some set a bar so that students can pass tests but, ultimately, are ill-prepared.
Led by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, the states, including Maryland and Virginia, are aiming to define a framework of content and skills that meet an overarching goal. When students get their high school diplomas, the coalition says, they should be ready to tackle college or a job. The benchmarks would be "internationally competitive."
Once the organizers of the effort agree to a proposal, each state would decide individually whether to adopt it.
The nearly complete support of governors for the effort -- leaders in Texas, Alaska, Missouri and South Carolina are the only ones that have not signed on -- is key. Many Republicans oppose nationally mandated standards, saying schools should not be controlled by Washington. But there is broad support for a voluntary effort that bubbles up from the states.
"This is the beginning of a new day for education in our country," U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan said. "A lot of hard work is ahead of us. But this is a huge step in a direction that would have been unimaginable just a year or two ago."
Duncan has said that today's patchwork system amounts to "lying to children and their parents, because states have dumbed down their standards." He and other critics say that disparity becomes clear in places where students earn high marks on state tests but fall short on national exams.
In Mississippi, for instance, 90 percent of fourth-graders passed the state reading exam in 2007, according to U.S. Department of Education data. But only 51 percent had at least "basic" or "partial mastery" on the test known as the Nation's Report Card.
In Maryland, 86 percent of fourth-graders passed the reading test, while 69 percent earned a basic score or better on the national test, according to federal data. And in Virginia, about 87 percent of fourth-graders passed the state test, while 74 percent reached at least a basic score on the national exam.
Gene Wilhoit, executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers, said the new expectations would be "higher, clearer and fewer."
There would be political pressure for states to show their children aren't at the bottom of the pack. But Wilhoit said the shift also would help improve schools. Companies and researchers could more easily create textbooks and professional training that meshed with the curriculum coast to coast. States under financial strain could pitch in scarce resources.
Margaret Spellings, who was education secretary under President George W. Bush, said in a recent interview that she supports states coming together to raise the bar for students. But she worries that the effort could distract attention from students who are failing today.
"We have a speedometer, and it says we're going too slow," Spellings said. "Should we get a more precise speedometer? Sure. But the most important thing is speeding up."
The governors and schools chiefs have set an ambitious agenda. By July, groups of experts already at work are expected to unveil "readiness standards" for high school graduates in reading and math, Wilhoit said. Then, with each grade considered a steppingstone toward that goal, they will set out the skills students must master each year to stay on track.
There will be no prescription for how teachers get there, avoiding nettlesome discussions about whether phonics or whole language is a better method of teaching reading; whether students should be drilled in math facts; or whether eighth-graders should read "The Great Gatsby" or "To Kill a Mockingbird."
Education experts say there will still be plenty to argue about.
"All the groups, the math educators and the English professors and the liberals and the conservatives will want to weigh in," said Michael J. Petrilli, vice president for national programs and policy at the nonprofit Thomas B. Fordham Institution. "There are fundamental disagreements in our society about what kids should learn."
For now, the organizers are keeping secret the names of experts who are combing education research and putting together the standards, to protect them from being bombarded by reporters and interest groups. Later, a separate national "validation" panel, made of up of experts nominated by the states, will review the proposal.
Even if the project sails through with few fights, students wouldn't see the results immediately, because states would have to determine whether to adopt the standards.
Duncan and others also said that even the highest goals lose their punch if there's not an accurate way to gauge whether students measure up. That means revamping state tests -- a cumbersome and expensive process. So far, the states have committed only to working to develop the standards.
"If you agree to common standards but you don't agree to tests, it's like buying a car without a motor," said Jack Jennings, president of the D.C.-based Center on Education Policy. "It's buying the outside without getting the thing to work."
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by EduTech's MailScanner Vaccine3, and is believed
MDRC - Issue Focus: How Can We Build Better Programs for Disconnected Youth?
This is very good data on where we are at with at-risk populations.
MDRC - Issue Focus: How Can We Build Better Programs for Disconnected Youth?
MDRC - Issue Focus: How Can We Build Better Programs for Disconnected Youth?
Education Week: 46 States Commit to Common-Standards Push
Once again this is BIG news and apparently we (ND) are in on this....I am curious as to when we will hear about the new standards that we will have to apply in our classrooms and test to. If this is to be done by July as reported someone should be talking about it. This is not to suggest that those in charge are not talking but it is not filtering out anywhere in the local schools world
Education Week: 46 States Commit to Common-Standards Push
Education Week: 46 States Commit to Common-Standards Push
Friday, May 29, 2009
NREA Post
This is very important information for ND Schools! Conrad and Pomeroy are on this legislation....
Urge Your Lawmakers to Support REAP Reauthorization Act
In May, Sens. Conrad (D-N.D.) and Collins (R-Maine) and Reps. Pomeroy (D-N.D.) and Graves (R-Mo.) reintroduced the Rural Education Achievement Program Reauthorization Act. First introduced in the 110th Congress, these stand-alone bills would make necessary changes to improve REAP and ensure school districts are accurately identified to participate in the program. AASA has actively participated in the drafting of the proposed changes. As Congress moves to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, REAP will also be up for discussion. We need your representative to co-sponsor the House bill, HR 2446, and your senators to co-sponsor the Senate bill, S 1052. The more support we get, the better our chances will be to get the changes we desire.
The first change proposed in the reauthorization bills is a transition to new locale codes. Currently, eligibility for the Small and Rural Schools Achievement Program is restricted to school districts located within locale codes 7 and 8, the rural designations. These codes will transition to 41, 42 and 43 (rural fringe, rural distant and rural remote) under the new system. District eligibility under the new codes should be similar to current law, although there is no way to ensure an absolute match between the old and new locale codes.
Eligibility for the Rural and Low-Income Schools Program was previously based on locale codes 6, 7 and 8 (rural and small town designations). Under the reauthorized law, eligibility will also be based on 41, 42 and 43 but will also include 32 and 33 (remote town and distant town). Because 32 and 33 are not a direct link to the previous code of 6, there will be some minor adjustments in eligibility.
Under the current law, if you are eligible for both programs, you are automatically enrolled under the Small and Rural Schools Achievement Program. This was done to prevent double dipping. Unfortunately, some schools eligible for the Small and Rural Schools Achievement Program do not receive a financial award due to their current levels of federal funding. The Rural Education Achievement Program Reauthorization Act will allow districts that are eligible for both programs but not receiving additional funding under the Small and Rural Schools Achievement Program to apply under the Rural and Low-Income Schools Program. This will affect approximately 200 school districts across the country.
Another proposed change in the bill would switch the eligibility poverty measure from 20 percent Census poverty to 40 percent free and reduced price lunch for those districts under the Rural and Low-Income Schools Program. Census poverty is an inaccurate measure of poverty for school districts, especially in areas where school district borders are not contiguous with county borders. In addition, the Census Bureau questions the accuracy of its poverty measure for any populations below 20,000 people, the very size of the communities REAP seeks to target.
The last change the Rural Education Achievement Program Reauthorization Act proposes is a shift in the sliding formula from the current $20,000 to $60,000 to a new scale of $25,000 to $80,000. This shift will help acknowledge changing costs since the program’s initial introduction. In addition, it will help school districts with populations from 450 students to 600 students take full advantage of the sliding scale. While this change will be beneficial for most school districts that receive funding under REAP, we will need to raise the overall funding level first to prevent funding shifts that cause school districts to lose funding. This change in the program will be predicated on REAP funding reaching the $200 million mark. We are currently at $173 million, so it is not an enormous leap. But we will need everyone’s help.
We know that this program will not be reauthorized without a fight. There are members of the Senate who are seeking to undermine the program and possibly even dismantle it. At a minimum, we know there are senators who seek to narrow the definition of rural and kick some districts out of the program altogether. We need to get strong support through your representatives and senators co-sponsoring HR 2446 and S1052. With increased congressional support, we can preserve REAP and make the necessary improvements during ESEA reauthorization.
President’s Budget Proposes a Shift Away from Formula Grants
In May, President Obama issued his budget proposal, providing the most detail so far on his education priorities and proposals. AASA supports many of the new initiatives in the Obama budget, including the expansive focus on early childhood opportunities. However, in an environment of limited funding, rural and small schools need to be wary of how the administration is proposing to pay for these new initiatives. There is a proposed policy shift away from formula grant dollars toward competitive grant programs at the state and national level. With limited administrative staff and time, rural and small schools rarely apply for competitive grants, leaving them at a disadvantage in accessing these new federal dollars.
The most concerning proposal in President Obama’s budget is a $1.6 billion (10 percent) cut in Title I funding to districts (not including the stimulus funding). This is the first proposed cut to Title I in over two decades. Technically, this entire cut would come from the basic grants, the first of the four funding formulas under Title I. This would disproportionately hurt small rural schools as the other funding formulas put a focus on large numbers of high-poverty students. The administration argued that they could cut Title I because districts just received an increase under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. They further reasoned they were not really cutting Title I but rather diverting funding for new programs.
The budget proposes three new programs within Title I. The first is the Early Childhood Challenge Grants at $300 million. None of this grant would go to local districts. Instead it would make capacity building grants available to states to increase their capacity to provide early childhood education programs. The second program is the Title I Early Childhood Grants funded at $500 million. These would be matching grants to districts that spend a portion of their Title I ARRA funds on early childhood. Finally, the budget calls for the creation of a $50 million national competitive grant program called the High School Graduation Initiative. Again, while we support all of these program areas, we wish they did not come at the expense of Title I and that avenues were available to ensure rural and small schools could access the funding.
In addition to the Title I cut, Safe and
Urge Your Lawmakers to Support REAP Reauthorization Act
In May, Sens. Conrad (D-N.D.) and Collins (R-Maine) and Reps. Pomeroy (D-N.D.) and Graves (R-Mo.) reintroduced the Rural Education Achievement Program Reauthorization Act. First introduced in the 110th Congress, these stand-alone bills would make necessary changes to improve REAP and ensure school districts are accurately identified to participate in the program. AASA has actively participated in the drafting of the proposed changes. As Congress moves to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, REAP will also be up for discussion. We need your representative to co-sponsor the House bill, HR 2446, and your senators to co-sponsor the Senate bill, S 1052. The more support we get, the better our chances will be to get the changes we desire.
The first change proposed in the reauthorization bills is a transition to new locale codes. Currently, eligibility for the Small and Rural Schools Achievement Program is restricted to school districts located within locale codes 7 and 8, the rural designations. These codes will transition to 41, 42 and 43 (rural fringe, rural distant and rural remote) under the new system. District eligibility under the new codes should be similar to current law, although there is no way to ensure an absolute match between the old and new locale codes.
Eligibility for the Rural and Low-Income Schools Program was previously based on locale codes 6, 7 and 8 (rural and small town designations). Under the reauthorized law, eligibility will also be based on 41, 42 and 43 but will also include 32 and 33 (remote town and distant town). Because 32 and 33 are not a direct link to the previous code of 6, there will be some minor adjustments in eligibility.
Under the current law, if you are eligible for both programs, you are automatically enrolled under the Small and Rural Schools Achievement Program. This was done to prevent double dipping. Unfortunately, some schools eligible for the Small and Rural Schools Achievement Program do not receive a financial award due to their current levels of federal funding. The Rural Education Achievement Program Reauthorization Act will allow districts that are eligible for both programs but not receiving additional funding under the Small and Rural Schools Achievement Program to apply under the Rural and Low-Income Schools Program. This will affect approximately 200 school districts across the country.
Another proposed change in the bill would switch the eligibility poverty measure from 20 percent Census poverty to 40 percent free and reduced price lunch for those districts under the Rural and Low-Income Schools Program. Census poverty is an inaccurate measure of poverty for school districts, especially in areas where school district borders are not contiguous with county borders. In addition, the Census Bureau questions the accuracy of its poverty measure for any populations below 20,000 people, the very size of the communities REAP seeks to target.
The last change the Rural Education Achievement Program Reauthorization Act proposes is a shift in the sliding formula from the current $20,000 to $60,000 to a new scale of $25,000 to $80,000. This shift will help acknowledge changing costs since the program’s initial introduction. In addition, it will help school districts with populations from 450 students to 600 students take full advantage of the sliding scale. While this change will be beneficial for most school districts that receive funding under REAP, we will need to raise the overall funding level first to prevent funding shifts that cause school districts to lose funding. This change in the program will be predicated on REAP funding reaching the $200 million mark. We are currently at $173 million, so it is not an enormous leap. But we will need everyone’s help.
We know that this program will not be reauthorized without a fight. There are members of the Senate who are seeking to undermine the program and possibly even dismantle it. At a minimum, we know there are senators who seek to narrow the definition of rural and kick some districts out of the program altogether. We need to get strong support through your representatives and senators co-sponsoring HR 2446 and S1052. With increased congressional support, we can preserve REAP and make the necessary improvements during ESEA reauthorization.
President’s Budget Proposes a Shift Away from Formula Grants
In May, President Obama issued his budget proposal, providing the most detail so far on his education priorities and proposals. AASA supports many of the new initiatives in the Obama budget, including the expansive focus on early childhood opportunities. However, in an environment of limited funding, rural and small schools need to be wary of how the administration is proposing to pay for these new initiatives. There is a proposed policy shift away from formula grant dollars toward competitive grant programs at the state and national level. With limited administrative staff and time, rural and small schools rarely apply for competitive grants, leaving them at a disadvantage in accessing these new federal dollars.
The most concerning proposal in President Obama’s budget is a $1.6 billion (10 percent) cut in Title I funding to districts (not including the stimulus funding). This is the first proposed cut to Title I in over two decades. Technically, this entire cut would come from the basic grants, the first of the four funding formulas under Title I. This would disproportionately hurt small rural schools as the other funding formulas put a focus on large numbers of high-poverty students. The administration argued that they could cut Title I because districts just received an increase under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. They further reasoned they were not really cutting Title I but rather diverting funding for new programs.
The budget proposes three new programs within Title I. The first is the Early Childhood Challenge Grants at $300 million. None of this grant would go to local districts. Instead it would make capacity building grants available to states to increase their capacity to provide early childhood education programs. The second program is the Title I Early Childhood Grants funded at $500 million. These would be matching grants to districts that spend a portion of their Title I ARRA funds on early childhood. Finally, the budget calls for the creation of a $50 million national competitive grant program called the High School Graduation Initiative. Again, while we support all of these program areas, we wish they did not come at the expense of Title I and that avenues were available to ensure rural and small schools could access the funding.
In addition to the Title I cut, Safe and
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Politics K-12: New Construction: Allowable under the Stimulus, but not Encouraged
I wonder why we have not applied yet....?
Politics K-12: New Construction: Allowable under the Stimulus, but not Encouraged
Politics K-12: New Construction: Allowable under the Stimulus, but not Encouraged
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
