Montana Public Education Center Issue Spotlight M T- P E C ’s p r i o r i t i e s f o r t h e R e a u t h o r i z a t i o n o f the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Preserve
MT-PEC wants to:
high-stakes testing and incorporate growth models and multiple measures of accountability.
Maintenance of Effort to help sustain and improve services for students.
overall number of tests to increase classroom time spent teaching students.
control to the state and local district to determine how best to attain student educational outcomes.
diversion of public funds to private education interests and hold charter schools to the same standards of public accountability including regional accreditation standards, educator effectiveness, teacher and principal certification, regulation, and financial
provisions requiring high-quality instructional teams in schools including licensed, credentialed, and profession-ready teachers, principals, school librarians, counselors, and education support personnel.
to formula-based funding and a decrease in competitive or grant-based funding.
M T- P E C r e c o m m e n d s a s s e s s i n g t h e v a l u e o f s p e c i f i c f e d e r a l l e g i s l a t i o n a c c o r d i n g t o t h e s e M T- P E C p r i o r i t i e s . D o e s t h e l e g i s l a t i o n : Keep public funds in public Preserve local control Increase formula-based Require highlyEliminate Incorporate growth models Decrease Retain regarding outcomes high-stakes and multiple measures of number of Maintenance schools. Require accountfunding, and avoid qualified staff? ability for charter schools? and how to attain them? competitive grants? testing? mandated tests? of Effort? accountability?
If the answer to the each of the questions is yes, then the legislation will work for Montana’s public school children and will align with MT-PEC’s priorities, which we have adopted out of our shared interests in the best interests in students. K–12 education has traditionally been a state and local responsibility, with the federal governments role limited to ensuring against unlawful discrimination and providing supplemental assistance to meet the needs of the disadvantaged and children with disabilities. Over the last 14 years, however, the federal government has expanded its role well beyond its capability of ensuring the attainment of desirable outcomes, and this has translated into a byzantine and bureaucratic maze of contradictory laws and administrative regulations that result Learn more at mt-pec.org in over testing of students and overregulation of Montana’s public schools. It’s time for a change.
THE FIRST 200 YEARS COMMUNITY OWNED, F E D E R A L LY S U P P O R T E D . E L E M E N TA RY A N D S E C O N D A RY E D U C AT I O N A C T
1965 First passed into law as part of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty.
G O ALS 2000: E DUCAT E AMERICA ACT
1975 When the first version of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act was passed in 1975, Congress proposed that federal funds should cover 40 percent of the excess cost of education for eligible children. That promise has never been met.
1983 A Nation at Risk Report is released and creates a false perception of failure in our nation’s public schools that has served as the rallying cry for every federal intrusion since.
1994 President Clinton is roundly criticized by Republicans in Congress for proposing an overreach in the federal role in public education.
NO C H LE ILD BEHI FT ND A CT
2001 (reauthorization of ESEA). Watershed change in the federal role in public education enacted and set the stage for an inevitable labeling of public schools as failing, even as they made substantial gains in student achievement.
THE LAST 20 YEARS GOVERNMENT INFLUENCE: AT T H E E X P E N S E O F C O M M U N I T I E S . RA C E TO T HE TO P BEG I N S
Really a race to 100% proficiency further concede target under NCLB community kicks in and ownership and local virtually every control in return for school in the nation desperately needed is declared failing. money in the wake of the Great Recession. Federalization by Waiver: Obama Administration initiates waivers from NCLB in return for further concesAmerican sions of community Recovery and ownership and local Reinvestment Act control.
2015 ESEA Reauthorization is 8 years overdue with most looking to dial back the extent of federal intrusion into K-12 public education policy and reclaim the community ownership of the nation’s public schools.
Why Reauthorize ESEA?
To provide stability in the law and resolution of the conflict between NCLB and the waiver process employed by the U.S. Department of Education.
To eliminate over testing of students and to allow teachers time to teach and administrators time to lead.
To put bad law behind us. NCLB did not and does not work and needs to be replaced with a restoration of the discretion of local communities that was usurped with the passage of NCLB. It was set up to label failures rather than identify success.
We are united by our shared interests in the best interests of students.
Schools need greater flexibility and support to innovate and adapt to increase student achievement.