1 / 21

The Changing Landscape of Title I

The Changing Landscape of Title I. Renee Palakovic, Chief, Division of Federal Programs. April 4, 2011—Where Are We?. Current Authorization of ESEA (NCLB) Expired on 9/30/07 Accountability Consequences required under NCLB Beginning to Pile Up ARRA Funds Due to Expire 9/30/2011

olina
Télécharger la présentation

The Changing Landscape of Title I

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Changing Landscape of Title I Renee Palakovic, Chief, Division of Federal Programs

  2. April 4, 2011—Where Are We? • Current Authorization of ESEA (NCLB) Expired on 9/30/07 • Accountability Consequences required under NCLB Beginning to Pile Up • ARRA Funds Due to Expire 9/30/2011 • State Budget Uncertainties

  3. April 4, 2011—Where Are We? • 6th Round of Continuing Resolutions for FY11 Federal Budget • $4 billion Cuts Thus Far • $888 Million in Education (No Title I Cuts) • Obama Administration Pushing Consolidation w/ Increased Funding • House Pushing for Cuts • Senate Standing Firm w/ Obama Administration

  4. 1965—Where Have We Been? • April 11, 1965—ESEA Was Passed “…to provide financial assistance to local educational agencies serving areas with concentrations of children from low income families to expand and improve their educational programs to meet the special educational needs of educationally deprived children.”

  5. 1965—Where Have We Been? • 1966 Appropriation of $1,192,981,206 • General Aide for “special educational needs” • 51% of Funds for Reading • 25% of Funds for Art, Music, Math, Kindergarten & PreK and Cultural Enrichment Activities • Remaining Funds on Library, Guidance Counseling, Food/Health Services

  6. 1965—Where Have We Been? • Targeted Assistance Only • Focus on Individual Students • 8.3 Million Children Served in First 2 Years • 59% of Services in Grades 1-6 • 35% of Services in Grades 7-12 • 5% of Services in Kindergarten • 350,000 New Staff Hired in First 2 Years

  7. 1965—Where Have We Been? • Basic Assurances of Title I • Serve Children in Areas of Concentrated Poverty • Designed to Meet Educational Needs of Educationally Deprived Children • Equitable Participation of Non-public Students • Control of Funds/Equipment at LEA • Annual Evaluation Measures • Parent Involvement • Supplement/Supplant (1967)

  8. Changes Through the Years • 1968 • Comparability Introduced • Fiscal Accountability Increased for Supplement/Supplant Requirement • Pull Out Programs • 1978 • Schoolwide Programs Introduced • Pull Out Programs Disruptive • Matching Funds Required

  9. Changes Through the Years • 1988 • Schoolwide Matching Requirement Eliminated • Schoolwide Eligibility Threshold 75% • 1994 • Standards & State Assessment • New School Ranking/Allocation Requirements • Schoolwide Eligibility Threshold 60% then 50%

  10. Changes Through the Years • 2002 • AYP • Labeling of Schools & Consequences • More Focus on School Improvement • Teacher Quality Standards • 2011…Back to the Present Day Situation

  11. Back to the Future—Where Are We Going?? • Major Factors In Determining Future of Title I • Reauthorization • Timeline • Priorities • Reconciliations/Agreements • Economy

  12. Reauthorization Timeline

  13. Differing Thoughts on Timeline • Obama & Duncan • On President’s Desk by Labor Day • Rep. John Kline (Chair, Ed. Workforce Comm.) • “We cannot allow an arbitrary timeline to undermine quality reforms that encourage innovation, flexibility and parent involvement.”

  14. Differing Thoughts on Timeline • Obama & Duncan • 82% of Schools Will Fail to Make AYP in 2011 If Law Not Reauthorized • Jack Jennings (Center for Education Policy) • “On it’s face, that does not seem possible.” • Senate • Entire Bill Completed in 2011 • House • Piecemeal, Possibly in 2011

  15. PrioritiesHouse vs. Senate

  16. What Does Each Side Want? • Senate Side • More Focus On Struggling Schools—More Muscle from Feds • Better Accountability Structure—Growth • Innovation • Teachers and Leaders • Equity in Resources

  17. What Does Each Side Want? • House Side • Reduction in Federal Role in Schools • Reduce Burdensome Paperwork • Accountability Measures Need to Be Fixed—Growth • Cuts in Spending • Voucher Discussions • Funding Formula Issues--Equity

  18. Reconciliations & Agreements

  19. Economy

  20. What Does All of This Mean for Title I? • Some Things Will Never Change • Less Funding • Regulatory Relief • When Reauthorized: • New Accountability System • Formula Changes • Some Type of Tutoring Requirement • More Flexibility • But Where?

  21. Conclusion • Be Prepared • Record Keeping • Data • Financials • Keep Involved • READ, READ, READ • Ask Questions

More Related