91制片厂视频

Before leaving office next month, the Obama administration is finishing up rules for the Every Student Succeeds Act, including in the areas of accountability and testing.

The administration released final regulations for accountability on Nov. 28 that seek to address state and school officials鈥� biggest criticisms with draft regulations, released in May, which drew more than 20,000 comments from educators, advocates, and the general public.

These regulations give states more time to get their systems in place before identifying schools that are struggling, and offer more flexibility for states when it comes to school ratings, and dealing with schools with high testing opt-out rates.

By contrast, the department didn鈥檛 make major changes to its testing regulations, which were released Dec. 7. The draft version of those regulations was largely crafted earlier this year by a panel of educators and advocates through a process known as 鈥渘egotiated rulemaking.鈥� The department also released regulations for innovative tests under ESSA.

It鈥檚 unclear whether the incoming Trump administration and Congress will decide to keep these regulations on the books, make changes to them, or move to get rid of them entirely.

What ESSA Says: States must have an accountability system that includes both academic factors (like test scores, graduation rates, and English-language proficiency) and at least one school quality or student success indicator (like school climate, access to advanced coursework, or chronic absenteeism). They must identify schools for 鈥渃omprehensive improvement鈥� (lowest-performing schools and those where less than two-thirds of students graduate) and 鈥渢argeted improvement鈥� (schools that might be doing well overall, but where subgroups of students are struggling).

What the Final Regulations Say: States can use the ratings in ESSA鈥攊ncluding 鈥渃omprehensive鈥� improvement and 鈥渢argeted鈥� support鈥攁s their summative ratings. They don鈥檛 have to go as far as an overall number or A through F grade, unless they want to. States also can use a 鈥渄ashboard鈥� to explain how schools are doing on each of the different indicators that make up their accountability systems.

What ESSA Says: In addition to test scores, graduation rates, and English-language proficiency, states have to hold schools accountable for another factor that gets at school quality or students鈥� opportunity to learn, including school climate, access to advanced coursework, access to arts,or absenteeism, among others.

What the Final Regulations Say: States can pick any factor that research has shown has a positive impact on student learning, as defined by a host of things like grades, credit accumulation, postsecondary enrollment, persistence, and performance in advanced classes.

What ESSA Says: States get to set their own minimum 鈥渘-size.鈥� That鈥檚 a technical term for the number of students from a particular group that a school must have in order to be held accountable for their performance. For instance, if a state鈥檚 n-size is 20 and a school has only 17 4th graders in special education, that school wouldn鈥檛 have to include those students鈥� scores for accountability or report their data because the sample size is too small.

What the Final Regulations Say: States can use any n-size they want, but those that want to go over 30 have to show the impact of that decision, giving data on the percentage of schools that would be held accountable for subgroup performance under whatever number they want to use, versus the percentage that would have been held accountable for subgroup performance if the n-size were 30.

What ESSA Says: States have to identify schools where subgroups of students (such as English-language learners or students in special education) are 鈥渃onsistently underperforming鈥� compared to their peers.

What the Final Regulations Say: States are still supposed to base their definition of 鈥渃onsistent underperformance鈥� on no more than two years of performance, but if they really want to look over a longer time frame, they can, as long as they can explain how more time will help students in a subgroup get the support they need.

What ESSA Says: Schools need to test 95 percent of their students, both for the whole school and for different subgroups of students, just as they did under the No Child Left Behind Act, which ESSA replaced. If a school doesn鈥檛 hit that threshold, the state gets to decide what happens, not the U.S. Department of 91制片厂视频.

What the Final Regulations Say: States that come up with their own system for dealing with opt-outs get the leeway to develop different remedies to address different degrees of low-test participation. That means states can propose to do something less dramatic for a school that barely missed the 95 percent for a single subgroup of students, as opposed to a school where say, just 10 percent of students took the test. Whatever the state comes up with, though, has to be 鈥渟ufficiently rigorous鈥� to fix the school鈥檚 participation problem.

What ESSA Says: States need to hold schools accountable for helping English-language learners become proficient.

What the Final Regulations Say: States have to come up with a 鈥渞esearch-based鈥� maximum timeline for ELLs to become proficient in English. The idea is to encourage schools to make sufficient progress each year in helping ELLs master their new language.

What ESSA Says: The new law, which passed in December of 2015, is supposed to go into effect in the 2017-18 school year. The 2016-17 school year is for transition and planning.

What the Final Regulations Say: States essentially get a one-year extension on identifying key groups of schools for extra attention and support. They are now supposed to identify their lowest-performing schools and schools with really low graduation rates (those in 鈥渃omprehensive improvement鈥�) in the 2018-19 school year. Also in 2018-19, they must identify schools with low-performing subgroups for so-called 鈥渢argeted鈥� support. But states now have until the 2019-20 school year to identify schools where subgroups of students are 鈥渃onsistently underperforming鈥� compared to their peers for 鈥渢argeted support.鈥� State accountability plans now are due April 3 or Sept. 18.

What ESSA Says: States must test students in reading and math every year between 3 and 8 and once in high school, just like under the No Child Left Behind Act. Districts may choose a nationally recognized test, such as the SAT or ACT, in lieu of the state鈥檚 high school test for accountability purposes, as long as they have the state鈥檚 permission. There are also special rules pertaining to tests for English-language learners and students in special education. For instance, no more than 1 percent of students in a particular state should be given tests for students with severe cognitive disabilities, unless there is a waiver from the department.

What the Final Regulations Say: The regulations seek to flesh out these provisions, for instance by defining what kinds of assessments would be considered 鈥渘ationally recognized.鈥� They also call on states to come up with a definition of 鈥渟evere cognitive disabilities,鈥� and they explain how states must go about applying for a waiver from the 1 percent cap.

What ESSA Says: Up to seven states can apply to try out new forms of testing鈥攕uch as performance tasks鈥攊n a handful of districts before taking them statewide. States must make sure these new kinds of tests provide comparable results to the state assessment. And, as they are piloting these new approaches, states must include a representative sample of English-language learners and students in special education.

What the Final Regulations Say: The regulations spell out how states can make sure that these tests are comparable to the state assessment and among districts.