Earlier this week, President Obama gave the Department of Education the go-ahead on beginning to grant waivers to states seeking relief from some provisions of ESEA /NCLB. “We want to deliver a very important message: Relief is on the way,” said Melody Barnes, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council. “Low expectations, uneven standards and shifting goals…those days are numbered.”
The waivers will not be without strings attached, however. States will be required to adopt reforms in order to receive relief, though the exact shape of these reforms is still unclear. The full details will be available to the public in September, but in the meantime some information has leaked out about reforms under consideration:
–The reforms would not be a la carte—it’s an all or nothing deal.
–To waive the 2014 deadline for English and math proficiency, states would have to adopt college- and career-readiness standards and assessments, likely those of the Common Core.
–To waive the highly qualified teacher requirement and get funding flexibility, states would have to adopt evaluation mechanisms that are based on growth and have heavy oversight.
Secretary Duncan has made it clear that waivers will not be without strings attached. This caveat has made two major district advocacy groups (the American Association of School Administrators and the National School Boards Association) eye Secretary Duncan with particular disfavor.
The two groups argue that if the department truly wants to provide relief, they should do it on a case-by-case basis, and sent an open letter to Duncan saying as much. In the letter, Daniel A. Domenech of AASA and Anne L. Bryant of NSBA lay out their case:
While the NSBA and AASA support the need to emphasize some of the areas proposed as conditions for relief (the 2014 deadline for 100% proficiency in math and language arts and highly qualified teacher regulations), they do not support requirements for relief.
Part of the problem is that ESEA has yet to be reauthorized, which is not the fault or responsibility of state and local education agencies. Therefore, asking them to “jump through hoops to get relief from specific provisions widely recognized as broken” is counterintuitive.
While the waivers are being offered to states, it is districts that need the relief. If a state does not want to file for a waiver, an ailing district’s hands are tied.
They see the conditions attached to the waivers as being a roundabout way of pushing “policy priorities” rather than providing relief.
They close the letter by encouraging the Department of Education to grant “universal modifications to state accountability workbooks,” similar to that granted to Idaho (the state was allowed to modify its accountability workbook and freeze its annual proficiency targets in reading and math at the same level for three years).
To read the background information on this story, please visit http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2011/08/obama_gives_go-ahead_for_waivers.html
To read the joint letter visit http://www.aasa.org/uploadedFiles/Newsroom/NSBA-AASA-Reg-Relief-081011.pdf
