House Hearing, 111TH Congress - Elementary and Secondary Education Act Reauthorization: Addressing The Needs of Diverse Students

ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION ACT REAUTHORIZATION:

ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF DIVERSE STUDENTS
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD,

ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION AND LABOR
U.S. HOUSE
OF
REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION
HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MARCH 18, 2010
Serial No. 11153

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor
(
Available on the Internet:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/education/index.html
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
55304 PDF
WASHINGTON
2010
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 5121800; DC area (202) 5121800
Fax: (202) 5122104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 204020001
GEORGE MILLER, California, Chairman

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan, Vice Chairman
Donald M. Payne, New Jersey
Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey
Robert C. Bobby Scott, Virginia
Lynn C. Woolsey, California
Ruben Hinojosa, Texas
Carolyn McCarthy, New York
John F. Tierney, Massachusetts
Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio
David Wu, Oregon
Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Susan A. Davis, California
Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
Timothy H. Bishop, New York
Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania
David Loebsack, Iowa
Mazie Hirono, Hawaii
Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania
Phil Hare, Illinois
Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Joe Courtney, Connecticut
Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire
Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio
Jared Polis, Colorado
Paul Tonko, New York
Pedro R. Pierluisi, Puerto Rico
Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
Northern Mariana Islands
Dina Titus, Nevada
Judy Chu, California
John Kline, Minnesota,

Senior Republican Member
Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin
Howard P. Buck McKeon, California
Peter Hoekstra, Michigan
Michael N. Castle, Delaware
Mark E. Souder, Indiana
Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan
Judy Biggert, Illinois
Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania
Joe Wilson, South Carolina
Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington
Tom Price, Georgia
Rob Bishop, Utah
Brett Guthrie, Kentucky
Bill Cassidy, Louisiana
Tom McClintock, California
Duncan Hunter, California
David P. Roe, Tennessee
Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania
Mark Zuckerman, Staff Director

Barrett Karr, Minority Staff Director
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD,

ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
DALE E. KILDEE, Michigan, Chairman
Donald M. Payne, New Jersey
Robert C. Bobby Scott, Virginia
Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
Susan A. Davis, California
Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania
David Loebsack, Iowa
Mazie Hirono, Hawaii
Jared Polis, Colorado
Pedro R. Pierluisi, Puerto Rico
Gregorio Sablan, Northern Mariana Islands
Lynn C. Woolsey, California
Ruben Hinojosa, Texas
Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio
Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania
Dina Titus, Nevada
Judy Chu, California
Michael N. Castle, Delaware,

Ranking Minority Member
Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin
Peter Hoekstra, Michigan
Mark E. Souder, Indiana
Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan
Judy Biggert, Illinois
Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania
Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington
Rob Bishop, Utah
Bill Cassidy, Louisiana
Tom McClintock, California
Duncan Hunter, California
(II)
C O N T E N T S
Page
Hearing held on March 18, 2010 ............................................................................

Statement of Members:
Castle, Hon. Michael N., Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on
Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education ..........................
Kildee, Hon. Dale E., Chairman, Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education ..............................................................
Additional submission:
Prepared statement of the Tribal Education Departments National Assembly ..............................................................................
Miller, Hon. George, Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor,
submission for the record:
Letter, dated March 25, 2010, from the National Disability Rights
Network (NDRN) ...................................................................................
Statement of Witnesses:
Curry, Dr. Daniel, superintendent, Lake Forest School District, Kent
County, DE ....................................................................................................
Prepared statement of ...............................................................................
Dale, Dr. Jack, superintendent, Fairfax County Public Schools, Fairfax,
VA ...................................................................................................................
Diaz, Arelis E., assistant superintendent of curriculum/instruction and
human resources, Godwin Heights Public Schools ....................................
Gipp, Dr. David M., on behalf of the National Congress of American
Indians and the National Indian Education Association ...........................
Kearns, Jacqui Farmer, Ed.D., Principal Investigator, National Alternate
Assessment Center, U.S. Department of Education ..................................
Wotorson, Michael, executive director, Campaign for High School Equity .
(III)
3
1
61
64
36
38
40
41
21
22
14
16
26
28
7
9
ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY

EDUCATION ACT REAUTHORIZATION:
ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF
DIVERSE STUDENTS
Thursday, March 18, 2009
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Early Childhood,
Elementary and Secondary Education
Committee on Education and Labor
Washington, DC
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in room

2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Dale Kildee [chairman
of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Kildee, Scott, Davis, Loebsack, Polis,
Pierluisi, Sablan, Hinojosa, Kucinich, Titus, Chu, Castle, Petri,
Ehlers, Biggert, and Platts.
Staff present: Tylease Alli, Hearing Clerk; Jody Calemine, General Counsel; Jamie Fasteau, Senior Education Policy Advisor;
David Hartzler, Systems Administrator; Fred Jones, Staff Assistant, Education; Sharon Lewis, Senior Disability Policy Advisor;
Sadie Marshall, Chief Clerk; Ricardo Martinez, Policy Advisor,
Subcommittee on Higher Education, Lifelong Learning and Competitiveness; Bryce McKibbon, Staff Assistant; Lillian Pace, Policy
Advisor, Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education; Kristina Peterson, Einstein Fellow; Alexandria
Ruiz, Staff Assistant; Melissa Salmanowitz, Press Secretary; Stephanie Arras, Legislative Assistant; James Bergeron, Deputy Director
of Education and Human Services Policy; Kirk Boyle, General
Counsel; Alexa Marrero, Communications Director; Susan Ross, Director of Education and Human Resources Policy; and Linda Stevens, Chief Clerk/Assistant to the General Counsel.
Chairman KILDEE [presiding]. A quorum being present, the hearing of the subcommittee will come to order. Pursuant to subcommittee rule 12(a), all members may submit an opening statement in writing, which will be made part of the permanent record.
I now recognize myself for an opening statement.
I want to welcome everyone to todays hearing, entitled ESEA
Reauthorization: Addressing the Needs of Diverse Students. We
have been talking about this for many years. I can recall when we
first coined the word disaggregated data, and that word has been
in our lexicon since.
(1)
2
The timing of this hearing is critically important, as we continue
to review the administrations blueprint for ESEA reauthorization
and work as a committee to reform our nations primary K-12 education law. I hope todays discussion brings us one step closer to
that goal.
The governor and I here have met regularly with the secretary
of education and with some of the Senate leaders on this bill. This
is a high priority. The governor and I have worked together many
times on good education bills and look forward to this process.
I also want to thank our witnesses for taking the time out of
their very busy schedules to inform this process. We cant do our
jobs, really, without input from educators, advocates, and researchers who are working hard to help all children succeed.
Like many of my colleagues, I am pleased that we are embarking
on another bipartisan reauthorization. I have participated in five
reauthorizations of ESEA during my 34 years here in Congress and
strongly believe that this next reauthorization is long overdue.
While the No Child Left Behind Act shed light on the inequalities in our education system, it unfortunately did not do enough
to close the achievement gap for diverse students.
The federal government has a responsibility before all others to
ensure equal opportunity. This must be a top priority for future
steps in education reform. Just as our country grows increasingly
diverse, we must ensure that our education system adapts to varying student needs.
By strengthening current programs for diverse students and investing in innovative strategies for closing the achievement gap, we
have an opportunity to change the future course for millions of students.
It is very interesting when you look around our country today
and even at the time that I first entered politicswe find a crosssection basically of the world. You go to California, for example,
and you find no majority ethnic group. And as a cross-section of the
world, we should set an example for the rest of the world, how we
can live together in peace and educational development.
So you have in your hands an enormous responsibility to make
us become aware of our responsibility during this hearing today.
We must also explore ways to eliminate the systems inequalities,
encouraging a more equitable distribution of resources, expanding
access to rigorous curriculum in high-need communities, and providing incentives to improve the distribution of effective teachers.
As we continue to explore these ideas and many others that we
will hear in the weeks and months to come, I hope we never lose
sight of the opportunity we have before us. We must prepare to do
what is right for all students, even if it requires a lot of work and
significant change.
Today we will hear recommendations from a panel of educators,
advocates, and a researcher working to close the achievement gap
for diverse students. These panelists will help us better understand
the challenges facing low-income minority students, English-language learners, students with disabilities, Native American students, and homeless students.
Given the importance of todays topic, I know our panel will give
us a lot of thoughts to ponder over as we work across the aisle and
3
the capital to improve our education system. I look forward to your
testimony.
It is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes or such time as he may consume to Governor Castle. Governor?
Mr. CASTLE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I am very pleased also to be here and to welcome all the witnesses here today to what I think is an important hearing. I would
like to thank you, Chairman Kildee, for holding todays hearing.
This is a fourth in the current series, as I understand it, as the
committee begins the process of reauthorizing the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act.
I would also, obviously, like to thank all the people who come
here today to listen to this testimony. I believe it is imperative that
we examine all these issues thoroughly, particularly through this
hearing process.
We began the process last Congress, and I am glad that today
we are taking another look at our nations diverse student populations, which includes students with disabilities, English-language
learners, students in rural areas, Native American students, homeless students, and minority and ethnic students.
Addressing the needs of these students was the driving force behind the most recent overhaul of federal K-12 education policy,
which Congress passed in 2001. Prior to that time, states and
school districts were not required to report the academic achievement of these subgroups, and many schools were masking the lagging performance of these students with the test scores of their
more affluent, higher performing students.
In 2001, we put these students front and center, and states and
school districts all across the country have responded with innovative programs and practices to ensure that all students now have
the opportunity to succeed academically, but it hasnt been easy.
This new focus on diverse learners has presented significant challenges to states, school districts, and schools, who have struggled
to make changes in teacher professional development, curriculum
and instructional strategies to ensure diverse student populations
have every opportunity to meet high academic standards, and that
is why we are here today.
We owe it to these students to ensure that they receive the same
high-quality education as their peers. But we also owe it to states
and local areas to give them the tools necessary to educate students for the wide range of needs.
Current law was crafted under the guiding principle that all students can and deserve to learn, diverse student populations being
no exception. As we begin rewriting ESEA this year, we cannot lose
sight of this. I believe that our witnesses today will provide us with
valuable information about the importance of and the challenges
that states and school districts face in educating diverse student
learners.
I hope to hear how educators at the state and local levels are
working to ensure that special populations are receiving high-quality instruction that can lead to high academic achievement. I also
want to hear that where there have been problems and challenges
in the implementation of current law from the state, school district
and school level.
4
Finally, I look forward to suggestions about how to reform ESEA
to ensure that it accounts for the complexities that states, school
districts and schools must address in educating diverse learners,
especially how we ensure that they are properly assessed so that
teachers and school administrators can develop appropriate strategies.
I hope todays hearing will help us understand these issues better, which are some of the most difficult and important ones facing
us in current law and issues that must be considered carefully as
we craft education reform policy this year.
I thank you again for joining us this Thursday morning, and I
look forward to your testimony. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much, Governor.
Without objection, all members will have 14 calendar days to
submit additional materials or questions for the hearing record.
Now I would like to introduce our very distinguished panel of
witnesses here this morning. Michael Wotorson is the executive director of the Campaign for High School Equity, a partnership of 10
leading civil rights and educational organizations focused on high
school education reform. Mr. Wotorson has spent his career advocating in support of educational equality and civil rights, working
for more than 15 years as a researcher, advocate and policy analyst.
Prior to joining CHSE, Mr. Wotorson was national education director for the NAACP and has held numerous other positions, including at the Mid-Atlantic Equity Center Leadership Conference
on Civil Rights Education Fund, Fair Employment Council of
Greater Washington, and the Anti-Defamation League. Originally
from Liberia, West Africa, Mr. Wotorson holds bachelor and master
of arts degrees in political science from the University of MissouriColumbia.
Our second witness is Dr. David Gipp, who is a citizen of the
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in North Dakota and has served as
president of the United Tribes Technical College since 1977. United
Tribes College serves over 1,100 adults and 500 children, with
three early childhood centers and a K-8 elementary school.
Among other posts, President Gipp has served as an education
adviser for the greater plains tribes on the Bureau of Indian Affairs
Tribal and Advisory Budget Council, board member for the National Indian Education Association, executive director and past
president and current board member of the American Indian Higher Education Consortium, and past chair and current board member of the American Indian College Fund.
He has also received numerous recognitions, including the North
Dakota governors service award, the National Indian Education
Associations Indian educator of the year, and the North Dakota
multicultural educator of the year. President Gipp was educated at
the University of North Dakota and holds a doctorate in laws,
honoris causa, from North Dakota State University for his contributions to tribal higher education.
I will now yield to my colleague, Congressman Ehlers, colleague
and friend, who is voluntarily leaving the Congress. That is the
best way to leave. Some leave involuntarily, but Vern has served
well here.
5
I one time wasgive me a minute hereI one time was asked
by a reporter from his paper who was doing a little profile on him
what I thought about Vern Ehlers, and I told the reporter that if
we had more Vern Ehlers in the Congress, we could get things
done around here rather than sitting around shouting at one another, and I still believe that today. He is a credit.
Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for those kind words,
and the feeling is mutual.
I am very pleased to introduce my constituent, Arelis Diaz, who
is the assistant superintendent of Godwin Heights Public Schools.
This is a school district that serves approximately 2,200 preschool
through 12th grade students in Wyoming, Michigan.
Now, you have to understand geography in Michigan. The city of
Wyoming, which she is from, is about 10 miles west of Alaska. Another interesting quirk in my district is we have a harbor in my
district, and it is located roughly one mile from Podunk, soso we
have great diversity in my particular district.
She has had academic success with diverse students, including
English-language learners, which is a big deal in our area, because
the nature of our districtthe people are very generous, and we
have received far more than our share of refugees from other countries. And that shows in our school districts that we have handled
them very well, and she is had great success with that.
Prior to her current position, she was a principal and led North
Godwin Elementary to be recognized as a high-performing school
by the Just For Kids program at the Michigan Chamber Foundation. The school also recently received a Dispelling the Myth award
by the Education Trust.
As a teacher for English-language learners, she was recognized
by the Michigan education association for her work in promoting
diversity. Arelis has also received the educational excellent award
by the Michigan school boards association for her development of
the Parents are Teachers English-language learners parent after
school program. So you can see she is had experience in many different areas in dealing with non-English-speaking students.
Born as a first-generation American in Chicago to immigrant
parents from the Dominican Republic and raised in Puerto Rico,
Arelis now lives with her husband, Andre, and their three children
in Byron Center, Michigan. I am pleased to introduce her to the
committee.
Thank you.
Chairman KILDEE. Our fourth witness, Dr. Jacqui Kearns, serves
as principal investigator for the federally funded National Alternate Assessment Center, which assists five states in developing validity evaluations for their alternate assessments on alternate
achievement designs. She played a key role in the design and implementation of the first alternate assessment used in an accountability system as part of Kentuckys education reform act in the
early 1990s.
Dr. Kearns also helped a number of states in the design, implementation and evaluation of alternate assessments after passage of
the IDEA reauthorization in 1997. Dr. Kearns is a third-generation
educator with 9 years of district classroom experience teaching students with significant cognitive disabilities. She is a parent of two
6
children, ages 7 and 4, one of whom was recently diagnosed with
ADHD and is receiving service through response to intervention,
RTI.
I will now yield to our committees ranking member, Governor
Castle, to introduce the final two witnesses.
Mr. CASTLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And happy to introduce our witnesses. First, there will be Dan
Curry. Dr. Daniel Curry currently serves as the superintendent of
Lake Forest School District in my home state of Delaware. The
Lake Forest School District serves more than 3,700 students in
southern Kent County, Delaware, 15 miles south of the capital of
Dover.
Dr. Curry began his 36-year education career at a local elementary school in Pocahontas County, West Virginia, where he taught
fourth and sixth grade before his first assignment as the principal
at age 24. During his time in the county, he served as an elementary school principal, a middle school principle, and all-purpose
central office administrator, and even drove a school bus on occasion, representing the dual roles that most educators play in small
rural areas.
At age 34, he was named county superintendent, where he
served for a total of 15 years. Dr. Curry has also worked in the
West Virginia Department of Education. And he and I spent time
together touring the Lake Forest people, I should say, at a school,
and he is a wonderful tour guide, too, and everyone seems to like
him greatly in the job he is doing.
Dr. Jake Dale is the current superintendent of Fairfax County
Public Schools, the nations 13th-largest school system. He has
served as superintendent since July 2004. From 1996 until 2004,
Dr. Dale served as superintendent for Frederick County public
schools where, in his fourth year, he was named Marylands superintendent of the year.
I would like to point out I have been in Congress for 18 years
and nobody has ever named me the outstanding legislator of the
year or anything like that.
Previously, Dr. Dale served as the associate superintendent for
school administration, curriculum, and instruction at the Edmonds
School District in Edmonds, Washington. He also served as director
of personnel in the Everett, Washington, school district, assistant
to the director at the Center for the Assessment of Administrative
Performance at the University of Washington and director of school
instructional services, assistant principal, and mathematics teacher
in the Bellevue School District, Washington.
Dr. Dale is co-editor and author of the book Creating Successful
School Systems and has conducted workshops on teacher compensation systems for No Child Left Behind initiatives. He has also
published papers in the Executive Educator, International Journal
of Education Reform, American Association of School Personnel Administrators, Research Brief and SIRS Management Information,
all of which are publications we read up here on a regular basis,
sort of tongue-in-cheek.
But I congratulate Dr. Dale on a wonderful career, as well, and
we are delighted to have all the witnesses here today.
Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much, Governor.
7
Before we begin, let me briefly explain our lighting system and
the 5-minute rule. Everyone, including members of Congress, is
limited to 5 minutes of presentation or questioning. The light is
green when you begin to speak. When you see the yellow light, it
means you have one minute remaining. When the light turns red,
your time has expired and you need to conclude your testimony.
Please be certain as you testify to turn on and speak into the
microphones in front of you. Dont worry, there is no ejection seat.
So if you want to, you know, finish a thought, you dont have to
cut it off in the middle of that.
So we will now hear from our first witness, Mr. Michael
Wotorson.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL T.S. WOTORSON, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, CAMPAIGN FOR HIGH SCHOOL EQUITY
Mr. WOTORSON. Chairmen Kildee, Ranking Member Castle, and

distinguished committee members, good morning and thank you for
inviting me to testify. My name is Michael Wotorson, as was stated
earlier, and I serve as the executive director for the Campaign for
High School Equity.
I am here this morning not only representing the civil rights coalition that comprises our organization. I am here to speak on behalf
of the over 18 million young people, students of color enrolled in
public elementary and high schools in the U.S. I am also here on
behalf of the over 1 million kids who choose to drop out of high
school each year, often making that choice because they are forced
to contend with ineffective construction, low academic standards
not aligned to college and career readiness, and poor access to academicto educational resources.
So my remarks today are going to be focused on the kinds of support that high school students, particularly students of color and
Native students, need to graduate prepared for college work and
life.
The reauthorization of ESEA presents a historic opportunity to
build upon the promise and the achievements of the 2002 reauthorization known as No Child Left Behind, while remedying the defects that have limited the laws affecting this in eliminating educational inequities.
To be sure, NCLB was a step forward and greatly enhanced the
potential for conditions prevent students of color to achieve to be
removed, to be unhidden, particularly as faced by ethnic minorities
and language minorities of low-income students and students with
disabilities.
As a direct result of that 2002 legislation, the discussion and the
notion of school accountability is much more widely accepted, and
important attention is being paid to addressing achievement gaps,
enhancing college and career readiness, and strengthening high
school graduation rates for all students.
If we intend to improve Americas schools, ESEA needs to be
strengthened in many ways. For CHSE, this means expanding the
focus on how we address the unique needs of high school students
of color, Native students, and English-language learners. The pervasive and persistent inequities in our public education system
puts students of color at a disproportionate disadvantage as they
8
continue to attend highly segregated schools, despite the decadesold Brown v. Board ruling.
To ensure access to equal educational opportunities and to reverse the graduation crisis among students of color, our system of
education must challenge all students to meet the same high academic expectations. Indeed, in 2008, an American Council on Education report revealed that, counter to earlier trends, far too many
of todays young Americans are realizing lower levels of educational
attainment than in previous generations.
In years past, our economy allowed high school students to find
meaningful employment without the requirement of significant
education and training beyond high school. Today in the increasingly global economy, there is a demand that American students
are prepared to compete with students from around the world. Unfortunately, most of our high school students do not measure up to
their international peers.
It is critical, therefore, that as a society, we provide students
with high-caliber, relevant academic coursework to adequately prepare them for the increasingly international post-high school reality of college and work.
Students who attend colleague without having mastered basic
skills cost our nation over $2 billion a year in remediation costs.
Additionally, many employers today lament that high school graduates often do not have the skills necessary to be successful in the
workplace.
Clearly, we need to restore the value of the high school diploma.
To do so, we must align state academic standards to college and
work readiness so that our nations graduates leave high school
prepared to be highly skilled employees and leaders of tomorrow.
At CHSE, we believe that the American education policy should
prepare all students for this reality. And to do so, we believe ESEA
should aim high and address critical needs of high school students
through the following suggestions.
Number one, make all students proficient and prepared for college and work. We should guarantee as a minimum threshold that
all students have access to rigorous and engaging coursework in
core subjects.
Number two, hold high schools accountable for students success.
It is imperative that we hold high schools accountable for getting
students successfully through to graduation by including meaningful graduation rates in federal school accountability standards.
We should also improve data systems as a critical component of
a strong accountability system. As we all know, making decisions
without the benefit of fully disaggregated data ignores the unique
needs of students of color and ill prepares school administrators to
allocate resources based on student and teacher needs.
For example, without fully disaggregated data, the needs of
whole segments of Asian-American and Pacific Islander populations
are often neglected and, as a result, entire groups of kids end up
falling through the cracks.
Number three, fundamentally redesign the American high school.
In order to address students diverse needs, states and districts
must provide their schools with the means to explore and implement new educational models, as well as other effective interven-
9
tions, such as literacy programs, personal graduation plans, and
extended learning time.
Number four, provide students with excellent leaders and teachers. The federal government can support programs that establish
incentives to recruit, train, support and retain effective leaders and
teachers in high poverty high schools.
Number five, invest communities in students success. The school
environment is critical to student success, but we also know it is
not the only factor that impacts a secondary school students academic and social outcomes. Families and communities also play key
roles.
Number six, provide equitable learning conditions for all students. Persistent disparities in the allocation of key education resources often bar low-income and minority students from receiving
a high-quality education, a high-quality education that they so
richly deserve, so resources must be distributed equitably, used effectively, and directed where they are needed the most.
I just want to say two quick things about our specific recommendationor actually, three quick things about our recommendation. I am happy to answer questions later.
Number one, our policy should invest in interventions that work.
Number three, our policy should adopt effective teaching policy
strategies and make sure they are distributed equitably. And number three, we should make sure that we do, in fact, improve data
systems for all students.
Thank you very much.
[The statement of Mr. Wotorson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael Wotorson, Executive Director, Campaign
for High School Equity
Chairman Kildee, Ranking Member Castle, and distinguished Committee members, thank you for inviting me to testify today.
My name is Michael Wotorson and I serve as executive director of the Campaign
for High School Equity, otherwise known as CHSE. CHSE is a coalition of leading
civil rights organizations representing communities of color that is focused on high
school education reform. Our goal is to advance solutions to close the achievement
gap for students of color and Native students and to build public will and support
among policymakers, advocates and community leaders for policies that will
strengthen high school quality and graduation rates for minority and low-income
students.
CHSE partners include the National Urban League, the National Council of La
Raza, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund, the
Alliance for Excellent Education, the National Indian Education Association and the
Southeast Asia Resource Action Center.
I am here today not only representing the nine national civil rights and education
advocacy organizations that comprise our coalition. I am here to speak on behalf of
the nearly 18.4 million students of color and Native students enrolled in public elementary and high schools in the United States. I am also here on behalf of the over
1 million students who choose to drop out of our nations high schools each year.
CHSE believes in the very simple premise that in order to ensure all students unfettered and equitable access to educational opportunities and to arrest the high school
graduation crisis among students of color, we must have a system of education that
challenges and supports all students to meet the demands of a college and of the
modern workforce.
My remarks today therefore will be focused on the kinds of supports that high
school students, particularly students of color and Native students, need to graduate
prepared for college, work, and life.
10
Building on Past Successes
The promise of a high-quality high school education is integral to our success as
a nation. From meeting the presidents goal of again leading the world in the number of college graduates, to competing in a global economy, to citizen participation
in our democracy, education is a basic building block. The pending reauthorization
of the Elementary and Secondary Education (ESEA) Act presents a historic opportunity to build upon the promise and achievements of the 2002 reauthorization,
commonly known as the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, while remedying defects
that have limited the laws effectiveness in eliminating educational inequities.
NCLB was a step forward. It greatly enhanced ESEAs potential to improve conditions for students of color, first by holding states, school districts, and schools accountable for the academic success of all students; and second, by disaggregating
data for racial and ethnic minorities, language minorities, low-income students, and
students with disabilities.
The simple fact is that the 2002 reauthorization of ESEA moved us significantly
closer to strengthening educational quality for all students. In short, it eliminated
the ability to hide the often tragic conditions student so of color face in our schools
and consequences of our collective failure to educate all of our students at a high
level. Today as a direct result of the 2002 legislation, the critical importance of
school accountability is widely accepted and important attention is being paid to addressing achievement gaps, enhancing college and career readiness, and strengthening high school graduation rates for all students. The 2002 reauthorization of
ESEA effectively changed our national conversation about educational excellence
and equity. We must not retreat on these gains if we are to continue making important progress.
If we do intend to improve Americas schools, ESEA needs to be strengthened in
many ways. For CHSE, this means expanding the focus on how we address the
unique needs of high school students of color, Native students, and English language learner (ELL) students. The pervasive and persistent inequities in our public
education system puts students of color at a disproportionate disadvantage as they
continue to attend highly segregated schools, despite the decades old Brown v.
Board of Education ruling. For example, three out of every four of Latino students
and 56 percent of all Asian Americans1 attend segregated schools in which minorities comprise 50 percent or more of the student population.2 Latinos and African
Americans comprise 80 percent of the student population in extreme-poverty schools
where 90 to 100 percent of the population is considered low-income.3 We need to
ensure that all American students have access to equitable learning conditions
whether they come from high or low-income neighborhoods.
To ensure access to equal educational opportunities and reverse the graduation
crisis among students of color, our system of education must challenge all students
to meet the same high academic expectations. Indeed, a 2008 American Council on
Education report revealed that counter to earlier trends, far too many of todays
young Americans are realizing lower levels of educational attainment than in previous generations.4
In years past, our economy allowed high school students to find meaningful employment without the requirement of significant education and training beyond high
school. Today, the increasingly global economy demands that American students are
prepared to compete with students from around the world.5 Unfortunately, American high school students do not measure up to their international peers. It is critical that as a society, we provide students with high caliber, relevant academic
coursework to adequately prepare them for the increasingly international post-highschool reality of college and work.
Students who attend college without having mastered basic skills cost our nation
over $2 billion a year in remedial coursework.6 Additionally, many of todays employers lament that high school graduates do not have the skills necessary to be successful in the workplace. Clearly, we must restore the value of a high school diploma
by increasing academic rigor. To do so, we must align state academic standards to
college and work readiness so that as our nations graduates leave high school, they
are prepared to assume roles as Americas college students, highly skilled employees, and leaders of tomorrow.
Policy Solutions
CHSE believes that American education policy can prepare all students for college, work and life by creating an environment in which all children can achieve
that goal regardless of race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. To do this, ESEA
should aim high and address the critical needs of all high school students through
the following policies:
11
1. Make All Students Proficient and Prepared for College and Work
We should guarantee that all students have access to rigorous and engaging
coursework in core subjects. Coursework should impart the knowledge and skills
needed to excel in postsecondary education and career, and assessments should
measure student learning against these criteria. States should in turn be required
to publicly report on access to college preparatory classes and course-taking patterns
by income, race and ethnicity, both among and within schools.
2. Hold High Schools Accountable for Student Success
It is imperative that we hold high schools accountable for getting students successfully to graduation by including meaningful graduation rates in federal school
accountability standards. Codifying in law the current graduation rate regulations
would make a significant difference and would serve as a critical factor in determining the quality of a high school and it would be an effective use of resources.
Improving data systems is another critical component of a strong accountability
system. They will to not only improve the fairness and accuracy of accountability
systems, including ensuring increased accountability for groups that are often
marginalized, such as, ELLs, Native Americans and Southeast Asians, but will also
allow schools to target services such as professional development where they are
needed most.
Additionally, making decisions without the benefit of fully disaggregated data ignores the unique needs of students of color and ill prepares school administrators
to allocate resources based on student and teacher needs. While many states
disaggregate data, inconsistencies in collection and reporting standards leave entire
groups of students out of the equation. For example, without fully disaggregated
data, the needs of whole segments of the Asian American and Pacific Islander population are neglected. As a result, entire groups of these young people end up falling
through the cracks.
We must also establish accurate and reliable assessments for ELLs. States have
not yet implemented valid and reliable Title I or Title III assessments for ELLs, and
the U.S. Department of Education has not yet provided sufficient technical assistance or guidance to the states in the development of appropriate assessment policies
and practices. Both failures have severely hindered the effectiveness of NCLB for
ELLs.
3. Redesign the American High School
In order to address students diverse needs, states and districts must provide their
schools with the means to explore and implement new educational models, as well
as other effective interventions such as literacy programs, personal graduation
plans, and extended learning time.
4. Provide Students with Excellent Leaders and Teachers
The federal government can support programs that establish incentives to recruit,
train, support and retain effective leaders and teachers in high-poverty high schools.
Federal education policy that promotes culturally based teaching, a practice wherein
teachers align instruction to the cultural practices and experiences of their students,
is also critical to helping all students succeed.
5. Invest Communities in Student Success
The school environment is critical to student success, but we also know it is not
the only factor that impacts a secondary school students academic and social outcomes. Families and communities also play key roles. Students in low-performing
schools often do not receive the same exposure to outside learning opportunities as
their more affluent counterparts. Our policy must harmonize the incentive and disincentive structures of the external and internal environments to support all students ability to stay in school, excel academically, and develop into a productive individual.
6. Provide Equitable Learning Conditions for All Students
Persistent disparities in the allocation of key education resources often bar lowincome and minority students from receiving the high-quality education they deserve. Research demonstrates that, across states, school districts that enroll the
highest percentage of students of color and low-income students receive fewer resources than school districts serving white and affluent students.7 Resources must
be distributed equitably, used effectively, and directed to where they are needed the
most.
12
7. Support the State-led Common Core Standards
The state-led effort on common standards can be a critical first step in reforming
the American educational system. If developed and implemented effectively, high
common standards can help to improve our education system with significant benefits for students of color. The federal government should support states when necessary, as these standards have the prospect to challenge all students to reach the
same high expectations.
8. Expand Learning Opportunities Beyond the School Day
Often, increasing the engagement of older youth requires more than just time beyond the traditional school day. The innovation and enrichment that can take place
beyond the regular school day can help students stay engaged in school and graduate.
I would like to speak in more depth about a few areas of interest: turning around
low-performing schools, student supports needed to help all students succeed, and
effective teaching.
Turning around Low-performing Schools
Our nations students of color are four times more likely than non-minority students to attend a persistently low-performing school, and three times less likely to
attend a high school with very high graduation rates. In fact, dropout factories
produce 81 percent of all Native American dropouts, 73 percent of all African American dropouts, and 66 percent of all Latino dropouts.
Despite these alarming statistics, the majority of low-performing high schools are
left out of school improvement efforts because many are not eligible for Title I support, the trigger for school improvement efforts. In fact, only 61 percent of dropout
factories are eligible forand, many analysts believe, even fewer actually receive
Title I funds. Even if they do receive Title I funds, many dropout factories will likely
not be identified as in need of improvement since graduation rates are not significantly factored into the determination of a schools success or failure. For example,
41 percent of dropout factories made AYP in the 200405 school year.8
We have an opportunity right now to ensure that low-performing high schools
benefit from attention, resources, and aggressive reform by making sure high
schools are eligible for Title I, are held accountable for graduation rates in addition
to academic achievement, and are included in school improvement calculations and
intervention strategies.
Invest in Interventions that Work
Creating high-performing high schools that give all students the support they
need to succeed is no small task, and it requires changing the school in addition
to a community investment. To truly serve the needs of Americas diverse learners,
high schools must be redesigned by:
implementing a variety of quality high school models shown to support different
learning styles and student situations;
providing integrated student supports that utilize both in-school and community-based services (for example, high-quality high school counselors, graduation
coaches, social workers, and health care and mental health services);
promoting strategies (such as literacy coaches or native language instruction)
and targeted interventions (such as afterschool programs or block scheduling) that
improve student numeracy and literacy skills without sacrificing access to high-level
academic subjects;
promoting instructional practices designed to meet the needs of diverse learners
such as reflexive learning and culturally competent learning techniques; and
ensuring that legally and educationally valid criteria are used to appropriately
inform decisions regarding student eligibility for services in special education, services for ELLs, college preparatory curricula, and gifted and talented programs.
CHSE believes that community-based organizations (CBOs) play a critical role in
providing much-needed wrap-around services, particularly for students of color and
Native students. The federal government should support the creation and expansion
of multilingual parent centers, as well as CBO-based expanded learning opportunities including afterschool and summer programs, business-school partnerships and
other community-based support services needed to help students stay in school and
graduate.
Throughout a reauthorized ESEA, we must remember that successful strategies
for high school students differ from those of younger students. High school students
are inherently more mobile, have competing demands on their timeincluding
sports, clubs, jobs, and family responsibilities, among other differencesand therefore, require different strategies, activities, and supports than elementary and mid-
13
dle school students. For example, expanded learning initiatives and services for
older students should use innovative practices and partners to better develop student assets by providing leadership and community service opportunities, work experience, academic credits and stipends. Policy must support and drive high-school
based supports such as expanded learning programs.
An evaluation of New York City programs9 found certain common elements in
successful high school effort, and they differed from those that made elementary and
middle school programs successful. They include:
the use of creative, age-appropriate strategies to recruit youth and encourage
their continued participation;
the employment of staff who could relate to youth and staff with expertise in
activity content areas;
activities designed to meet the developmental needs of older youth, for example,
through the provision of career- and college-oriented activities and leadership opportunities; and
partnerships to increase the fiscal and other resources available to the program.
Adopt Effective Teaching Policy Strategies and Distribute them Equitably
High-quality teachers are the single most important factor influencing student
academic outcomes, including graduation.10 In fact, the presence of an effective
teacher trumps almost every other intervention, including class size reduction, in
improving student outcomes.11 Students, especially students of color and Native students who have traditionally been underserved by the system and are most likely
to benefit, are not being taught by effective teachers.12 In order to address this disparity, CHSE believes that it is critical that all students, especially those most at
risk of dropping out of high school, should have access to effective teachers. Next
week, CHSE will release policy recommendations related to effective teaching. Our
vision contemplates teacher effectiveness policies that:
Are based significantly on growth in academic achievement for all students,
Improve classroom instruction and leadership decision-making,
Include and support high school specific solutions,
Ensure teachers (and school leaders) are culturally competent,
Ensure Teachers of Diverse Learners are prepared and well-resourced; and
Invest in Research
While we know that teachers are a critical determinant of how a student will perform academically, research shows that the students most likely to benefit are not
being taught by effective teachers.13 Highly effective teachers are more likely to be
teaching in more affluent schools and schools with smaller populations of students
of color.14 Therefore CHSE supports teacher effectiveness policies that ensure that
effective teachers are equitably distributed to give all students a fighting chance at
learning.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the last reauthorized ESEA surfaced a number of troubling academic disparities amongst student subgroups. Prior to disaggregating data for racial, ethnic, and language minorities, low-income students, and students with disabilities, the depth of academic achievement gaps remained relatively hidden. While
NCLB was a step in the right direction, clearly, there is still much to do, and we
must not only do it right, we must do it NOW.
The educational interests of students of color and Native students should be fully
considered in the deliberation over ESEA. In order to meet the needs of these students CHSE and its partners urge Congress to ensure better support for high
schools and strong accountability for improving results for high school students.
All studentsespecially students of color, Native students, ELLsstand to benefit
from a reauthorized ESEA. Waiting any longer to reauthorize ESEA amounts to
shutting the door on thousands of American high school students and their dreams
of a successful future. CHSE looks forward to continuing to work with this Committee and the full Congress to ensure the timely renewal of this critical civil rights
legislation.
Thank you, again, for the opportunity and privilege to testify before you today.
I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
ENDNOTES
1 Orfield,
G., and C. Lee. (2005) Why segregation matters: Poverty and educational inequality.
Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Available at http://
bsdweb.bsdvt.org/district/EquityExcellence/Research/WhySegregMatters.pdf.
2 Orfield, G. and J.T. Yun, (1999) Resegregation in American Schools. Cambridge, MA: The
Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Available at http://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/
research/deseg/ResegregationAmericanSchools99.pdf.
14
3 Orfield,
G., and C. Lee. (2005)

Council on Education (2008). Minorities in Higher Education 2008 Twenty-third
Status Report. Washington, DC: Author.
5 National Center on Education and the Economy (2007). Tough Choices or Tough Times: The
Report of the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce, Executive Summary.
Accessed at www.skillscommission.org/pdf/execsum/ToughChoicesEXECSUM.pdf.
6 Strong American Schools (2008). Diploma to Nowhere. Washington, DC: Author.
7 Carey, K. (2004). The funding gap 2004: Many states still shortchange low-income and minority students. Washington, DC: Education Trust.
8 Balfanz R. et al., (2007). Are NCLBs measures, incentives, and improvement strategies the
right ones for the nations low-performing high schools? American Educational Research Journal
44: 55993.
9 Russell, C. A., Vile, J.D., Reisner, E. R., et al. (2008). Evaluation of the New York City Department of Youth and Community Development Out-of-School Time Programs for Youth Initiative: Implementation of Programs for High School Youth. New York: New York City Department of Youth and Community Development. Available at www.nyc.gov/html/dycd/downloads/
pdf/osthsprogramsreport-6-08.pdf.
10 Carey, K. (2004). The real value of teachers: if good teachers matter, why dont we act like
it? Thinking K-16, 8, 1. Available at http://www.calread.net/documents/summit3/articles/
realvalueteachers.pdf.
11 Jerald, C., Haycock K. and A. Wilkins (2009). Fighting for quality and equality, too: how
state policymakers can ensure the drive to improve teacher quality doesnt just trickle down to
poor and minority children. Washington DC: The Education Trust. Available at http://
www.edtrust.org/sites/edtrust.org/files/publications/files/QualityEquity3.pdf.
12 Gordon, R., Kane, T., and D. Staiger (2006). Identifying effective teachers using performance
on the job. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Available at http://www.brookings.edu/?/
media/Files/rc/papers/2006/04educationgordon/200604hamilton1.pdf.
13 Gordon, R., Kane, T., and D. Staiger (2006). Identifying effective teachers using performance
on the job. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Available at http://www.brookings.edu/?/
media/Files/rc/papers/2006/04educationgordon/200604hamilton1.pdf.
14 Gordon, R., Kane, T., and D. Staiger (2006).
4 American
Chairman KILDEE. Thank you.

Dr. Gipp?
STATEMENT OF DAVID GIPP, PRESIDENT, UNITED TRIBES
TECHNICAL COLLEGE (UTTC)
Mr. GIPP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is an honor to beon behalf of the National Congress of American Indians, the National Indian Education Association, and the National Alliance to save native languages, it is a great honor to be here today from Bismarck,
North Dakota.
As you indicated, I am president of United Tribes Technical College, where we have about 500 children, three early childhood centers, and a K-8 elementary school on our campus that represents
over 70 different tribes in our student population.
I would like to speak to about five major points relative to American Indian tribal nations and Indian education. First, we believe
that we should strengthen tribal control in Indian education and
in education. Tribes, like communities, are fully aware of what
their children need.
As future tribal leaders, tribes recognize the importance of providing their children with the fundamental curriculum that state
education requires. However, they also bring a unique and critical
perspective to the table, which includes the incorporation of tribal
culture and languages.
State education agencies do not understand the complexity of
tribal beliefs and, therefore, undermine the vital role in our lives
of our Indian children. Tribal education departments are formal
components of our tribal governments, and they need to be recognized and given appropriate authority as part of the ESEA reauthorization.
15
Second, we believe that there ought to be increased coordination
between the Department of Education and the Bureau of Indian
Education. About 90 percent-plus of our children are educated in
public schools and aboutthe other 10 percent are educated within
the Bureau of Indian Affairs systems or in tribal schools themselves. Because our students attend public, tribal, and BIE schools,
it is critical that these education agencies communicate and work
together.
Third, there ought to be a focus on recruitment and retention of
native teachers. Indian country needs more native teachers. Teachers that share the same cultural knowledge and ethnic background
of their students understand their educational needs to a higher
degree and act as community role models. Consequently, teacher
retention is a major issue for us.
Tribal colleges, the 37 that are throughout the United States,
also have a critical role to play in teacher recruitment and training.
United Tribes, where I am at, offers a 4-year elementary education
degree. Graduates of this program, almost all Native Americans,
are ready to step into the classroom at schools throughout Indian
country.
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act needs to include
provisions that offer incentives for students to enter teacher training programs through our tribal colleges and universities.
Fourth, the long-term investment in culturally based education
again, I want to highlight the importance of native culture and language in combination with education. What we do know is that the
research shows and demonstrates that Indian children who have a
better knowledge base of their culture, their heritage and their language also perform much better with respect to the other kinds of
academic curriculum.
We know that our students perform better academically when
they have a sense of pride and self-esteem for knowing who they
are and where they come from. This cultural foundation needs to
be reinforced and strengthened for each of our native students.
This kind of cultural-based education is being utilized in places like
Montana, and it is beginning to show good results.
We also know that native-language-based educational models
also work to improve performance. On that, we recommend that
the Esther Martinez Native American Language Preservation Act
be funded more fully and that a formula base is used for those
kinds of schools that work with immersion styles of education for
native children.
We would also like to emphasize the issue of tribal consultation,
because our tribes have a treaty and federal Indian relationship to
the United States government, as well as our states, a nation-tonation relationship that is reaffirmed through those means that I
have just mentioned and through President Obamas executive
order in November 5, 2009, which requires that each agency develop a plan to implement a consultation and coordination with
tribal government.
In the past, the Department of Education has not adequately
consulted with our tribal leaders. As a result, our students were
left out of the Recovery Acts stabilization funds and the Department of Eds Race to the Top Initiative.
16
Finally, I would like to point out that each of our speakers who
have testified today are representative of various groups throughout education. Our students cannot be characterized into one particular single group, because American Indian and Alaska native
tribal nations are first and foremost tribal governments and have
many distinct and diverse cultures within the 565 federally recognized Indian tribes.
Thus, there is a political aspect that is unique to our educational
system. We have students from rural and urban areas, and many
have special needs, and many come from low-income families. We
also have children who attend all forms of schooling, public, BIE,
rural and urban, and consequently our tribes can relate to each of
these groups.
We hope that the ESEA needs to assist tribal nations by giving
them the tools of control they need to make through the various
education systems consistent with each tribes cultures and values.
I thank you for this opportunity today, Mr. Chairman.
[The statement of Mr. Gipp follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. David M. Gipp, on Behalf of the National Congress of American Indians and the National Indian Education Association
Good morning, Chairman Kildee, Ranking Member Castle, and members of the
Subcommittee. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify today. My name
is David M. Gipp. My Indian name is Lone Star or Wicahpi Isnala, I am an enrolled
citizen of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, and I am a Hunkpapa Lakota. I have
served as the president of the United Tribes Technical College, (UTTC, sometimes
referred to as United Tribes of North Dakota) since May, 1977. On the UTTC campus, there is a Bureau of Indian Education-funded elementary school, Theodore
Jameson, educating students in K through eighth grade, which has been in operation for 38 years. There are three pre-K early childhood centers on the campus as
well.
We submit this testimony in collaboration with our sister organization, the National Indian Education Association (NIEA). NCAI is the oldest and largest American Indian organization in the United States. As the most representative national
Indian organization, we serve the broad interests of tribal governments across the
nation. NCAI was founded in 1944 in response to termination and assimilation policies. Since then, we have fought to preserve the treaty rights and sovereign status
of Indian tribes and to ensure that Indian people may fully participate in the political system. Our partner, NIEA, was founded in 1969 and is committed to increasing
the educational opportunities and resources for Indian students while protecting our
cultural and linguistic traditions.
NCAI, NIEA, and I strongly support the Administrations and Congress efforts to
reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Perhaps nowhere
in the country will the impact of this reauthorization be more beneficial than in Indian Country. We were excited to hear Secretary Duncans testimony last week as
he expressed the Departments desire to move towards greater flexibility and local
control, as well as his affirmation of promoting promising practices and focusing on
disadvantaged students.
Indian education disparities
In comparison to their peers, American Indian and Alaska Native children continue to fall behind in the educational and learning achievements of their peers. The
2007 National Indian Education Studyi indicated that in reading and math, American Indian and Alaska Native students scored significantly lower than their peers
in both fourth and eighth grades. In fact, Native students were the only students
to show no significant progress in either subject since 2005. Our students also face
some of the highest high school dropout rates in the country.ii These discouraging
trends need to be reversed.
Data for Indian students is often incomplete. There are a number of reasons for
thisincluding the need for oversampling, our remote locations, and language barriers. However, some of the comparisons with the non-Native population are quite
disturbing (additional demographic and statistical information provided in Appendix
A):
17
70% of BIA-administered schools failed to satisfy No Child Left Behind Adequate Yearly Progress requirements in 2005.iii
American Indian and Alaska Native students were more likely than students
of other racial and ethnic groups to receive services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Specifically, about 12% of American Indian and
Alaska Native students received IDEA services in 2003, compared to 8% of white,
11% of black, 8% of Hispanic, and 4% of Asian/Pacific Islander students.iv
Only 44.6% of American Indian males and 50% of American Indian females
graduated with a regular diploma in the 200304 school year.v
American Indians have a 15% higher chance of dropping out of high school then
white students.vi
The National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) reports that 74% of
American Indian and Alaska Native twelfth graders read below grade level, compared to 57 % of white twelfth graders.vii
Tribal governments believe that we are well positioned to address many of these
educational disparities. Unfortunately, tribes face many challenges in providing the
best educational opportunities for our children.
On Indian reservations, there are three types of K-12 public school systems: federal Bureau of Indian Affairs schools, tribal government schools, and local county
school districts. In some Indian communities, all three school systems co-exist.
The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) is responsible for 184 elementary and secondary schools and 27 colleges. These institutions are located on 63 reservations,
spanning across 23 states; they educate approximately 60,000 students. Schools that
are not directly operated by the BIE are run by individual federally recognized
tribes with grants or contracts from the BIE.
Tribal Education Departments (TED) are formal components of tribal governments. Over 110 federally-recognized tribes have TEDs. Their primary goal is to ensure that tribal students are receiving the same opportunities that non-tribal students receive by coordinating federal, state, and tribal resources for tribal students
and implementing the goals of the NCLB Act. TEDs improve educational opportunities for tribal students by giving direction, advice, and assistance to local schools
through the development of education codes and analysis of educational data and
research. Funding for TEDs has been authorized through the Department of the Interior since 1988 and through the Department of Education since 1994; however,
TEDs have never been funded at an appropriate level.
Head Start Programs, particularly the Tribal Head Start and Early Head Start
Programs are vital to Indian Country. Approximately 38% of all federally-recognized
tribes have Head Start and/or Early Head Start programs, which are reaching over
23,000 Indian children; Indian Head Start plays a major role in educating and preparing Indian children for academic success. They have a proven record of enhancing academic readiness and self-esteem of Indian children, and provide a unique opportunity to enhance cultural pride and knowledge through the promotion of tribal
values and tribal language immersion programs.
Tribally controlled colleges and universities (TCUs) share many characteristics
that differentiate them other secondary institutions. TCUs are intended to foster environments focused on American Indian and Alaska Native culture by creating
learning opportunities that preserve, enhance, and promote Native language and
traditions. Some TCUs function as community resources, providing social services
to isolated and remote reservation areas. Currently, there are 34 TCUs. TCUs are
essential in providing educational opportunities and environments for Native students to pursue advanced degrees in settings that are comfortable and familiar and
at an affordable cost.
Indian education is a Federal responsibility
We must be clear: specifically addressing the needs of American Indians and Alaska Natives within the reauthorization of the ESEA is not akin to providing requirements for reducing education disparities or considering the needs of ethnically diverse populations. While we may fall into those target populations as well, the significant difference is that providing education to American Indians and Alaska Natives is a federal obligation because of the unique legal status of Indian people.
When Indian tribes ceded certain landslands which now constitute the United
Statesagreements were made between tribes and the United States government
that established a trust responsibility for the safety and well-being of Indian peoples in perpetuity. In addition, a number of treaties specifically outlined the provision of education, nutrition, and health care. Therefore, the federal trust responsibility for American Indian and Alaska Native education must be recognized in all
education policies.
18
At the same time, as United States citizens, American Indians and Alaska Natives should have opportunities equal to those of other citizens to participate in the
benefits of all programs and services offered within the reauthorization. While it
may be tempting for Congress to dismiss tribal recommendations, due to their complex nature, I assure you they are needed. The Indian education system is invisible
to most Americans, but it does, and it must, interface with federal and state education systems. We understand what is needed to assure that educational reform
reaches and benefits Indian Country, and ask that you take the time to understand
how both the federal trust responsibility and mainstream education can work in
tandem for Indian people. We are committed to work with you in any way we can.
To that end, we offer the following specific comments.
Framework for inclusion of Indian country
Over the last few weeks, tribal leaders have spoken about the challenges facing
our Indian education system at a number of venuesCongressional briefing sessions, meetings with the Domestic Policy Council, and most recently on a call with
Secretary Duncan. At each of these, key principles and themes have emerged, which
I share with the Committee today. NCAI and NIEA are working with tribal leaders
from across the nation to transform these principles into our National Tribal Priorities for Indian Education. We are looking forward to sharing the specific details
with the Committee in the coming weeks.
1) Strengthening Tribal Control in Education. Tribes are overwhelmingly supportive of local control over education. For Indian Country, this means fully recognizing the status of our tribal education departments (TEDs) as formal components
of our tribal governments and affording them the same status as State Education
Agencies (SEA) in tribal geographic territories.
2) Increased Coordination between the Department of Education and the Bureau
of Indian Education. Indian education must be viewed as an integrated system, with
our students moving in and out of public, tribally-run, and BIE schools. As such,
there must be a coordinated effort between the agencies that are responsible for providing Indian education.
3) Focus on Recruitment and Retention of Native Teachers. There is no greater
influence on student learning than the quality of the teacher. Indian schools are significantly disadvantaged in their effort to recruit skilled Native teachers. Uncompetitive salaries, remote locations, and lack of housing are but some of the challenges our tribal governments are facing. Tribal leaders are calling for an increased
focus on recruiting and retaining Native educators, as well as providing professional
development and support for teachers in schools with significant Native populations.
4) Long Term Investment in Cultural Based Education. By definition, Cultural
Based Education (CBE) is a teaching model that encourages quality instructional
practices rooted in cultural and linguistically relevant context. For Native communities, this includes teaching our Native language, but it also means incorporating
traditional cultural characteristics and teaching strategies that are harmonious with
Native cultural and contemporary ways of knowing. We know that our students perform better academically when they have a sense of pride and self-esteem, and CBE
provides this vital foundation. We recognize however that there is little quantitative
data to point to, so tribes are calling for CBE to be a identified as a promising practice in Indian education and for programs to be funded over a period of five years
so we can effectively build an evidence base that conclusively distinguishes what
works for which populations and under what circumstances.
Tribal consultation
Lastly, I would like to mention the importance of tribal consultation. A unique
Government-to-Government relationship exists between federally-recognized Indian
tribes and the Federal Government. This relationship is grounded in numerous treaties, statutes, and executive orders as well as political, legal, moral, and ethical
principles. This relationship is not based upon race, but rather, is derived the legal
status of tribal governments. The Federal Government has enacted numerous regulations that establish and define a trust relationship with Indian tribes. An integral
element of this Government-to-Government relationship is that consultation occurs
with Indian tribes. President Obama recently re-affirmed this relationship with an
Executive Memorandum, which requires each federal agency to develop a plan to
implement consultation and coordination with Indian tribal governments as required by Executive Order 13175.
The Department of Education (DoEd) has had little direct consultationor communicationwith the Tribes. They have relied almost exclusively on the National
Advisory Council on Indian Education, which unfortunately was not effectively utilized over the years. As a result, the DoEd has neglected to take into consideration
19
the impact of legislation on our tribal schools. A recent example of this oversight
is the inability for our schools to receive much needed funding through the Recovery
Acts Stabilization Funds or the DoEds new Race to the Top initiative. Through the
new EO, we are looking forward to a direct, productive relationship between our
tribal governments and the Department.
Conclusion
In closing, I would like to remind the Committee that whatever form the reauthorization of ESEA takes, it is important that tribal students, whether they attend
a Bureau of Indian Education funded school, a state public school, or a tribally run
school, are served by all of the ESEA programs, and must be specifically considered.
Thank you for inviting me to speak with you today; and thank you for making
Indian children a priority. We look forward to sharing the National Tribal Priorities for Indian Education with the Committee in the following weeks. I am certain
that our shared goal of improving the education of Indian children can be fostered
through the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
APPENDIX A
EDUCATION PROFILE OF AMERICAN INDIAN AND ALASKA NATIVE STUDENTS
Demographics
American Indian and Alaska Native students make up 1.2% of public school
students nationally.viii
There are approximately 644,000 American Indian and Alaska Native students
in the U.S. K-12 system.ix
About 93% of all American Indian and Alaska Native students attend regular
public schools and 7% attend schools administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.x
States where American Indian and Alaska Native students compose the largest
proportions of the total student populations included: Alaska (27 %), Oklahoma (19
%), Montana, New Mexico, and South Dakota (11 % each).xi
School Profiles
52% of American Indian and Alaska Native students attended schools in the
200304 school year where half or fewer of the students were white.xii
54% of American Indian and Alaska Native eighth graders attend schools where
more than half of the students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunch.xiii
In the 200203 school year, the average American Indian and Alaska Native
student attended a school where 39% of the students were poor, while the average
white student attended a school where only 23% were poor.xiv
70% of BIA-administered schools failed to satisfy No Child Left Behind Adequate Yearly Progress requirements in 2005.xv
In public schools with high American Indian and Alaska Native enrollment,
only 16% of teachers are American Indian and Alaska Native.xvi
Preparedness, Graduation and Dropouts
The National Assessment of Educational Progress reports that 44% of American
Indian and Alaska Native eighth graders read below grade level, compared to 16%
of white eighth graders.xvii
The national graduation rate for American Indian high school students was
49.3% in the 200304 school year, compared to 76.2% for white students.xviii
Only 44.6% of American Indian males and 50% of American Indian females
graduated with a regular diploma in the 200304 school year.xix
American Indians have a 15% higher chance of dropping out of high school then
white students.xx
American Indian and Alaska Native high school students who graduated in
2000 were less likely to have completed a core academic track than their peers from
other racial/ethnic groups.xxi
NAEP reports that 74 % of American Indian and Alaska Native twelfth graders
read below grade level, compared to 57 % of white twelfth graders.xxii
Special and Gifted Students
American Indian and Alaska Native students were more likely than students
of other racial and ethnic groups to receive services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Specifically, about 14% of American Indian and
Alaska Native students received IDEA services in 2006, compared to 8% of white,
11% of black, 8% of Hispanic, and 5% of Asian/Pacific Islander students.xxiii
About 20 % of students at BIA schools receive special education services.xxiv
20
American Indian and Alaska Native students are 1.53 times more likely to receive special education services for specific learning disabilities and are 2.89 times
more likely to receive such services for developmental delays than the combined average of all other racial groups.xxv
15% of American Indian and Alaska Native eighth graders were categorized as
students with disabilities in 2005, meaning they had or were in the process of receiving Individualized Education Plans, compared to 9% of all nonAmerican Indian and Alaska Native eighth graders.xxvi
ENDNOTES
i Freeman,
C. and Fox, M. (2005). Status and trends in the education of American Indians and
Alaska Natives. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department of
Education (NCES 2005-108).
ii Id.
iii U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs. BIA Funded School Adequate Yearly Progress 20042005.
http://www.oiep.bia.edu/ (accessed June 15, 2007).
iv Freeman, C. and Fox, M. (2005). Status and trends in the education of American Indians
and Alaska Natives. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Department
of Education (NCES 2005-108).
v Id.
vi Freeman, C. and Fox, M. (2005). Status and trends in the education of American Indians
vii The nations report card: Twelfth-grade reading and mathematics 2008 (NCES 2009-468).
Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
viii Id.
ix Id.
x Id.
xi Id.
xii Orfield, G., and C. Lee. 2005. Why segregation matters: Poverty and educational inequality.
Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
xiii National Indian education study, Part II: The educational experiences of fourth and eighthgrade American Indian and Alaska Native students (NCES 2007-454). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
xiv Orfield, G., and C. Lee. 2005. Why segregation matters: Poverty and educational inequality.
Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
xv U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs. BIA Funded School Adequate Yearly Progress 20042005.
http://www.oiep.bia.edu/ (accessed June 15, 2007).
xvi Manuelito, K. 2003. Building a native teaching force: Important considerations. Charleston,
WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education (ERIC ED482324).
xvii U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 2008. The nations
report card: Reading 2008 (NCES 2009-451). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
xviii Editorial Projects in Education [EPE]. 2007. Diplomas count 2007: Ready for what? Preparing students for college, careers, and life after high school. Special issue, Education Week
26, no. 5.
xix Id.
xx Freeman, C. and Fox, M. (2005). Status and trends in the education of American Indians
xxi Id.
xxii The nations report card: Twelfth-grade reading and mathematics 2005 (NCES 2007-468).
Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
xxiii Freeman, C. and Fox, M. (2008). Status and trends in the education of American Indians
xxiv U.S. General Accounting Office. 2001. BIA and DOD schools: Student achievement and
other characteristics often differ from public schools (GAO-01-934). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
xxv U.S. Department of Education. Office of Special Education Programs. 2004. Twenty-sixth
annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act, 2004, Vol. 1. Washington, DC.
xxvi National Indian education study, Part II: The educational experiences of fourth and
eighth-grade American Indian and Alaska Native students (NCES 2007-454). Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office.
Chairman KILDEE. Thank you, Dr. Gipp.

Ms. Diaz? Is your
21
STATEMENT OF ARELIS DIAZ, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT
OF CURRICULUM/INSTRUCTION AND HUMAN RESOURCES,
GODWIN HEIGHTS PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Ms. DIAZ. Good morning, Mr. Kildee, Ranking Member Castle,

and Mr. Ehlers, members of the subcommittee. It is an honor to be
here, and I appreciate your time.
In my immigrant experience, having immigrant parents and
being a first-generation American, I was really interested in working with ELL learners, and I wanted to share some of the successes
we have had at Godwin Heights public schools with you, things
that could be replicated easily and throughout the United States.
When I started my principalship in 2000, only 50 percent of our
students were meeting or exceeding reading and writing goals, 46
percent in math, and only 6 percent in social studies. We knew we
had to do something very quickly.
Some of the things we were able to do was analysis of data. This
is like the GPS of education. We need to know where we are going
with data, and data analysis provides that for us. It gives us that
ability to do so.
Teachers need to know how to look at data and analyze data.
They need to be given the time to do so during the school day, with
gaining substitutes, works very effectively.
It needs to be done in teams by grade level, and it also needs to
be documented. That work needs to be documented. It needs to go
to the school improvement team, and goals need to be met based
on the data analysis.
The professional learning communities that we have implemented in our district has incorporated the sharing of instructional
practices that work. It is really moved teachers from isolation to
collaboration, really increasing the achievement in all of our
groups, including the English-language learners.
The school improvement team goals, before you leave for a road
trip, it is similar to checking your engine, the oil, your tire pressure. What it does is it lets you know that things are in order.
The ideal time to do the school improvement team goals is really
in the spring for the fall, if possible. Team members need to be represented by every grade level, ELL teachers, reading teachers.
There needs to be a good representation of the school and the
school improvement team.
The yearly goals need to be based on the data analysis that takes
place. They need to be measurable and specific, and we need to be
able to incorporate that in the teacher evaluation process. Oftentimes, that is missing. And principals need to be sure to look for
those school improvement team goals in the observations and reflect on that through the evaluation process.
Parent involvement is enormous. We need to include all of our
parents. When you are dealing with a community of diverse parents and they are surrounded by poverty, it does create a challenge
for us, but they need to feel welcome, they need to be embraced and
educated.
One of the things that has been successful for our district is family and family night, reading nights, math nights, where we are
specifically demonstrating, live demonstrations to parents on how
they can help their students with literacy and skills and strategies.
22
We also translate everything for the families, Spanish, Vietnamese,
Bosnian, whatever language is represented, and we feed them. If
you feed them, they will come. And that is a very important part.
And through title money, we could also provide that.
Professional developments like rolling down the window and getting fresh air when you are on a long road trip. Professional development gives teachers a fresh outlook in their education. It kind
of eliminates the stagnant air, if you will. With implementation
plans and expectations clearly outlined, professional development
can make a tremendous difference.
We need Title 3 funding that can provide resources for us to educate the teachers that are working with English-language learners,
and it also provides activities for us for parents, before and after
school tutoring for students, which is extra time and support, and
programming after school for parents, as well.
When you reach a destination, there is a sense of joy and accomplishment. Results do that for educators. When you can look back
and see that your hard work has paid off, it makes a tremendous
difference. I have included longitudinal data, as well.
Effective teaching can close the achievement gap. There is absolutely no reason that we cannot do it. But when you have a diverse
population, it is twice as hard to do so, and we would like you to
acknowledge that.
We understand and welcome accountability, but there are modifications that are necessary, and I have included a couple of recommendations in my proposal. Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Diaz follows:]
Prepared Statement of Arelis E. Diaz, Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum/Instruction and Human Resources, Godwin Heights Public
Schools, Wyoming, MI
Good morning. Chairman Kildee, Ranking Member Castle, Mr. Ehlers, and members of the subcommittee thank you for this opportunity to speak to you today. I
am Arelis Diaz, Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum/Instruction and Human Resources in Godwin Heights Public Schools District located in Wyoming, Michigan.
This work is quite dear to me since I am a first generation American with hard
working parents from the Dominican Republic. I was raised in Puerto Rico and returned to the states during my third grade year. My immigrant experience gave me
a desire to train for and teach diverse English Language Learners. I was privileged
to teach ELL students for 5 years, lead teachers primarily as a principal for 5 years,
and most recently have led instruction for the district as a central office administrator for the last 5 years. I am honored to share some of the work we have been
successful with at Godwin Heights over the past 10 years to improve instructional
practices and achieve positive academic gains in addressing the needs of diverse students.
Background of Godwin Heights Public School District
Godwin Heights is an urban district located on the border of Grand Rapids. We
have experienced a great deal of diversity growth in the past two decades. In 1995,
I had 36 students in my English Language Learners class whose native language
was other than English. Fifteen years later, although our students prominent first
language is still Spanish, that same school has 155 ELL students who come from
16 different countries. The changes in poverty are similar. In 1995, Godwins community was comprised primarily of strong manufacturing employees working at GM
and Steelcase plants. Today, the GM plant has closed and Steelcase is a skeleton
of the healthy and hearty company it used to be. As a result, 84% of our students
now qualify for free and reduced lunch.
Godwin Heights Public School District serves 2,212 students at our 3 elementary
schools, one middle school, one high school, and one alternative high school. All of
our schools qualify for and receive Title I Program funding. We also provide ELL
and Special Education services at all of the schools.
23
Changes in instructional practiceas principal
When I became principal of North Godwin Elementary School in 2000, only 50%
of our students were meeting or exceeding Michigans Reading and Writing expectation. Only 46% of our students satisfactorily passed the Math assessment. Our Social Studies results were even worsewith only 6% of our students meeting or exceeding expectations. Why were some students making progress and others not? We
had to face our brutal factsquickly!
I knew that facing our brutal facts meant looking at our data to truly discover
who was learning, what they were learning, when (what grade level) they were
learning it, how were we vertically aligning the curriculum, and most importantly,
why were some students not learning. My mantra became we will do whatever it
takes to effectively educate all of our students! During my tenure as building principal, I continuously focused on the following 5 principles:
Give teachers time to analyze past and present data
Develop specific and measurable School Improvement Team goals (from data
analysis)
Create a positive, efficacy-based cultureIf you believe it, you will see it. If
you dont, you wont.
Develop a continuous learning environment with book studies and collaboration
Parent Involvementembracing and educating them
Analyze past and present data:
Teachers need to be given time to be intentional about looking and analyzing
data. I was surprised to discover that most needed to be taught how to analyze data.
I found that teachers could not/should not be expected to do this most important
work on their own time. Administrators needed to give them time and support. Providing this time during the school day, by obtaining substitutes for their classroom,
works best in my experience. This process must be done in teams, by grade levels
and include the ELL and Special Education educators with the administrator for optimum results. The findings must be documented and shared with the School Improvement Team, then finally with the rest of the staff members. Ownership of the
achievement must be embraced by every staff member in the building including
custodians, food service and paraprofessionals.
As I studied our data and compared it to our programming, there was a glaring
observation. Many more students needed more time and support with literacy than
we were providing. We were servicing a limited number of students with Reading
Recovery. Many more needed services. I concluded that it was time for a literacy
revolution!
The reading teacher and I made an executive decision to modify the reading program to maximize the number of students that could be serviced. We initiated our
own program which we named the Backpack Reader program and utilized the reading staff as a team that in addition to the classroom teacher would go into every
K-2nd grade classroom daily. Every day students chose an appropriate level book
to read with a team member. During that time, the team provided mini lessons and
reading strategies. The student took the book home to read, and a parent/guardian
signed daily when they read with the student. The book is brought back to school
and read with a team member for the third time. The students progress up in levels
until they are reading independently and can check out books on their own from
the library. The Backpack Reader program produced amazing results and increased
reading growth such that every first grader was reading at grade level by the end
of the year, including ELL and Special Education students.
School Improvement Team Goals:
The data analysis findings from each grade level must be presented to the School
Improvement Team (SIT). Since each team includes one teacher representative from
each grade level, an ELL teacher, a Special Education teacher, an elective teacher
representative and the Reading teacher (if applicable), the analysis of the data is
comprehensive. The key to the success of this team is that the entire school is represented and is part of the decision making process for the yearly goals. This ensures that special populations are addressed.
The SIT then develops the yearly goals based on the data analysis. Each goal has
to be specific to every grade level and measurable by marking period. For example,
once we realized graphing skills were a deficiency throughout our student population, we set a goal that every grade level would include one graphing activity per
marking period. We were specific: 1st marking period would be a Social Studies
graphing activity, 2nd marking period would include a graph from the science content, 3rd marking period from Language Arts and 4th from Math. Integration of the
24
subject areas was important and based on research, for higher level learning and
retention.
I then incorporated the SIT goals into my teacher evaluations. During observations, I requested each teacher conduct a lesson that easily identified and emphasized a SIT goal. This included ELL and Special Education classrooms.
Create positive culture:
This is an area that is underestimated in schools. However, every highly effective
school that has overcome diverse challenges understands that it is essential to believe that all students can learn regardless of their individual needs.
During my principalship, I was intentional about creating a positive culture. I implemented the FISH philosophy that focused on being there for one another as staff
members. That also included supporting teachers when their students demonstrated unacceptable student behavior and following through with consistent corrective discipline. Increasing and maintaining student achievement is hard work.
Teachers need to feel safe, empowered and appreciated. Remembering birthdays
with treats, sending Thanksgiving letters to family members and notes of acknowledgement in mailboxes all helped in establishing a positive climate.
Continuous Learning Environment:
It is enlightening to realize that most veteran teachers with continuing certificates have not returned or taken a college credit class since they graduated from
college. The best way to learn new strategies and be inspired by others is to read
and study from them. I introduced the staff to book studies, both at staff meetings
and afterschool. I read a chapter of The Essential 55 by Ron Clark to my staff at
every meeting and then we implemented its strategies for diverse communities.
They worked! Afterschool, we read There Are No Shortcuts by Raffe Esquith, a
teacher from inner city Los Angeles. The success of his ELL students motivated us
to go above and beyond.
Finally, I modified the schedule to provide each grade level common collaboration
time during the day. There was some resistance at the beginning because traditionally teachers had always worked in isolation as individual experts. However, as they
started sharing activities, lessons and strategies, that worked slowly. The collaborative teams realized they each had individual natural strengths and weaknesses,
that they could help one another, primarily in the area of ELA/SS and Math/
Science. Then, vertical alignment started taking shape. As the teams discussed gaps
in learning, they realized they needed to talk with the grade levels above and below
them. Finally, they sought out all of their resources, including the ELL and Special
Education teachers for assistance.
Parent Involvement:
When parents are surrounded with poverty, it complicates things for educators.
Our parents are working two and three jobs. When they are sleeping, their children
are in school. When they are awake and working, their children are at home. And
many do not know or understand the English language. Parents need to feel welcomed into our school environment and need to be educated on the importance of
being involved as a part of the school.
We initiated Family Reading and Math Nights where we demonstrated strategies
that parents could easily implement at home with commonly used products. For example, we showed them that shaving cream is a fantastic way to learn spelling or
sight words. We translated everything and we provided dinner every time because
if you feed them, they will come!
Remember the Backpack Reader program? This is a perfect example of how we
had to educate our parents. When we initiated this program, we had very little support from the parents. They were not reading with their children, not signing that
they read with their children, and failing to return the books. Instead of stopping
the program, we educated the parents instead by incorporating the importance of
reading into every opportunity we had: classroom newsletters, building-wide newsletters, PTO meeting presentations, family nights, drop off and pick up time, at
breakfast, etc. It worked so well that by the end of the year, the parents were calling us if the book was not in the backpack!
The results? In 2005, when I left North Godwin for the Central Office our achievement was simply outstanding. We were recognized as a Top Performing School by
the Just for the Kids Foundation. Our students, including ELL and Special Education students, were and still are, outperforming similar students throughout the
state. 85% of students met or exceeded state reading standards and 87% met or exceeded state writing standards in 4th grade (compared to 50% in 2000). 75% of students met or exceeded state Social Studies standards in 5th grade (compared to 6%
in 2000).
25
Changes in instructional practiceas assistant superintendent
In 2005, I packed the lessons I had learned from being a principal brought them
to the Central Office.
Analyze past and present data:
I instituted district-wide early release once a month where students are dismissed
at 1:30 p.m. and teachers stay until 4:15 p.m. for collaboration. It allows all teachers, including Special Education and ELL teachers to collaborate not just as a building, but as a district and we can align the curriculum vertically as well. The Professional Learning Communities (PLC) philosophy and practice has dramatically
changed the way our educators teach and virtually eliminated the teaching in isolation practices. Teachers are sharing what works and modifying their instruction
based on their discussions with one another, and most importantly they are incorporating the SIT goals. The result? Increased achievement for all students including
diverse subgroups.
School Improvement Team Goals:
At the district level, the school improvement team goals have to be woven with
the Board of Education goals. Our board has consistently focused on improved reading goals. As the new curriculum leader for the district, I knew what worked from
my work at the building level. We had to implement successful programs such as
the Backpack Reader and Accelerated Reader district wide at all three elementary
buildings. We provided training for all teachers and set minimum usage expectations per grade level. On a weekly basis, I check the Accelerated Reader Dashboard
for individual teacher participation and success index (how well the students performed on their reading quizzes) for all K-8 classrooms. Additionally, we incorporated another software component specifically for ELL students that focuses on
vocabulary building called English in a Flash. The results have been increased reading scores on the MEAP state assessment district wide for all students, including
our diverse subgroups.
Continuous Learning Environment:
Most recently, we have incorporated the Response to Intervention (RtI) program
in all of our schools. It has proven to be extremely successful due to the daily intense, targeted lessons and the progress monitoring built into the program. It has
allowed us to identify the foundational skills necessary for long term proficient readers. Prior to RtI, our reading revolution produced good readers, but we noticed that
we saw a drop in third grade reading skills. We now realize, thanks to RtI, that
we were missing some steps in the continuum critical to long term reading success.
At any point in the school year, we know exactly where all of our students are on
the reading continuum. As a result, we have seen a decrease in Special Education
referrals.
When we analyzed our data, our ELL students needed more time and support.
District wide, we implemented before and/or afterschool tutoring for our ELL students this school year, utilizing Title III Immigrant Funds. We are focusing on targeted areas where they are not meeting expectations in their content areas. Classroom teachers re-teach lessons not mastered utilizing a variety of differentiation
strategies to master the content. The teachers have already provided feedback that
confirms the extra time and support is working. Pre and post assessments prove
that the students are obtaining mastery on a weekly basis, simply by receiving more
time and support.
Teachers and administrators also need time and support to maximize their effectiveness. Although as a novice administrator, I sent teachers to conferences and
workshops as they requested, now I send only teams of new teachers to a conference
each year. The remainder of our professional development practice involves:
1. Training all teachers (including ELL and Special Education staff) at the same
time
2. During the school day
3. Based on needs from data analysis
4. With an implementation plan and clear expectations articulated and
5. With follow up training throughout the school year(s).
During the past several years our districts professional development has focused
on writing and literacy. We have discovered that teachers working with consultants
that come to our district for building wide or district wide training is very effective;
much more effective than the singleton conference approach. For our administrators,
the professional development has focused on instructional leadership versus management utilizing Marzanos research. We emphasized that leadership is not about
us as administrators, but rather about empowering others.
26
Results, Reflections, and Recommendations:
I have attached our MEAP state assessment results from 2005 to the present.
Longitudinally, you will see that we have made significant gains. Keep in mind that
the growth has occurred during financially troubling times of yearly budget cuts,
yearly increases to our free and reduced lunch counts, and a growing ELL population. This type of achievement is not easy when you consider the expanding challenges facing our district every year. However, what I have tried to explain to you
is that effective teaching can close the achievement gap in any diverse group!
Now that I have made it perfectly clear that it can be done, allow me to identify
some recommendations that would assist us in the field to continue to make it happen. Understanding that life is not fair, please, please, please acknowledge the fact
that districts with diverse populations must work twice as hard to produce the results that are expected. Consider for a moment a fourth grade teacher that welcomes several new refugee or immigrant students into their classroom at the beginning of the year. Even though the new students have no prior knowledge of the
English language, the teacher goes above or beyond to teach the students on a daily
basis. The school provides ELL, RtI Tier 1, 2 and 3 services, Backpack Reader, Accelerated Reader, Accelerated Math, English in a Flash, before, lunch and after
school tutoring. The students make miraculous gains of 2 to 3 year gains * * * but
they are still at a second or third grade level! We understand and welcome accountability, but modifications are necessary to acknowledge of schools and students
working hard to close the achievement gap.
As I have a special place in my heart for English Language Learners (ELL), allow
me to make three final recommendations for this population:
Permit states to include growth in their accountability systems, rewarding districts and schools who are making progress. This is an important tool for measuring
the success of English Language Learners.
Increase resources for the Title III program to help states and school districts
provide English language instruction programs for English Language Learners and
provide more professional development for the teachers working with these diverse
learners.
Thank you for the opportunity to share some of the successes we have enjoyed
at Godwin Heights Public Schools. It is indeed a tribute to all of the hard work and
dedication of our excellent teaching and staff members. You may contact me at
[email protected] with any further questions.
Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much.

Dr. Kearns?
STATEMENT OF JACQUI FARMER KEARNS, ED.D., PRINCIPAL
INVESTIGATOR, NATIONAL ALTERNATE ASSESSMENT CENTER
Ms. KEARNS. Thank you, Chairman Kildee, Ranking Member

Castle, and all the members of the subcommittee for inviting me
to testify this morning.
I am here today to discuss the importance of including all students with disabilities fully and equitably in assessment and accountability systems. I am fortunate to work in collateral with nationally recognized experts in education, measurement and curriculum to regularly review and discuss the research in this area.
Currently, students with disabilities participate in accountability
systems in one of four ways: general assessment; general assessments with accommodations; alternate assessments on modified
achievement standards in a few states, the 2 percent test; and alternate assessments on alternate achievement standards, the 1
percent test.
Eighty-five percent of students identified under the IDEA do not
have intellectual disabilities that should prevent them from achieving at grade level. They should participate in general assessments
with or without accommodations.
A number of states have conducted an analysis of their general
assessment data by identifying learners who are persistently low
27
performing. Over and over again, states have been surprised to find
that this group includes both students with and without disabilities. These students are more likely to be male, represent a minority, economically disadvantaged students, or have a disability.
Unfortunately, many students represent all these characteristics.
There is a chart representing these data in my written testimony.
Teachers at schools that have successfully closed the achievement gap for these students include the following: alignment of
curricula with state standards, inclusion of students with disabilities in general education classes with appropriate support, and use
of student assessment data to inform decision-making.
For the purposes of system accountability, we absolutely need to
know where every student is in relation to the standards of their
enrolled grade on a summit of assessment. For other purposes, including diagnostic and instructional planning on interim, benchmark or formative basis, we may find other tests helpful, but care
has to be taken not to lower the expectations or academic targets.
It is true that some students with disabilities who are among the
students who can attain grade-level achievement are most challenging to assess. This group includes children with hearing and vision disabilities, but also some students with learning disabilities
and intellectual disabilities.
Consider Lizzie, a young lady with a severe learning disability.
She comprehends on grade level, but needs accommodations to
demonstrate her knowledge, yet accommodations for reading are
not allowed for the test in her state. None of the current state assessment options can produce a valid set of results to accurately
represent her achievement level.
Consider Megan, a student with Down syndrome, an intellectual
disability. Because Megan had access to high-quality instruction,
individualized support and services, and the opportunity to learn
from the general curriculum, she graduated from high school with
a standard diploma in a state with high standards and is attending
college.
Career and college-ready achievement is well within the reach
for students like Megan. Our obligation is to ensure that she and
others like her are prepared to reach these goals. ESEA should continue to ensure that schools are accountable for the academic
achievement and graduation rates of all students, including students with intellectual disabilities.
Other students with intellectual disabilities participate in alternate assessments on alternate achievement standards. This is the
1 percent test. It may surprise you to learn that the largest group
of these students with the most significant cognitive disabilities,
about 70 percent, can communicate, read sight words, and solve
math problems with a calculator. I have included a chart representing these data in my written testimony before you.
Consider Bruce. Bruce is a student with significant disabilities.
Bruce is not provided with assistive technology to communicate
until late in high school. In the video clip, you will see that Bruce
is answering questions about predicted and actual temperature
within days of receiving his device.
[Begin video.]
28
VOICE. Lets look at October 20th. Were the forecasted and actual
temperatures high, low or about the same?
VOICE. The forecasted and the actual temperatures were the
same.
VOICE. Very good. Now, look at these forecasted temperatures.
Okay? Looking at them? How many days was the forecasted temperature higher than the actual temperature?
[End video.]
Ms. KEARNS. Low expectations and segregation have denied
Bruce access to the general curriculum. Sadly, he will exit this
school this year without a high school diploma, greatly limiting the
opportunities available to him. Bruces story illustrates a classic example of the failure of the IEP team and why access to the general
curriculum is so important.
We continue to hold schools accountable for all these students.
The challenge of high expectations is being met in many places
with leadership and hard work. In large part because federal law
has required transparency and accountability for all students, children with disabilities are showing us what they know and can do,
often exceeding our expectations. We must continue to hold schools
accountable for the education of all students. Their futures depend
on it.
Thank you.
[The statement of Ms. Kearns follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jacqui Farmer Kearns, Ed.D., Principal Investigator, National Alternate Assessment Center, U.S. Department of Education
Thank you Chairman Kildee, Ranking Member Castle and all the Members of the
Subcommittee for inviting me to testify this morning
I am currently the Principal Investigator for the US Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs funded National Alternate Assessment Center
(NAAC), a research center on alternate assessments, and a General Supervision Enhancement Grant assisting five states in developing validity evaluations for their alternate assessments on alternate achievement standards at the University of Kentucky. I have completed three other federal research initiatives about alternate assessment and universally designed, technology-based general assessments. In the
early 1990s, I played a key role in the design and implementation of the first alternate assessment used in an accountability system during Kentuckys Education Reform Act (KERA). When the IDEA was reauthorized in 1997 and included the provision for alternate assessment, I assisted a number of states in the design, implementation, and evaluation of alternate assessments as Associate Director of a university-based assessment design group at the University of Kentucky. I have authored and co-authored research publications including the first text on alternate
assessment and, more recently, a new text on alternate assessment and standardsbased instruction. I have extensive experience in providing professional development
support to teachers serving students with significant cognitive disabilities and to
principals regarding the implementation of inclusive education and access to the
general curriculum. I am a third generation educator, with 9 years of direct classroom experience teaching students with significant cognitive disabilities. Finally, I
am the parent of a child recently diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity
Disorder, who received services through Response to Intervention (RTI) through his
second grade year and has been referred for evaluation under the IDEA. However,
in my testimony this morning, I am representing myself, and not the University of
Kentucky or the multiple projects on which I work.
Todays Focus. I am here today to discuss the importance of including ALL students with disabilities fully and equitably in assessment and accountability systems.
These systems must include challenging content standards, progress and proficiency
measures, participation, and data reporting. To do otherwise, places the entire population at risk for a variety of serious consequences as they leave school unprepared
for the educated world that waits them. I have brought with me some students
29
whose stories will help us understand the complexities of the issues that face us.
I will describe the challenges and possible solutions for students with disabilities
who are persistently low performers and lessons learned from schools who have
successfully closed the achievement gap. Next, I will introduce Lizzie, a student
with a learning disability. Lizzie teaches us the importance of designing solutions
for assessments that accommodate the widest array of possible users, so students
can show what they know and can do. Megan reminds us that high expectations
can result in students who can and o exceed our expectations. Finally, Bruce a student in an alternate assessment teaches us that IEP teams cant do it by themselves. My area of expertise is alternate assessments and students like Bruce. I am
fortunate to work in collaboration in collaboration with national special education,
measurement, and curriculum experts.
How Do Students with Disabilities Participate in Accountability?
Currently, students with disabilities participate in the accountability system in
one of four ways: 1) general assessments, 2) general assessments with accommodations, 3) alternate assessments on modified achievement standards, and 4) alternate
assessments on alternate achievement standards. Eighty-five percent (85%) of students identified under the IDEA do not have intellectual disabilities that should
prevent them from achieving at grade level. This includes students with learning
disabilities, who comprise nearly half of the IDEA population, as well as students
with physical disabilities, vision and hearing impairments, emotional and behavioral
disabilities, and even some students with mild cognitive impairments.
Persistently Low Performing. A number of states considering the 2% flexibility
have conducted an analysis of their general assessment data by identifying learners
who are persistently low performing (Gong, Marion, & Simpson, 2006). Over and
over again, states have been surprised to find that this group of persistently low
performers includes BOTH students with and without disabilities. Furthermore,
these students are disproportionately representative of males, minorities and disadvantaged as identified by Free and Reduced lunch, as well as students with disabilities (Lazarus, Wu, C., Altman, & Thurlow, 2010). Researchers from the National Center on Educational Outcomes presented the data from five states considering these students. The charts in Figure 1 illustrate these data.
As the layers of the data unfold, researchers have discovered that many of these
students have not had access to high quality curriculum or instruction. Meanwhile,
schools across the nation ARE CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP for historically low-performing students with and without disabilitiesthrough leadership and
hard work to improve their educational opportunities. From these data, and similar
data from other investigations it is clear that providing accountability relief to
schools for these students with disabilities while other schools can and do help these
students achieve is unwarranted and counterproductive for inclusive accountability
policy.
30
Studies of Low Performing Students. States have studied the extent which students with disabilities are low performing students, in an effort to design alternate
assessments based upon modified achievement standards for the 2% flexibility that
is currently allowed under the ESEA regulations (Fincher, 2007; HB Study Group
from Colorado, 2005; Marion, Gong, & Simpson, 2006; New England Compact,
2007). Researchers at the National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment (NCIEA) conducted one the first of these investigations. These researchers
found that the scores of students with disabilities were distributed all across the
scaled scores, as are the students without disabilities. (Marion, Gong, & Simpson,
2006). This study foreshadowed results of studies in multiple states: the lowest performing students on state assessments under NCLB are not only, or even primarily,
students with disabilities. Perie (2009) summarized data mining approaches in
Georgia and South Carolina. Georgia mined data from three years of the state test,
identifying persistent low performers in grades 5 and 8 as students scoring in the
lowest of three achievement levels. South Carolina looked at grades 4 and 7, identifying students with two years of data scoring in the lowest of four achievement levels. In both states, the percentage of students with disabilities represented 39% to
55% of all students in the lowest achievement levels, adjusting for variations in test
cut scores.
Closing the Achievement Gap. Current accountability definitions require that
schools ensure that students with disabilities achieve proficiency through access to
the same challenging curriculum as their peers. Schools that are succeeding have
recognized the importance of integrating the content standards into a challenging
curriculum for all students, and providing access to students with disabilities
through individualized and appropriate services, supports, and accommodations
identified by the Individualized Education Program team so that each student can
be successful.
Special education as typically practiced in this country has questionable effectiveness. Access to the general curriculum at grade level is an essential component of
accountability that cannot be understated. A new study by Morgan, Frisco, Farkas,
and Hibel (2010) found that students who were identified for special education services had significantly lower reading achievement after receiving those services from
2002-2004 than their peers with similar learning and demographic characteristics
who did not receive special education services. The National Association of School
Psychologists (2002) has found that labeling of students tends to result in lowered
expectations, fewer typical peer relationships, and a lack of curriculum integrity.
We have examples of how system accountability the past decade has resulted in
significant reductions of the achievement gap between students with and without
disabilities in schools where special education practice has changed. An Association
of Curriculum Development Association (ASCD) longitudinal study of schools in
Rhode Island found that 100 of the 320 schools had show a dramatic closing of the
achievement gap by students with disabilities (Hawkins, 2007). The 2004 Donahue
Institute study and the 2009 Ohio Follow up Study on Students with Disabilities
had similar findings. Indeed, closing the achievement gap between children with
and without disabilities is an articulated goal in schools across the country, although some school leaders continue to resist taking responsibility for these students. Features of these schools that have successfully closed the achievement gap
include the following: 1) alignment of curricula with the state standards, 2) inclusion of students with disabilities in general education classes with appropriate supports, 3) use of student assessment data to inform decision-making, 4) disciplined
social environment, and 5) strong leadership teams (Hawkins, 2007; Pritchard Committee, 2005).
It is important to note that schools that have achieved the goal of closing the
achievement gap for their sub-groups including those with disabilities have done so
in part by changing the way they think about the children who challenge our educational system. They did not seek relief from accountability or lower their expectations for student achievement.
Students Who are Challenging to Assess. Some students with disabilities who are
among the students who can attain the grade-level achievement are challenging to
assess. This group includes children with hearing and vision disabilities, but also
some students with learning disabilities.
Consider Lizzie. Lizzie is a middle school student who has a severe learning disability that affects her ability to read. Despite intensive efforts to improve her reading, her conventional reading skills are still well below grade-level achievement.
However, her comprehension of oral text is well within grade-level achievement and
will be a strength on which she builds toward college and career readiness for a lifetime. Accommodations for reading are not allowed for the test in her state. Test day
is extremely frustrating for Lizzie and her teachers. Providing an out-of-level grade
31
assessment which measures conventional reading but does not measure comprehension commensurate with her grade will NOT provide an accurate assessment of her
performance. The resulting data will not encourage her teachers to build the skills
she needs for her future.
Assessment Options. As the description of Lizzie illustrates, none of the current
state assessment options would have produced a valid set of results to accurately
represent her achievement level. The State has not provided adequate accommodations policy to meet her needs. An out of level assessment, or even a self-leveling
assessment, would not appropriately demonstrate her performance.
For a variety of reasons, a one-size-fits-all approach will likely never have the precision to assess the widest array of possible students. For the purposes of SYSTEM
accountability we absolutely need to know where students are in relation to the
standards at their enrolled grade on a summative assessment. For OTHER purposes, including diagnostic and instructional planning on an interim, benchmark or
formative basis, we may find other tests helpful, but care has to be taken to avoid
lowering expectations and academic targets.
Use of Accommodations. The research on the use of accommodations during assessment is increasingly more sophisticated and refined (Thompson, Morse, Sharp,
& Hall, 2005). The use of accommodations during assessments should be built on
the foundational assumption that students with disabilities must be expected to
demonstrate achievement in the same content as other students and thus the content targets should not be changed by the accommodations, accommodations used
in assessment should also be used during instructional assessment as a matter of
practice, and that accommodations decisions are specific to individual students. Accommodations should be used consistently and the use of them and the need for
them evaluated regularly. Ultimately, the use of an accommodation should not prevent the student from mastering the content or limit the students pathway to learning future content (Thompson, Morse, Sharp, & Hall, 2005). Finally, deep understanding of the content is essential for making appropriate accommodations decisions.
Growth Model Designs. We often hear teachers comment he has grown so much
over the year and the assumption is to measure that growth for these populations.
No doubt the teachers observations are reliable, but the assumptions about using
a growth model design to measure this must consider the variety of pathway that
defines progress across the widest array of student users. Growth model designs are
based on the theoretical assumptions of norm referenced assessments. Most students with disabilities were not included in normative samples (Hill, Gong, Marion,
DePasquale, Dunn, & Simpson, 2005). An accurate description of the pathway to
academic competence is an essential component of growth model assessment designs (Betebenner, 2005; Hill, Gong, Marion, DePasquale, Dunn & Simpson 2005).
This is because for most students with disabilities like those described today, something is missing from the pathway that we need to understand in order to build a
fully valid growth model assessment. In many states, research suggests that this
missing piece is effective instruction and access to the curriculum. Still, we know
that we do NOT know all we should about how to ensure students like Lizzie can
first learn and then show what they have learned on state tests. This is also true
for students with significant cognitive disabilities in AA-AAS who take alternate assessments on alternate achievement standards where less evidence to support the
curricular pathway exists.
Career and College Ready. According to the National Transition Technical Assistance Center data, the predictors of post secondary education for students with disabilities depends to a large extent on the following factors: 1) participation in the
academic curriculum, 2) performance in reading, writing, and math, 3) placement
in general education 4) high school diploma (Baer, 2002; Raybren, 2005). As would
be expected, similar factors are predictors of post school employment.
Intellectual Disabilities. Of the students with disabilities who DO have intellectual disabilities, some CAN achieve grade-level proficiency when given high quality
instruction, individualized supports and services, and the opportunity to learn.
Consider Megan. Megan graduated from high school with a standard diploma
and is attending college. She has a disability commonly known as Down syndrome
which is a chromosomal condition that typically but not always results in an intellectual disability.
If you are tempted to suggest that the standards for attaining a high school diploma must be low in her state, I assure you that the current graduation and dropout rates in her state do not support that claim. The purpose of this example, is
to challenge our understanding and beliefs about what students with intellectual
disabilities given the right supports and expectations for achievement
32
Students with the Most Significant Cognitive Disabilities. The students with intellectual disabilities, who participate in alternate assessments on alternate achievement standards, represent at least two distinct groups of learners. We know that
70% of students participating in alternate assessments on alternate achievement
standards can communicate, read basic sight words, and solve math problems with
a calculator (Towles-Reeves, Kleinert, Kleinert, Thomas, in press) often beginning
in elementary school.
FIGURE 2: READING AND MATH CHARACTERISTICS OF STUDENTS IN AA-AAS
The remaining 30% of this 1% of students in the AA-AAS do not use oral speech
to communicate or in some rare cases respond inconsistently. Furthermore, more
than half do not have augmentative communication systems. Of all the groups, we
agree that this group is the most challenging to assess. However, vigilance is warranted because many students in this group have not received the services they
need to communicate. This misidentification and failure of service is tragic but sadly
not uncommon.
Consider Bruce. Bruce a high school student who has cerebral palsy who does
not use oral speech. His IEP team determined that he had an intellectual disability.
He was dropped from speech/language therapy as a related service due to failure
to make progress in using oral speech. He received educational services in a segregated class for students with significant intellectual disabilities with limited to no
access to the general curriculum. A new teacher recognized that Bruce had not been
appropriately identified or served, and requested the assistance of speech/language
external to the school and district. As a result, Bruce received a touch screen computer with voice output communication device. In the video clip, you will see that
Bruce is answering questions about predicted and actual temperature within days
of receiving his device.
From his performance, it is clear that a series of unfortunate errors and low expectations from the IEP team across a number of years has reduced his ability to
communicate, and thus has denied him access to the general curriculum. Sadly,
Bruce will exit school this year without a high school diploma which will gravely
limit the opportunities available to him after high school. Bruces story illustrates
a classic example of the failure of the IEP team. IEP teams are limited by the
knowledge they have available to them and the extent to which they access to high
quality professional development and technical assistance. In most cases, neither
professional development or technical assistance is available. Further, shift in system accountability to the IEP team would seriously threaten productive home/school
partnerships and increase the probability of due process procedures, attorney involvement, and litigation. If the only place to ensure the system is accountable for
a child is through the IEP team process, then all parents will bear a terrible burden
33
to ensure THEIR child benefits from a free appropriate education under IDEA. The
research on the quality of the IEP team processes and outcomes suggests that, instead, parents will have to accept what schools choose to offer, regardless of what
their child needs to be successful (Hunt & Goetz, 1989; Turner, Baldwin, Kleinert,
& Kearns; 1997). Bruces story illustrates this problem. For these reasons, we believe that the IEP is not a viable option as an accountability tool.
Alternate Achievement Standards. Students in alternate assessments on alternate
achievement standards are among the most diverse of the assessed populations and
the least is known about how they achieve competence in academic domains and the
curricular pathways to academic competence. As described previously, the students
who are emerging in their language development may require a different set of
achievement expectations until consistent responding and engagement can be established. More than one alternate achievement standard is currently allowed under
the 1% regulation, and that option should be continued to meet the needs of these
students-. While we continue to build the knowledge base around these instruments,
maintaining the flexibility for setting multiple achievement standards for these assessments is warranted., Students with the most significant cognitive disabilities
should continue to be engaged in reading, math, and science activities based on content standards that that are chronologically age appropriate, linked to grade-level
content, and consistent with what peers without disabilities are learning. This least
dangerous assumption (Donnellan, 1984; Jorgensen, 2005) will safeguard their
learning opportunities until more data are available.
Academic Content Standards Linkage. Earlier in this testimony, I reported data
indicating that the majority of students (70%) in alternate assessments read sight
words and solve math problems with a calculator (Kearns et. al. in press). Our data
also suggest that the percentages of students performing these skills across the
grade bands from elementary to high school do not appear to change much. While
these data are not longitudinal, we would expect increased percentages of more difficult skills as students advance through the grades and decreased percentages of
easier skills as students advance through the grades. These data suggest that performance may be essentially static, meaning that limited progress is made beyond
elementary school (Kearns et. al). Despite the growing number of studies pointing
to the effectiveness teaching students in this population academic content reading,
math, and science (Browder,Wakeman, Y.Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzell, & Algozzine,
(2006); Browder, Spooner, Ahlgirm-Delzell, Wakeman, & Harris, (2008); Courtade,
Spooner, & Browder, (2007); many continue to argue for functional skills. To counter
that argument, Kleinert, Collins, Wickham, Riggs, & Hagar (in press) suggest that
these skills are best embedded into naturally occurring routines across the students
day alongside academic instruction.
We recommend vigilance in maintaining a close linkage to grade-level academic
content standards and consideration of achievement standards that mirror the highest achievement standard possible for this group of students.
Career & College Ready. As yet, limited data are available on extent to which students who participate in alternate assessments are prepared to transition from
school to adult life. Current post school outcome data define a positive outcome as
fully time enrollment in post secondary education or full-time employment. Few students in the 1% population achieve full-time employment or post secondary education (Newman, Wagner, Cameto, & Knokey, 2009; Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Levine, & Gazar, 2006). As a result, little is known about their post school outcomes.
However, a Kentucky study in progress will consider the student interview data
among students who participate in an alternate assessment for the ACT to describe
current outcomes. The Kentucky Transition Attainment Record (TAR) includes transition student and IEP team interviews. Kearns, LoBianco, & Harrison (in preparation) found that the majority of these students plan to receive special education
services through age 21. Roughly, two thirds of these students plan to have full or
part time jobs and have identified supported employment as an important transition
support. This figure compares to the majority of students in this population who
read sight words and solve math problems with a calculator. An additional one third
of students checked stay at home, which also compares to the percentage of students who are pre and emerging symbolic language users.
The majority of these students selected job interests related to working with children, animals, or food service. When asked what they would like to learn more
about in school, the most selected responses were 1) computers, 2) work experience,
and 3) music and arts. These responses were followed by academic goals of reading,
math and science. While these data are very preliminary, the Kentucky Department
of Education has authorized a study to merge these data with other student assessment and transition data sources to provide a more complete picture of the transition outcomes for these students.
34
We want to build a vision that post secondary education is an option for all students including those with intellectual disabilities. Programs like Think College at
Boston College or the Transition Program at Asbury College in Kentucky are making post secondary educational opportunities available to these students. Increasing
post secondary opportunities for this population underscores the importance of academic instruction and vigilance in maintaining close alignment with content standards.
Alternate Assessments. Unlike students in the general assessment who respond
independently to what are described largely as multiple choice or open response
items, students in this population must rely on a direct observation by the teacher
of the student engaging in the behavior or the teachers recall of a students previous performance. At this time, nearly all alternate achievement standards assessments are individually administered generally by building personnel and in most
cases the students teacher (Quenemoen, Kearns, Quenemoen, Flowers, & Kleinert,
2010). The level of teacher involvement in an accountability environment represents
an inherent validity problem which must be accounted for in the assessment design
(Gong, & Marion). However, given that the majority of this population (70% read
sight words and solve math problems with a calculator) (Kearns et al. in press), it
may well be possible for these students to respond independently using touchscreen, screen readers, and other use of technology. While the feasibility of this approach is unknown, given the rate of technology development, it is certainly worth
consideration.
It is important to note that the name of an alternate assessment is also not necessarily an indicator of the quality of the assessment. All the nominal categories
used to describe assessments for this population (portfolio, performance task, rating
scale, multiple choice with picture choices), have relative strengths and weaknesses
from a technical quality point of view (Gong & Marion, 2006). Technically sound assessments account for the weaknesses they present and clearly explicate the interpretations or inferences that can and cannot be made from the assessment results
(AERA, APA, NCME Standards for Assessments, 1999). As a result many hybrid
AA-AAS are beginning to emerge which may include features from multiple formats.
While technical quality in AA-AAS continues to improve, poorly designed AA-AAS
are simply poor assessments regardless of the name given to the assessment format.
To that end, assessment format is less important than consistent use, achieving the
intended purpose and consequences while minimizing negative consequences. Ultimately, the technical properties of an alternate achievement standards assessment
format will be revealed in carefully planned and documented validity studies.
Who is Responsible for These Students Success?
Research suggests that home/school partnerships are essential to promote
achievement (Heward, 2009)). Our son John has a diagnosis of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and is reading behind his peers. Through response to intervention, he has received intensive reading instruction by a reading specialist in addition
to the supports he needs to access the general curriculum. The partnership that we
have with his teacher and his reading specialist has resulted in steady progress.
Should he qualify for services under the IDEA, we want to build partnerships with
his teachers. Furthermore, we want his teachers to have high expectations for his
performance, we want an accountability system that recognizes his participation,
challenging academic standards, and well-designed progress and proficiency measures. We want to know where the achievement standard is, how close or far away
his performance is from the achievement standard, and more importantly what we
need to do to in partnership with his teachers to support his achievement. His future depends on it.
I want to acknowledge that the ESEA has a long history of supporting students
with disabilities through the birth of the IDEA in the late 1970s through the current authorizations of both the IDEA and ESEA. Never in our history have children
with disabilities been considered more a part of the essential elements of what we
know as school Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment. Indeed accountability has
been largely responsible for giving students with disabilities access to challenging
content, improved instruction, and highly qualified teachers. I see this discussion
today as important in the continued progress toward achieving the goal of equal
educational opportunities for all children.
REFERENCES
AERA, APA, NCME (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing.
Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Betebenner (2005) Norm and Criterion Referenced Student Growth. http://
www.nciea.org/publications/normativecriteriongrowthDB08.pdf
35
Browder, D. M., Wakeman, S. Y., Spooner, F., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., & Algozzine, B.
(2006). Research on reading instruction for individuals with significant cognitive
disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72,392-408.
Browder, D. M., Spooner, F., Ahlgirm-Delzell, L., Wakeman, S.Y. & Harris, a.
(2008). A meta-analysis on teaching mathematics to students with significant
cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 74, 407-432.
Courtade, G. R., Spooner, F. & Browder, D. M. (2007). A review of students with
students with significant cognitive disabilities that link to science standards.
Research and Practice in Severe Disabilities, 32, 43-49.
Donahue Institute. (2004, Oct). A study of MCAS achievement and promising practices in urban special education: Report of field research findings (Case studies
and cross-case analysis of promising practices in selected urban public school
districts in Massachusetts). Hadley, MA: University of Massachusetts, Donahue
Institute, Research and Evaluation Group. Available at: http://
www.donahue.umassp.edu/docs/?itemid=12699
Donnellan, A. (1984). The criterion of the least dangerous assumption. Behavioral
Disorders, 9, 141-150.
Fincher, M. (2007). Investigating the academic achievement of persistently low performing students in the session on Assessing (and Teaching) Students at Risk
for Failure: A Partnership for Success at the Council of Chief State School Officers Large Scale Assessment Conference, Nashville TN, June 17-20, 2007. Retrieved
August,
2007,
from:
http://www.ccsso.org/content/
PDFs/
12%2DMelissa%20Fincher%20Paul%
20Ban%20Pam%20Rogers%
20Rachel%20Quenemoen.pdf.
Gong, B., & Marion, S. (2006). Dealing with flexibility in assessments for students
with significant cognitive disabilities. Dover, NH: National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment. (PDF : 202 Kb)
Hawkins, V. J. (2007). Narrowing gaps for special-needs students. Educational
Leadership, 64 (5), 61-63.
Heward, W.L. (2009). Collaborating with parents and families in a culturally and
linguistically diverse society. In W.L. Heward, Exceptional children: An introduction to special education (pp. 88-126). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Hill, Gong, Marion, DePasquale, Dunn & Simpson (2005) Using Value Tables to Explicitly Value Student Growth. http://www.nciea.org/publications/MARCES
RH07.pdf retrieved 03/09
HB 05-1246 Study Committee (2005, December 31). Assessing students in the gap
in Colorado. Retrieved May, 2006, from http://education.umn.edu/nceo/Teleconferences/tele11/ColoradoStudy.pdf
Jorgensen, C. (2005). The least dangerous assumption: A challenge to create a new
paradigm. Disability Solutions, (6) 3.
Kearns, J., LoBianco, T. & Harrison, B. (in preparation). An analysis of transition
outcomes for students with significant cognitive disabilities in Kentucky. Lexington: University of Kentucky.
Kearns, J., Towles-Reeves, E., Kleinert, H., Kleinert, J., & Thomas, M. (in press).
Characteristics of and implications for students participating in alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards. The Journal of Special
Education.
Kleinert, H. Collins, B. Wickham, D. Riggs, L. & Hagar, K. (in press). Embedding
life skills, self-determination, and enhancing social relationships and other evidence-based practices. In H. Kleinert & J. Kearns, (in press). Meaningful outcomes for students with significant cognitive disabilities: Alternate assessment
on alternate achievement standards. Baltimore: Paul Brookes.
Lazarus, S., Wu, Y.-C., Altman, J., & Thurlow, M. (2010).NCEO brief: The characteristics of low performingstudents on large-scale assessments. Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Marion, S., Gong, B., & Simpson, M. A. (2006, Feb. 6). Mining achievement data
to guide policies and practices on assessment options. Teleconference on Making
Good Decisions on NCLB Flexibility Options. Minneapolis: National Center on
Educational Outcomes. Retrieved April, 2009, fromhttp://education.umn.edu/
nceo/Teleconferences/tele11/default.html
Megans Story: A Study in Postsecondary Education for Persons with Intellectual
Disabilities. University of Kentucky : Interdisciplinary Human Development Institute. Retrieved from http://www.hdi.uky.edu/Media/MegansStory.wmv
Morgan, Frisco, Farkas, & Hibel (2010). A propensity scoter matching analysis of
the effects of special education. Journal of Special Education 43 (4), pp. 236-254.
National Association of School Psychologists (NASP). (2002). Position statement:
Rights without labels. Original statement adopted by NASP Delegate Assembly
36
in 1986. Revision adopted by NASP Delegate Assembly, July 14, 2002. Retrieved March 10, 2009, from http://www.nasponline.org/aboutnasp/
pospaperrwl.aspx
New England Compact. (2007). Reaching students in the gaps: A study of assessment gaps, students, and alternatives. (Grant CFDA #84.368 of the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, awarded
to the Rhode Island Department of Education). Newton, MA: education Development Center, Inc.
Newman, L. Wagner, M. Cameto, R. & Knokey, A. (2009). The post high school outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school. A report of findings from the national longitudinal transition study-2. Retrieved from
www.nlts2.org/reports/200904ntls2report200904complete.pdf.
2009 Ohio Followup Study on Students with Disabilities
Perie, M. (2009). Understanding the AA-MAS: How does it fit into a state assessment and accountability system? Presentation to CCSSO SCASS meeting, February 4, 2009.
Perie, M. Marion, S. & Gong,B. (2007). A framework for considering interim and
benchmark assessments. The National Center for the Improvement of Educational
Assessment.
http://www.nciea.org/publications/
ConsideringInterimAssessMAP07.pdf
Quenemoen, R. (2010). Who are the students taking modified achievement standard
assessments.
Thompson, S.J., Morse, A.B., Sharpe, M., & Hall, S. (2005). Accommodations manual: How to select, administer, and evaluate use of accommodations for instruction and assessment of students with disabilities. Washington, DC: Council of
Chief State School Officers, ASES SCASS. Also available from OSEP toolkit at
http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/toolkit/accommodationsmanual.asp.
Thompson, S.J., Johnstone, C.J., Anderson, M. E., & Miller, N. A. (2005). Considerations for the development and review of universally designed assessments
(Technical Report 42). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National
Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved [03/13/2010], from the World Wide
Web: http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Technical42.htm
Thurlow, M. L., Moen, R. E. Liu, K. K., Scullin, S., Hausmann, K. E., & Shyyan,
V. (2009). Disabilities and reading: Understanding the effects of disabilities and
their relationship to reading instruction and assessment. University of Minnesota: Partnership for Accessible Reading Assessment.
Wagner, M. Newman, L. Cameto, R. Levine, P. & Gazar, N. (2006). An overview of
the findings from wave 2 of the national longitudinal transition study-2 (NTLS2). Retrieved from the www.nlts2.org/reports/200608nlts2report2006
08complete.pdf

Dr. Curry?
STATEMENT OF DANIEL CURRY, SUPERINTENDENT, LAKE
FOREST SCHOOL DISTRICT
Mr. CURRY. Good morning, Chairman Kildee, Mr. Castle, members of the committee. My name is Dan Curry. It has been my
pleasureI often say I have the best job in the worldto be superintendent of Lake Forest School District since 2003.
Prior to that, I served 15 years in that same capacity in my home
state of West Virginia in districts ranging from 1,500 students to
15,000 students, the most rural of which is considered the most
rural school district east of the Mississippi, I understand, with 1.3
children per square mile.
First, let me say that ESEA allocations have always been a godsend to rural school districts. It is the nature of rural school districts to have high instances of poverty and low property values,
leading to limited resources collected through property tax.
Central office staffs are often small, and they wear multiple hats.
For my 6 years in the central office in Pocahontas County, I think
37
I did virtually every assignment there would be, including, as Mr.
Castle, mentioned, I did drive a bus on occasion.
Rural superintendents I have talked to all agree that formula
funding is the fairest means of distribution of ESEA funds. We fear
that turning to competitive grants might leave rural districts at a
disadvantage to compete. Most dont have grant writers, nor do
they have the resources to dedicate to them.
Spending time and money to go after grants we may not get is
a poor use of human capital, especially during this economic downturn. It will do nothing but broaden the gap between the haves and
the have-nots.
I urge the committee to ensure that formulas are equitable for
rural school districts. Specifically, the funding formulas should be
based on percentages of poverty, not raw numbers. A poor student
is a poor student no matter where they live and should not lose
funding because they choose to live in a rural community.
The challenges facing rural schools are many. Recruiting and retaining teachers continues to be difficult for many. Some districts
have no choice but to maintain small schools with small enrollment. Geographical isolation and transportation challenges make
that so.
This leads to teachers who must teach multiple subjects and
makes it almost impossible for them to meet the standard to be
considered highly qualified.
First-time teachers willing to agree to any assignment for a
chance to teach can find themselves committing to a heavy load of
multiple class preps, while driving miles after work several days a
week to take the necessary classes. In general, rural school districts face the same challenges when it comes to finding a sufficient
candidate pool of qualified candidates for special education, math
and science, in particular.
Rural surroundings are sometimes a deterrent to some candidates. Though they may be willing to go anywhere when looking
for work, many will leave after a time, seeking easier access to
basic amenities like grocery stores and shopping centers and theaters. And in addition, there is little focus by the teacher training
programs to encourage candidates to take jobs in rural communities.
The rural school district student is like every other student in
the United States, except he is accustomed to long rides on the bus.
He wants to do well. He will respond to good teaching and high expectations and a climate that is supportive and challenging.
I urge you to take steps to see that student progress is measured
by growth and achievement and that progress for students in special education be in accordance with the educational goals of their
IEP.
When creating the new accountability system, I would like to remind the subcommittee to take into account the impact of small
numbers of students. Rural schools are more likely to have small
schools, small class sizes, and when using student assessment data
for accountability or for tracking the progress of teachers, remember that the results of just one or two students can skew the results.
38
Finally, graduation rates. If we are to reach the administrations
goal of college-and career-ready students, we need to let go of the
expectation that all children will get that done in 4 years. Those
of us who have sent our kids to college recentlyand I am one
learn that they may need more than 4 years to complete college.
The college degree earned in 5 years or 6 years has the same value
as the one earned in 4.
Why then must wewhile acknowledging that all children can
learn, but they learn at different ratesbe prodded to get every
child through high school in 4 years? Many would be better served
with a 5-year plan. Many, due to challenges at home, would like
to be supported to attend high school on a part-time basis.
Any high school graduation, whether it takes 5 years, 6 years, or
whether it is earned after taking a year off, should be celebrated.
A mandated 4-year graduation requirement works against all we
know and understand of how children learn.
Thank you for the opportunity to share with you today.
[The statement of Mr. Curry follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Daniel Curry, Superintendent, Lake Forest
School District, Kent County, DE
Good morning. My name is Dan Curry. I have served as superintendent of Lake
Forest School District in Kent County, Delaware since the summer of 2003. Ive
been a school superintendent for 22 years, having served in that capacity for 15
years in my home state of West Virginia. Each district was uniquely different. Student enrollment ranged from 1500 to 15,000. One of those districts, Pocahontas
County, is considered the most rural school district in the East with presently 1.3
students per square mile.
During my years as superintendent I have personally observed, and my districts
have adjusted to, the change in philosophy from ESEA supporting and
supplementing the work of the states and local school districts to ESEA mandating
and directing the work of the school districts.
Lake Forest School district is a rural farm community around 12 miles south of
Dover. We have around 3900 students in 166 square miles. Much of our land is
dedicated to farming. We have huge fields planted mostly in wheat, soy and corn,
but there are also plenty of fruits and vegetables. From 2004-2006 enrollment increased around 5% each year, and some of our fields gave way to sub-divisions.
The Lake Forest student population is 70% white, 25% African American and 5%
all others. 43% of our children qualify for free or reduced priced meals at school.
We have three primary schools with grades pre-K3, one intermediate for grades
45, one middle school for 6-8 and one high school.
First let me say that ESEA allocations have always been a godsend to rural school
districts. It is the nature of rural areas to have high instances of poverty and low
property values, leading to limited resources collected through property taxes. Central office staffs are generally small and they wear multiple hats. While working in
the central office in Pocahontas County, over several years I managed almost every
program. I even drove bus on occasion. In some smaller school districts out west,
they may share administrators or the principal might also be a teacher.
Rural superintendents I have talked to all agree that formula funding is the fairest means of distribution of ESEA funds. We fear that turning to competitive grants
might leave rural districts at a disadvantage to compete. Most dont have expert
grant writers nor do they have the resources to dedicate to them. Spending time
and resources to go after grants we may not get is a poor use of resources especially
during this economic downturn. It will do nothing but broaden the gap between the
haves and the have nots.
I urge the committee to work to ensure that the formulas are also equitable for
rural school districts. Specifically, the funding formulas should be based on percentages of poverty, not raw numbers. A poor student is a poor student no matter where
they live and should not lose funding because they choose to live in a rural community.
The challenges facing rural schools are many. Recruiting and retaining teachers
continues to be difficult for most rural school districts. Some districts have no choice
but to maintain small schools with small enrollments. Geographical isolation and
39
transportation challenges make that so. This leads to teachers who must teach multiple subjects and makes it almost impossible for them to meet the federal highly
qualified definition. Finding the necessary additional college classes to eventually
earn highly qualified status or making them take multiple assessments to meet this
arbitrary definition is also a challenge for the same reason. First time teachers willing to agree to any assignment for a chance to teach, can find themselves committing to heavy load of multiple class preps while driving miles after work, several
days a week to take the necessary classes.
In general, rural school districts face the same challenges when it comes to finding a sufficient candidate pool of qualified candidates for special education, math
and science. The rural surroundings are a deterrent to some candidates. Though
they may be willing to go anywhere when looking for work, many will leave after
a time, seeking easier access to basic amenities like grocery stores, shopping centers
and theaters. In addition, there is little focus by the teacher training programs to
encourage candidates to take jobs in rural communities.
Finding school leaders is much the same. I was first given an opportunity to be
a principal in rural Pocahontas County at age 24 because there was absolutely nobody in the district with the licensure. I was willing to make that move and it
turned out to be a great decision in my career, but not everyone would enjoy living
and working in such a rural area.
The rural school district student is like every other student in the United States,
except he is accustomed to long rides on the school bus. She wants to do well. Hell
respond to good teaching and high expectations in a climate that is supportive and
challenging. I urge you to take steps to see that student progress is measured by
growth in achievement and that progress for students in special education be in accordance with the educational goals of their IEP as opposed to the goals of the average student.
My district last year had the highest percentage of 8th grade students scoring proficient in Mathwe ranked 1st in the state. Our 8th grade writing scores were 2nd
and reading scores ranked 3rd. Yet, my middle school did not make AYP. Why? Because our special education students did not meet the general population target for
proficiency. Our special education students are learning and making great strides;
however, we must measure them based on what they are learning.
When creating the new accountability system, I would just like to remind the subcommittee to take into account the impact of small numbers of students. Rural
schools districts are more likely to have small schools and small class sizes. When
using student assessment data for accountability, or for tracking the progress of
teachers, remember that the results of just one or two students can throw off the
results.
In addition, remember that every time the federal government requests data on
an issue, there is someone in a school district that is now responsible for tracking
that new item. While never bad on its own, when these data points are added up
they have a huge burden on rural schools which often lack administrative staff. Instead, principals and sometimes teachers are running around to meet these data requests. This is time away from critical instruction. Please remember the impact at
the local level when these data requests are made.
I would also like to mention my support on behalf of rural superintendents for
the Rural Education Achievement Program. While my district does not receive this
funding directly, a lot of my colleagues do. This important funding stream is the
only federally dedicated funding stream for rural schools across the country, both
small and high poverty. It provided them with critical formula dollars to help overcome the gap in federal funding and their geographic isolation. This program has
proven to be a huge success story in the over 6,000 districts nationwide that support it. I urge the subcommittee to adopt HR 2446, the REAP Reauthorization Act,
introduced by Representatives Pomeroy, Graves and Hare. This important legislation will make the minor necessary updates to this very important program.
Finally, graduation rates. If we are to reach the administrations goal of College
and CareerReady Students we need to let go of the expectation that all children
will get it done in 4 years. Those of us who have sent our children to college in recent times have learned that many will need more than 4 years to earn a degree.
The college degree earned in 5 years or 6 years has the same value as that earned
in 4. Why then must we, while acknowledging that all children can learn, but they
learn at different rates, be prodded to get every child through high school in 4
years? Many would be better served with a 5 year plan. Many, due to challenges
at home, would like to be supported to attend high school on a part-time basis. Any
high school graduation, whether it takes 5 years, 6 years or whether its earned
after taking a year off, should be celebrated. A mandated 4 year graduation requirement works against all we know and understand of how children learn and develop.
40
Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts with you today. I would be
happy to take any questions.

Dr. Dale?
STATEMENT OF JACK DALE, SUPERINTENDENT, FAIRFAX
COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Mr. DALE. Thank you, Chairman Kildee and Governor Castle,

and members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to
address you this morning.
I would like to start with, Mr. Kildee, your comments at the beginning about how much of the United States now is a cross-section
of the world and how important it is to prepare our children for the
world, because I share that passion with you.
I would like to reflect a little bit on what we have all learned,
I think, from the first round of No Child Left Behind high stakes
accountability and then provide some of my thoughts for the future.
The first thing I think we have learnedand you can see from
all of us is disaggregation. We pay very close attention to our subgroups. But I think the next iteration, the next level of
disaggregation, is individual students, because behind every successful school in the United States is when they have peeled the
onion back and disaggregated to individual students. And that is
where our next area of emphasis should be.
We have also learned the importance of assessment. We have
talked about the variety of assessments. Ms. Diaz has talked about
the importance of data analysis, Ms. Kearns about the alternative
assessments. And one of the things that we have learned in assessments is one size does not fit all. And what we have learned,
though, is how much richer some of our assessments can be when
we think about the needs of our individual children, and that is extremely important in this next iteration.
I am almost beginning to think, too, it is a little bit less important about the individuals we hire to be teachers and principals
and maybe more important about what those people do once they
are on the job.
I have found that our most successful schools are ones where the
teams of teachers and principals are beginning to work diligently
on individual student needs, individual student learning gaps, individual student assessment changes to get at what their children
know, and I think that is the interesting thing that we need to
keep perspective of.
The diversityFairfax County public schools, we have over
170,000 children. We do represent the nation. One place we are differentand I will make some comments aboutis in our Englishlanguage learner population.
While we have a comparable percentage of our students who are
English-language learners, we differ in that about 80 percent of our
English-language learners are not U.S.-born students. They are immigrating to the United States, most recently even from Haiti.
But what we have learned with our English-language learners is
how important it is to teach them English and how to ensure that
they teachor they learn English and that we can assess that
41
English-language progress and then begin to assess simultaneously
in a phasing program their knowledge and background in literacy
and in math and science and social studies, but they must master
English, and we must have transitional assessments to accommodate that.
Our special education children are no different than whatever everybody else has talked about. One of the things I would note is
in the nation we are becomingI think we are having greater percentages of our children with greater needs. And so while a great
proportion of our children can be assess through the normal process, we are also beginning to see greater numbers of children who
need alternative assessments so that we can communicate with
them, they can communicate with us, and they can demonstrate
the knowledge that they, in fact, have, so that alteration and assessments is extremely important.
We tried that in Virginia. We had a Virginia grade-level assessment, which was basically a portfolio assessment. Some people
think it is suspect because it allowed greater passage rates. I think
it is a step in the right direction, because it actually allowed children to demonstrate their deep understanding of the content that
we are expecting them to learn. The normal testing mechanisms
did not allow that particular exhibition of knowledge to take place.
Funding. Funding is always an issue. With stimulus funding, we
have all benefited greatly through the increase in Title 1 and IDEA
funds. We are all recognizing the cliff that is coming after one more
year.
With IDEA especially, I think we should try and advocate for the
continuation of that level of funding for our special needs children
because, as I mentioned, we are having greater numbers of those
children and we need to pay attention to their needs much more
so.
A comment about assessments. Not only should we standardize
those across the United States, as we are trying to do, and I can
see the administration pushing us in that direction, a good
thought, but we also need to push ourselves to look at world assessment. Things that we are looking at in terms of world assessments are pieces of the program for international student assessment or TIMS, the trends in international mathematics and
science. We should be looking at some of those, as well as our U.S.
based assessments.
Finally, I want to make a comment about college readiness. College readiness is going to be a challenge because we do not have
a universal definition of what college readiness means. Our community colleges, our traditional state 4-year colleges, and our competitive private college entrance assessments vary greatly.
And while we aspire to have all of our students college-ready
and/or career-ready, we have a train wreck coming in that definition. Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Dale follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Jack Dale, Superintendent, Fairfax County
Public Schools, Fairfax, VA
Overview
The mission of Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS), a world-class school system,
is to inspire, enable, and empower students to meet high academic standards, lead
42
ethical lives, and demonstrate responsible citizenship. FCPS believes that each child
is important and entitled to the opportunity to realize his or her fullest potential,
and that a well-rounded education enables students to lead fulfilling and culturally
rich lives.
Fairfax County students achieve at high levels across a broad spectrum of pursuits. FCPS values a well-rounded education that goes beyond basics, and encompasses the arts, literacy, languages, technology, and preparation for the world of
work. FCPS provides a breadth and depth of opportunities to allow all students to
stretch their capabilities. More than 93 percent of FCPS graduates go on to postsecondary studyincluding more than 62 percent to four-year colleges. The on time
graduation rate is more than 90 percent.
FCPS is the largest school system in Virginia and the twelfth largest in the
United States. In the 2009-2010 school year, more than 173,000 students are served
by 22,137 staff members in 197 schools and centers. Fairfax County is home to more
than a million residents and reflects an increasing level of cultural, economic and
linguistic diversity. Fewer than 47 percent of FCPS students identify themselves as
White; 18 percent Asian American; 18 percent Hispanic; 10 percent African American; and 6 percent Multiracial. While the county is often viewed as having wealth
and resources, it also has the highest cost of living in the state. In the current
school year, more than 39,000 FCPS students are eligible for the Federal Free and
Reduced-Price Meals Program (FRL), a nationally recognized benchmark indicating
poverty.
Fairfax Countys critical issues include a rapidly growing population, increasing
diversity, primarily from immigration and resettlement, poverty, extreme income
disparity, high mobility, as well as the recession, which continues to significantly
impact our community. Decreased revenue at the county level has led to a decrease
in the amount provided to FCPS, which relies on the county for nearly 75 percent
of its funding. The budget crisis in the schools will impact a wide range of programs
and services, in particular programs that impact low income and language minority
students.
ELL
Currently in FCPS, more than 41 percent of PreK-12 students live in homes in
which a language other than English is spoken (language minority students), with
more than 140 different languages and 200 countries represented. Students come
to FCPS from all over the world, with major groups coming from Central America
(El Salvador, Guatemala), South America (Peru, Colombia, Argentina), Asia (Korea,
Vietnam, China, the Philippines) and Africa (Somalia, Ghana). Some of the most recent arrivals include orphans from Haiti being united with families in Fairfax. Approximately half of FCPS language minority students (or 20 percent of the total
FCPS student population) are also English language learners (ELLsalso referred
to as limited English proficient [LEP] students). The FCPS ELL student population
has more than quadrupled in the past 20 years.
Nationwide, ELLs are the fastest growing student population, and are projected
to comprise more than 25 percent of the entire K-12 student population in the US
by the year 2050. To prepare ELLs to be successful members of the 21st century
global society, there is a need to articulate a clear national vision of high expectations for ELLs. This includes guaranteeing ELLs equal access to advanced academic
programs, including Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB)
courses, and college and career preparation programs. It is also necessary to provide
ELLs with appropriate differentiated instruction and resource support to prepare
and enable them to become successful in these rigorous academic settings.
It is important to include ELLs in accountability systems, to ensure that they are
also being provided equal access to and quality instruction of content area standards. However, ELLs should be assessed with measures that are fair, valid, reliable,
and appropriate for their current English language proficiency level while they are
learning academic English. States should be given the resources to provide those appropriate alternative assessments for ELLs, especially when assessing literacy.
Research demonstrates that it can take five to seven years to acquire the type of
academic English necessary to be academically successful. Since ELLs educational
background varies greatly, their academic achievement and English language proficiency should be assessed using multiple measures, with a focus on their progress
and growth over time. ELLs who enter US schools during the secondary level should
be provided with additional time, as necessary, to fulfill graduation requirements
without penalizing schools through the accountability measures.
ELLs development of English, as well as the knowledge of their home language,
should be promoted and cultivated so that they can learn to communicate in two
or more languages to enhance their ability to be successful participants of the global
43
economy of the 21st century. Innovative models of providing high quality, successful,
rigorous, and challenging instruction to ELLs should be promoted, rewarded and
shared nationwide as demonstration models. ELL student populations are growing
most rapidly in areas around the country that previously did not have ELL populations. Therefore, all instructional personnel need pre-service and ongoing in-service professional development on successful, research-based strategies for working
with ELLs in the classroom.
IDEA
The underfunding of the actual cost of programs for students with disabilities at
the federal level impedes services to all students. Federal funding for IDEA has not
been brought to the level deemed appropriate when PL 94-142 was enacted in 1975
to help school districts maintain quality in special education and slow the drain of
funds for services to students who are not disabled.
IDEA requires that services mandated in each students IEP must be funded.
These services in the IEP cannot be cut when budgets are tight, so cuts to other
students go a little deeper. Even in good times, there is real budget tension between
special education and general education. Only additional funding or regulatory relief
can ease the budget tensions and help school districts deal with shortfalls in state
and local revenue as a result of the recession.
Currently FCPS serves 24,502 students with disabilities through IEPs. Of particular concern is that while the number of students with mild disabilities has increased only slightly, the number of students with severe disabilities has increased
significantly. These students receive more than 50 percent of their education in self
contained settings. The number of students with significant disabilities has risen by
12 percent. In the area of autism alone, there has been an increase of 413 students
from 2007 to 2009. The cost to educate these students can be in excess of $10,000
per student in addition to the general education per pupil cost. The services are
IEP-driven and are mandatory requirements of a law that is funded at approximately 15 percent of the cost to the district. Stimulus funding through the IDEA
created some partial support in this area but with the loss of this funding in FY12,
the education services to all students will be compromised. Permanent funding must
be found to close this gap.
Assessment Requirement
The testing requirements in IDEA and NCLB initially produced results which
were not useful in planning individual or group instruction for students with disabilities who function at low to very low cognitive levels. The tests based on the federal requirements measure proficiency based on long lists of grade level standards
but are not connected to a clear objective, like readiness for the next grade, or college/career readiness. These laundry-list tests were clearly not suited for students
who function at a very low level.
This resulted in the adoption of the one percent rule, which helped to ensure that
the information coming from tested students would be a more accurate reflection of
overall student performance. However, the many standards and the lack of internal
connectivity among the standards still resulted in tests where students functioning
at lower cognitive levels, but not the lowest, faced few items they could answer,
leaving the assessments unreliable for these students as well. The United States
Department of Education came up with a two percent rule to deal with inaccurate
and unreliable tests for this next tier of students. The two percent rule has not been
easy to implement because federal rules still insist on standards rigidly tied to
grade levels and because of the lack of appropriate assessments designed to address
the continuum of cognitive functioning. Virginia created the Virginia Grade Level
Assessment (VGLA) in an attempt to respond to the two percent challenge. While
a step in the right direction, the VGLA has not proven adequate. In fairness, no
assessment will be adequate until federal requirements permit adaptive assessment
and until there are fewer, clearer standards that build step by step to a logical
measurable end, like college and career readiness.
Assessment provides a valuable staff development opportunity. Teachers learn
more, and schools improve when they are provided time to sit down and analyze
the data from these assessments with their teams. They work together to apply
what they have learned from the analyses to formulate plans to bridge the gaps on
student achievement
Funding
All of these accountability programs and assessments have a direct and substantial impact on local resources. The estimated local cost to FCPS of the underfunded
federal programs is listed below:
IDEA$43 million (would have been nearly $62 million without stimulus)
44
NCLB$16 million
ELL$51.5 million
Homeless$112,000 for staff (not including additional classroom resources) and
$500,000 in transportation costs covering taxis, buses, vans, and gas and smart trip
cards.
Additionally, FCPS is eligible for greater Impact Aid under current allotment formulas than is received. However, because Impact Aid is not fully funded, school divisions like FCPS that have large overall operating budgets relative to their Impact
Aid eligible population receive proportionately fewer Impact Aid dollars. If fully
funded according to the federal definition, FCPS would receive $15.8 million in Impact Aid; instead of the $3.5 million received in FY 2009.
Looking to the Future
Assessment can and should improve, and we have many of the tools necessary to
improve these tests. Performance assessment and adaptive assessment have made
huge strides in reliability and validity since the adoption of No Child Left Behind.
The new ESEA and then the new IDEA must permit the use of these more accurate
assessments. Educators want to improve accuracy by measuring growth or progress
over time. Time can be measured by grade level or by years in school, but there
must be a beginning point for each student that is accurate and tracks over time.
Such measures require a clear end target and equally clear steps and benchmarks
along the way.
Assessment must move from a once a year event to a regular occurrence that is
built into the learning experience. Results must be available within hours, not
months, and the results must be individualized. School districts must also be permitted to include valid and reliable assessments they develop or purchase along
with required state assessments to provide a more complete picture of student
achievement in the aggregate and for individual students. Then the two percent rule
could be eliminated because the continuum of cognitive functioning will be accommodated in the assessment design.
More importantly every high scoring country internationally is using high-quality
performance assessments. No country that scores high on international benchmarks
like the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) or Trends in
International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) is using the type of tests required by IDEA/NCLB to improve schools or to measure student achievement, so
why are students in the US left using the Model T version of assessment?
Standards must improve too. States now have long lists of standards for each tested grade level. These standards exist in isolation from each other and do not include
internal steps or benchmarks that would inform students, parents, teachers, and administrators about student progress. Fewer, clearer standards that build to an easily understood and measured end point such as college and career readiness are a
must if students are to have a clear road map to success. In particular, special education and ELL students and their parents need that map to plan their futures.
Students who do not speak English well enough to take a content test in English
are also disadvantaged by the requirements of IDEA/NCLB and by the rules established by the US Department of Education to implement those programs. At some
point on the continuum of mastery, a students content knowledge can be accurately
assessed in English. Until they get to that point, there are too few items on current
tests to accurately and reliably gauge their academic achievementthe content tests
simply become a measure of their comprehension of the English language. The rigid
rules about time in school assume a uniform rate of learning English which is not
consistent with what we know about student language mastery. There must be some
flexibility in determining readiness for content-level testing and then the assessments themselves must be improved to give students the best opportunity to demonstrate their content knowledge.
Instead of choosing assessments based on what is educationally sound and best
for our students, the assessments being used appear to have been chosen largely
based on their cost. State of the art testing will require new resources, and those
resources must come from the Federal Government. We cannot require states and
localities to use of high quality assessments without making the resources available
to implement them properly. Our students need and deserve these changes to stay
competitive in our dynamic global economy.

I want to thank all the witnesses for their testimony and will
now proceed with the question-and-answer period of the hearing.
45
The presentations were very clear, and they provoke some good
questions from ourselves, too.
I recognize myself first for 5 minutes.
President Gipp, one of the important messages in your testimony
is the significance of tribal consultation. I have been a longstanding
advocate of native students and understand the importance of including tribal leaders in decisions that affect their students.
Can you talk more about the challenges tribal leaders face in this
area and how we can ensure that the needs of native students are
properly addressed and just not sometimes forgotten? For example,
I think in the Race to the Top and in the state fiscal stabilization
fund, by omission, you were not included.
What can we do to make sure that when we have special programs, which made a great difference in many school districts in
many states, that you are not ignored in that, but that you can see
how you can be included in those special programs that the president initiates?
Mr. GIPP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Indeed, you are correct that
there has been a major oversight of tribal communities and tribal
nations with respect to Race to the Top and those kinds of opportunities, and our communities have been completely left out.
So I think it would be incumbent upon the executive branch to
take a look at how they can formulate some of those or reformulate
some initiatives that could be made available to tribal governments
and tribal communities.
The second thing is to look at how we might also look at a special
initiative enabled by Congress itself so that those communities can
be included in terms of appropriations and directives to the administration to include tribal nations.
But more importantly, as you mentioned, the issue of tribal consultation is a very, very critical thing that needs to be ongoing, and
it needs to be part and parcel to how the Department of Education
and other federal agencies conduct themselves with respect to tribal governments who do have this nation-to-nation relationship with
the United States government.
Chairman KILDEE. And I think you are very correct. You know,
I have read many of the treaties. And very often, we fail to recognize that there is a direct relationship of government to government between the federal government and your tribal government.
I always, particularly with the younger Indians, point out that
I have, for example, two citizenships. I am a citizen of the United
States, and I am a citizen of the state of Michigan. You and other
Native Americans have three real citizenships of sovereign entities.
You are a citizen of the United States, and that is been proven by
the number of Indians serving in our armed forces. You are a citizen of the state. And you are a citizen of your tribe.
And you have rights and responsibilities that come from those
citizenships. And I think we have to make sure we dont by omission fail to carry that out, because sins of omission can be as damaging as sins of commission.
So I appreciate your comment on that.
Now I will recognize the governor for 5 minutes.
Mr. CASTLE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
46
And let me thank all of you. I think your testimony is wonderful,
and I cant get to all the questions I have, so I apologize for that.
But I am going to start with a question and go along with Dr. Dale,
Dr. Curry and Dr. Kearns, and that is the whole issue of adaptive
testing, which we are about to adopt in Delaware for nextor have
adopted, I guess, for next year, in terms of computer testing that
can go up and down, give instant results, and that kind of thing.
And you mentioned it in your testimony, Dr. Dale.
But I would be interested in your thoughts about that on a
broader sense. I think the whole business of assessments is going
to be a vital question. And however we redo the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act, and I dont know what your experiences
with it has been or what your thoughts about it are, but I would
be curious to hear about that. And I also worry about the special
populations and their ability to be able to handle that kind of testing, too.
Mr. DALE. You raise excellent questions. The assessments that
we are looking at trying to put in place to supplement our regular
standardizedstandards of learning test in Virginia they are
callediswell, first of all, we are trying to put assessments in
place that are informative.
You can assess weekly, monthly, whatever period of time to assess progress and intervene. It is to us not educationally sound to
wait until the very end of the year to begin to do assessments that
we should be doing that, so those kinds of adaptations, I want to
say, should take place.
The other is to try and look at different methods by which children can demonstrate their competency. As I mentioned in my testimony briefly, we have instituted a portfolio assessment collecting
artifacts of student work to demonstrate their competency, which
is a different method than just a paper or pencil test to accommodate special needs children, and that is a piece that we believe
strongly in continuing to research.
People question whether the validity and reliability of that kind
of an assessment is comparable to a paper and pencil test, but
those, I think, are research questions which we should continue to
pursue and not dismiss, but we should do, as Ms. Kearns says, continue to pursue those, to make sure that we have equivalent methods by which kids with different kinds of needs and disabilities can
demonstrate their competency.
Mr. CASTLE. Thank you.
Dr. Curry?
Mr. CURRY. And as you are aware, Congressman Castle, Delaware is making a move toward assessments of that ilk. We just this
week finished our state test in our traditional time period in
March. And almost immediately, we will go into field testing. A
new assessment that will be used next year, that assessment will
be Web-based. Most students will take it on computer. And there
will be various forms available so that the student may take it
more than one time throughout the year.
In that way, it helps inform the teacher so that they can adjust
instruction and make changes to instructional needs based upon
the students performance and a formative level of the assessment.
47
So we are looking forward to this new opportunity to more accurately measure student progress. And I think it will be good for all
the children of Delaware.
Mr. CASTLE. Ms. Kearns?
Ms. KEARNS. Thank you, Ranking Member Castle, for that question. I think that is a really important one that both Dr. Dale and
Dr. Curry pointed out, that they still use their state tests as the
demarcation of the standard, and I think that is really important.
We want kids with disabilities, particularly, to have access. We
want to know where the standard is. We want to know what the
achievement standard is for all kids. And both of my colleagues
here have mentioned that that was an important part.
Out of level tests or interim informative assessments in addition
to that are absolutely fine, as long as they help teachers really up
the expectations of what kids can know and can do, and I think we
really want to keep that in our minds. We really want to help
teachers understand what the expectations are and how to get kids
to those higher levels of expectations, and that would be for all
kids.
I want to ask the other side of the panel a question quickly. This
is an education hearing, and I understand that, but it often, in
terms of dealing with children who are underachieving and minority groups, or groups just coming to America, I worry about what
is also happening at home. Are they being prepared to be educated,
is therein the encouragement of that and that kind of thing?
I am not sure in redoing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act we can address too much of that directly, but Ms. Diaz
mentioned parents, and I think we are all very conscious of the
family effect in terms of moving forward.
Your comments on anything that we should be thinking about
doing, in terms of making sure that there is a recognition of the
importance of education among all groups, but obviously those who
are minorities or have English as a second language or some other
barriers in terms of education?
Mr. WOTORSON. I think it is a wonderful question, Mr. Kildee
I mean, Mr. Castle. I apologize.
When the Campaign for High School Equity was first put together, we put out a document called the plan for success that specifically addressed that issue where we were urging policymakers
to consider a variety of ways of specifically addressing how you, in
fact, invest communities so that they can be better supported in
terms of providing wraparound services so that there is more support in terms of how you involve parents in the education process.
It is something that we wouldthat I would say we agree with
you on 112 percent, that it is something that should be invested
in and to make sure that there is more support for kids outside of
school.
Ms. DIAZ. I would also agree. In my experience, it is very doable
and it is just about being intentional about it. We have utilized
Title 3 funding very carefully. And what we have found is that parents need to be educated, but they also need to be taught what
things they could do at home, and they need to be talked honestly
to and boldly.
48
In our Hispanic community, for example, the soap operas are in
the evening, unfortunately, and Univision is very popular. That is
a total contradiction of what we need as educators for them to
spend their time and in the evenings.
We need to explain that to them. It is just something that us as
educators need to hold on and embrace and sayand expect them
not to spend their time doing that, but to turn off the TV and explain why that is important and then show them how to do so.
We haveI talked a little bit about how we are intentional about
showing them strategies, and we do thatwe try to do that with
household, common household, you know, goods, for example, shaving creams. Most people have shaving cream at home. It is a wonderful tool to practice spelling words or sight words, for example,
but you have to show them. If they dont know, they wont implement it.
But if you can explain what they can do, for example, and how
to do it and then the results that their students will gain, it makes
a remarkable difference. Every parent wants their child to succeed,
and immigrant parents really have high expectations for their students. They do not want them to be cleaning hotel rooms and dishwashing in the backs of restaurants.
And if you can explain that in that way, the fact that it is an
investment, it is a sacrifice at that point in time to be able to turn
off the TV, but it is an enormous investment of their time, and if
you show them, and if we teach them English, as wellpart of our
Parents Are Teachers program is helping parents learn English, as
well.
So it can be done. You just have to be intentional about it. And
Title 3 funding can be very beneficial to us as educators.
Mr. GIPP. Thank you, Ranking Member Castle. I would agree
with both of the comments made by Mr. Wotorson and Ms. Diaz
as to this special population.
I would also add that our tribes need the authority to develop
their own measurements and standards. That is something that is
always been lacking. We always say that the local community is a
part of American pie and all of those kinds of things. That is not
been the case historically with the Indian tribe and tribal populations.
I remember my own grandfather being told by the local superintendent of the reservation that, when he went home, he was not
to speak Lakota in the home. He wasnt supposed to speak that to
his children and likewise. This went on for many, many years.
And so we were always taught that we shouldnt be who we
were. That, however, is not the case. We are who we are today. We
have lost a lot of cultural value.
But on the other hand, it can be put back together because our
tribes are still there, our children are still there, and they are intensely interested in knowing who they are by culture, by language
and by history. And this is where our tribes need to have a voice
when we talk about issues of accreditation, of standards, of measurement that have been totally left out of the picture.
And that is why it is so important to support tribal education departments, to support education standards, and a accreditation system that is responsive to who and what we are all about and help-
49
ing us build them from within the community, lets put it that way.
There is more to say, obviously, about this.
The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott?
Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wotorson, your organization is a coalition of civil rights
groups. Do I understand that correctly?
Mr. WOTORSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. SCOTT. The achievement gapin many areas, there is a very
clearly identifiable, ethnically identifiable achievement gap where
children of one group are educated to the 10th grade and children
of another group are educated to the 12th grade. Does that violate
the principle in Brown that the childrenthe minority race is
being denied an equal educational opportunity?
Mr. WOTORSON. I think in many ways it is reflective of the unfinished legacy of Brown. On the one hand, Brown intended to ensure
access, but it never ensured equity. And as you rightly point out,
we are faced with a situation of a real hyper-concentration of a
number of problems that affect low-income and minority students
in equitable access to critically important educational resources, access to oftentimes the most ineffective teachers, just a whole range
of things that, at the end of the day, do, in fact, have the effect of
denying them a high-quality education.
Mr. SCOTT. And there has been thein the litigation over disabled children 30 years ago, it was concluded that the localities had
the responsibility of educating special ed students and cost could
not be a defense, is that right?
Mr. WOTORSON. That is my understanding.
Mr. SCOTT. Now, one of the elements of the achievement gap is
the dropout rate. When we started No Child Left Behind, we put
in therethere is legislation that they had to consider dropout
rate. Otherwise, you would have a perverse incentive, letting people drop out to drop from the bottom. The more people drop out,
the higher your average looks, that you had to offset by dropouts
unfortunately, we left it up to the states to figure out what dropout
meant, and by the time they finished, it was a meaningless calculation.
Do you have a problem with leaving it up to the states as to how
they count who drops out?
Mr. WOTORSON. Mr. Congressman, that is exactly why we have
called for, at a minimum threshold, holding states accountable for
student success and requiring states and districts to report on how
well they are doing in terms of moving students towards graduation.
Mr. SCOTT. Now, the name of your organization is Campaign for
High School Equity. Did you find as a finding that the low-performing schools, in fact, got less resources?
Mr. WOTORSON. The finding has been established, actually, for
quite some time that generally the lowest-performing schools have
inequitable access to the same kinds of resources and that, more
often not, students of color tend to be concentrated in those schools.
Similarly, teachers with the least amount of experience tend to be
concentrated in those schools, as well.
50
Mr. SCOTT. Dr. Dale, you represent one of the most diverse
school systems in the nation. When you get your disaggregated
data and notice that some groups are not achieving and there is,
in fact, an achievement gap, you have a choice. You can just watch
or you can try to do something.
And we have in the legislation kind of cookie-cutter steps. Do you
do any diagnosis to find out what, in fact, the problem is and prescribe a solution to deal with that problem? Or do you just go
through some cookie-cutter ideas, whether it fits or not?
Mr. DALE. We go through individuallet me respond in a couple
things. One is to piggyback on the resource question.
The first thing we have done, regardless of Title 1 funding, regardless of IDEA funding, regardless of any state funding, even, is
we distribute additional resources to our schools that have the
greater needs, and our greater needs are defined three ways:
underperforming, high poverty, English-language learners.
And so weout of our own local resourcesdistribute an additional set of staffing and additional time for teachers to address
that, so we
Mr. SCOTT. That is in addition to Title 1?
Mr. DALE. In addition, well above Title 1. In fact, it is probably
twice our Title 1 funding. Then, to diagnose issues in a given
school, we expect our teachers and our principals to work on individual student needs. And so we get down to the individual student
to determine why that student is or is not succeeding and provide
the intervention. That is our quest.
Mr. SCOTT. Does it work?
Mr. DALE. We have many schools, in fact, where our
disaggregation data would suggest that the white middle class is
the underperforming class, interestingly enough. Yes, it works.
Mr. SCOTT. Good. Thank you.
And, Ms. Diaz, you have indicated that you can eliminate the
achievement gap, and you also suggested that a comprehensive approach was necessary. What kinds of initiativesyou mentioned a
couple of themactually eliminate the achievement gap?
Ms. DIAZ. I think education within our educators is important.
One of the things that we have tried to do is be very focused about
our professional development.
We had a changing community. It wasthe immigrant population came to the educators as a surprise. And being able to educate them was quite difficult at the beginning, so utilizing Title 3
funding to also educate the teachers in how to differentiate instruction for ELL learners.
The other thing we had to do was re-educate our English-language learner teachers. One of the thing I observed is that traditionally, our ELL teachers were seeing their role as what I call a
mother hen syndrome, is protecting their ELL students and trying
to do the best, but it was primarily tutoring services versus teaching content and teaching language acquisition.
So for the regular classroom teacher, being able to train them so
that they could provide good teaching for ELL learners, as well, not
just what I call the Crayola curriculum. Every student in every
country knows how to color and they dont need a teacher to teach
them that. They need to be taught content.
51
And the ELL teachers needed to see their jobs aswe need to
also work with the regular classroom teachers, and we need to provide learning, not just simply tutoring and let me help you with
your homework.
The combination of the two and working together so the ELL
teacher understands what the classroom teacher is doing and vice
versa and then working together collaboratively during our collaboration period, that is what they are lookingthey are looking at
the data, but what do they need to teach in both arenas? That has
been very successful.
Ms. KEARNS. I would like to add that that is ditto for children
with disabilities. When special ed teachers protect them, it is a lifetime ruin, so we really have to have access to the general curriculum. We have to have professional development. We have to
have all of those things if the kids are going to meet the standard.
Chairman KILDEE. The chair now yields 5 minutes to the
gentlelady from Illinois whose interest in education has been very
deep, very broad. When she was a member of the state legislature
in Illinois, she played a key role in the reorganization of the Chicago school district. And it helped turn that district around, and we
are all very grateful to her for that.
Mrs. Biggert?
Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you very much for those kind words, Mr.
Chairman. And I would like to kind of address something that we
havent been talking about, but since we are addressing the needs
of diverse students, I understand that several of you have excellent
programs to serve homeless students. And I would wonder how
much of an increase for services there has been since, obviously,
the climb in the unemployment and the recession.
And, second of all, I am wondering aboutand maybe introducing legislation which would allow Title 1 funds to be available
for transportation for homeless students, which would then provide
greater resources for the McKinney-Vento program. And I would
like to know if your districts receive McKinney-Vento subgrants.
And maybe Dr. Dale or Dr. Curry, I think you both
Mr. DALE. Yes, thank you for raising that question. Homeless
children are an issue. Economic circumstances does increase that,
as parents lose jobs and then children are leftor parents are left
in trying to grabmigrate to wherever it is they might be able to
live.
As we well know, the theory behind the McKinney-Vento act was
to make sure that the stability for that child was then their school.
And so when we do that, we obviously do increase transportation
costs. And while we get funds to cover some of that, it is nowhere
near the expenditures that we have in Fairfax County.
We used to spend in excess of $5 million on transportation costs
for homeless children, children who are foster care, which we have
put in somewhat the same category of trying to provide stability.
And while we redesigned some of our transportation processes, we
are still in excess of $2 million that we are spending to transport
kids to give them that stable environment in their school. Any assistance in that area would be tremendously helpful.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Dr. Curry?
52
Mr. CURRY. And even rural areas are no stranger to issues of the
homeless. We have a large transient population, and there is a lot
of movement when jobs are lost to move back home often and move
in with grandmother and grandfather at times, but sometimes that
is not a possibility, as well.
So my district has invested a great deal. And managing the
homeless, I dont have any numbers in front of me, but I do know
that it is significant, and we do not, however, exceed the available
money through McKinney-Vento, because everything we need has
been made available.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Is there anybody else that would like to comment
on that? No? Then I have one other question, and that is about,
you know, the testing and the IEP. And I know that we had a
hearing yesterdayand Secretary Duncan said that testing with
the IEP rather than the generalthat single test for those with severe disabilities, he thought, would be an option that he would like
to look at.
And, Dr. Curry, you mentioned it, and then, Dr. Kearns, you
seem to have a little difference of opinion on that, so
Mr. CURRY. Yes, we need to move to measuring progress of all
students, first of all. How much progress did we make and aim to
for those who are behind, to make more than one years progress?
And so overall, for all children, movement to assessments that
identify progress and movement to assessments that identify
progress so that we can also reward teachers for helping bring
about student progress is important.
And when it comes to special needs populations, when appropriate, their IEP will dictate, will tell you that they should be held
accountable to the same assessments, but at times that maybe it
wont be appropriate, and I think that needs to be taken into consideration and measure of every childs progress is critical.
With such a specialized program for a special needs student, you
have a lot more information to go on, on whether or not that child
is progressing.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Dr. Kearns?
Ms. KEARNS. Absolutely the IEP plays an important role. However, I would point out that Bruce is the classic example of a student who had an IEP, and the IEP team failed terribly. And it was
only because the teacher had to figure out how to assess him for
his alternate assessment, that she asked for assistance, and that
is how he got his technology.
So I would say that absolutely the IEP is an important tool, but
it is not an accountability tool. The other concern I have about
using the IEP for that is that we really need parents and teachers
to form partnerships. And my biggest concern about that is the inherent possibly resulting in litigation, and we really dont need to
go there. We really need to reinforce parent-school partnerships.
But all kids need to be in the assessment and accountability system, and I think Bruces example is the classic example of where
IEP teams sometimes dont have all the expertise they need to
make those important decisions.
Mrs. BIGGERT. I see it as a very sensitive issue that we will really have to look at. Thank you both. I yield back.
53
Chairman KILDEE. We have been told that we may have a vote
in about 10, 15 minutes, so we will have to move along as quickly
as possible because coming back after a series of votes would take
over an hour, so we will try to move along.
But the gentleman from Puerto Rico, Mr. Pierluisi?
Mr. PIERLUISI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to extend my own welcome to the witnesses, particularly Ms. Diaz, who I understand was raised in Puerto Rico. I am
glad to see, Mr. Chairman, that my fellow Puerto Ricans are contributing to the general welfare of the great state of Michigan.
[Laughter.]
Chairman KILDEE. We appreciate your generosity in sharing.
Mr. PIERLUISI. Welcome, everyone. Todays hearing addresses
educational issues faced by a range of diverse learners. Because I
have only a brief period of time, I want to focus my questions on
the needs of English-language learners, which are the fastest growing segment of the nations school-age population.
How well our schools educate the students will dictate the future
success of our nation. To meet the needs of English learners, our
schools must provide not only highly qualified teachers of English
as a second language, but also teachers who can teach the students
in their native tongue.
Yet schools in Puerto Rico and in many states are having great
difficulty in recruiting highly qualified, bilingual teachers certified
to teach ESL and subject-specific classes in the students native
language. Due to the dearth of quality applicants, many teachers
of English learners do not have the fluency for ESL teaching skills
necessary to provide effective instructions to the student population.
As I see it, the need for high-quality bilingual education extends
beyond the needs of English learners. We must prepare all students to work and succeed in the 21st century worldwide marketplace and to provide students in the United States with the same
language skills already required of students in Europe and Asia.
That is why it is important that high schools graduates of all background be able to communicate in more than one language.
I should say that, actually, I am impressed with your English,
Ms. Diaz. I hope that my Spanish matches yours. But that should
be the goal. I am talking now about Spanish, students who Spanish
is their first language, but the same applies to other languages.
I would like now to just ask a couple questions. I know that timing is running.
Ms. Diaz, I agree with your recommendation that this should
provide more professional development to teachers working with
English-language learners. Have you found certain professional development programs to be particularly effective for teachers of
English learners? Have you used teacher exchanges as a way for
teachers to learn from other teachers and schools?
Ms. DIAZ. I have used a SIAP model, and that has been also very
effective. I have trained all of our English-language teachers in the
SIAP model within our district. I believe that colleges need to be
doing a better job.
And I agree that we need to be focusing on the endorsements of
teacher prep programs. Most of our colleges are moving away from
54
the bilingual model certification process to the ESL model and that
the difference between the two is, if you are bilingually certified,
you have to choose a second language to learn and be certified in.
You have to show proficiency in a second language. In an ESL endorsement model, you do not have to know a second language.
So primary concern there really comes when you are working not
only with new immigrant families that need that second language;
I also find that there is a distinct difference between a teacher that
has gone through the process of learning a second language and
their ability to teach immigrant students and someone that has
not.
And more importantly, with working with parents, if you have
that second language, it opens the door very wide open to working
with the parents and the success that it brings when you educate
the parents. And you need that second language to be able to do
so, so I am in complete agreement. [Speaking in Spanish.]
Mr. PIERLUISI. Oh, my goodness. She is good at that, too. [Laughter.]
And then, Mr. Dale, Dr. Dale, does your school district have a
shortage of teachers of English as a second language? And what
strategies for increasing the number of qualified ESL teachers do
you have or are using? Any recruitment incentives, professional development? Can you elucidate on this?
Mr. DALE. We are actually blessed with not having a recruitment
issue. And we focus on, in our English-language learning program,
we have probably one of the nations premier people in Teddi
Predaris in knowing how to train our own teachers in how to best
teach English, because that iswe have two areas to focus on.
I am going to reinforce the other bilingual component that you
talked about. We have children from 200 different countries, 120
different languages, so there is no way we can do dual language.
We just dont have that capacity.
So we focus on teaching all of our English-language learners
English proficiency and monitor that through Title 3 processes and
make sure that they, in fact, learn that and exit from the program
within usually 3 to 4 years max.
The other piece that I want to note is that we have actually put
in place our own goals to have all of our children conversant in at
least two languages upon graduation, because we do also think
that that is important.
Now, 40 percent of our kids go home every night where English
is not the primary language, so we have a benefit of having bilingual, trilingual students already, but we want to make sure they
are extremely proficient in English, because that is our mission,
and then also pick up another language to be part of the world.
Mr. PIERLUISI. Thank you.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Platts?
Mr. PLATTS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I first want to thank each of our witnesses for your testimony
and, maybe most importantly, for your shared committed to our nations children and working to make sure we do right by all of our
nations children. That comes through loud and clear.
55
First, just a comment, I guess. Dr. Curry, you talked about your
concerns with rural school districts. And my oldest sister, who
taught for about 20 years, for a number of years taught in west
Texas, where kindergarten to 12, her school hadthe entire district had about 100 kids. She was the English department for seventh through twelfth grade. Her graduating class, the one year I
visited her, was four.
So your comment of one student, you know, impacting dramatically in that assessment, I think, is something we need to be very
conscious of in assessing how the school district, the school building, which was all one, or the teachers are doing in the classroom.
Ms. Diaz, I wanted to specifically ask youyou emphasized the
importance in your original testimony and in answering questions
about the family involvement, and I share that completely. Danny
Davis and I have sponsored legislation, Education Begins at Home,
about trying to help promote parenting education programs, nurse
family partnership and others.
But specifically in the area of literacy, in your area in Michigan,
if Even Startis there an Evan Start program in your area? Are
you familiar with it? And how do you see that working in trying
to promote family literacy that then helps the parent at home?
Ms. DIAZ. In our county, we have implemented a similar program
called Bright Beginnings. And they are very similar, as far as
foundational beliefs and philosophies, and thatwe have a representative stationed in our district to work with parent 0 to 5 and
performing play groups in our schools. It is a great feeder program,
and it focuses on literacy skills.
They go to the home for home visits and they also bring the families into the schools. We have awe are very fortunate to have a
bilingual Bright Beginnings representative within our district, and
she works collaboratively with our district to provide not only literacy skills, but the content that we would like her to focus on, as
well.
She is also partI mentioned the family night, the reading
night, math night. She is partactively a part of those nights. And
she brings the families into those activities and provides them in
Spanish, as well.
Mr. PLATTS. Sounds like your districts really on the ball, as far
as the importance of that 0 to 5 years and combining the literacy
with just the broader education skills or foundation through the
parents.
Ms. DIAZ. Extremely important to start them out as soon as possible.
Mr. PLATTS. Yes, thank you.
Dr. Gipp, you emphasized the importance of Native Americans in
the classroom with Native American students. Is there a percentage today that you are aware of what percentif you are familiar
with those numbersthat are Native American teachers and tells
us kind of how far we need to get, if we place a greater emphasis
here?
Mr. GIPP. Well, within the tribal communities, it still is very,
very small. We are lucky to have 5 percent to 10 percent of our
teachers in our school systems, sometimes as high as 20 percent,
56
that are teachers in a given school system. But it will vary from
one school and one tribe to the next.
Again, a large percentage of our students are educated in public
school systems, so there are fewer teachers there, so we have a
major need to redevelop and put forth a teacher initiative to teach
and train more people to becomeNative Americans to become
teachers.
Many in the past have already retired, and so it is very important to bring in teachers that also have the cultural identity and
the teaching of native heritage within the curriculum as we develop
these systems.
Mr. PLATTS. Yes, I think well stated. Thank you.
And I am going to try to squeeze in one last question, Dr. Dale.
When you talked about the assessmentand if I understood your
statement correctly, you said a standard assessment across the
country. And usually we hear local control, not top-down, but bottom-up. And did I understand you correct?
Because one of my concerns is we are incentivizingthis goes to
the competitive grant process, also, that Dr. Curry referenced, that
we are going to incentivize or give more and more moneyin fact,
most of the increase is in the competitive grant category, not in
Title 1, not in IDEA, but through competitive grant, which I think
is a point that Dr. Curry made that was important, but also in how
you do the assessment, if you do a regional, statewideor a regional approach versus a state doing their own assessment, you are
disincentivized from doing your own. Can you clarify where you are
on that?
Mr. DALE. I think I misspoke, because I remember the words I
said. What I believe is that we should have a set of national standards, and I think the local assessments in how to get there are still
fine, because I think we have a sophistication in the assessment industry now to be able to do cross-state comparisons if we can agree
on a set of standards.
And my quest would be to make sure that those standards are
globally competitive, as well.
Mr. PLATTS. Okay, so but still national standards that, in essence, we are setting here?
Mr. DALE. I think the notion of trying to get all of the states to
agree upon a set of standards is a positive direction to go, because
our kids are so mobile now
Mr. PLATTS. Yes.
Mr. DALE [continuing]. We do them a disservice to not having
some kind of assurance.
Mr. PLATTS. If it is more that cooperative state approach versus
a nationalmeaning us
Mr. DALE. Yes, I would agree. Thank you for
Mr. PLATTS. So thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Polis?
Mr. POLIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Access to quality early childhood education is a very important
strategy if we are to improve the educational outcomes of at-risk
students and if we are ever going to truly succeed in making Amer-
57
ica a leader in college graduates by 2020, which is the goal that
President Obama has set for the nation and I strongly support.
I wanted to give you the chancesince it wasnt covered in the
testimoniesto address some of the severe inequities the low-income and other at-risk students face before they even enter the
classroom in kindergarten. Lacking adequate preparation, these
students are already behind before they even set foot in a public
school environment.
I would like to open it up to see who would like to discuss the
role of expanding access to high-quality early childhood education,
especially for low-income students, as part of systemic school reform and any recommendations you might have in that area within
the context of ESEA reauthorization.
Yes, Dr. Curry?
Mr. CURRY. Quality early childhood, pre-kindergarten opportunities ought to be generally available to all students. I think some
states have done a better job of opening up access so that all children as 4-year-olds can have the opportunity for school.
But it is something that I have no doubt as an elementary educator initially that that early intervention is critical, and that is
thewithout that, that is, indeed, part of the deficit that many
children come in the door with, is that they didnt have the same
opportunities. So that needs to be strengthened. It would be helped
with some federal dollars to help support that.
Mr. POLIS. Ms. Diaz?
Ms. DIAZ. I would encourage partnership. There is a lot of early
childhood programs. Bright Beginnings is one I have mentioned already. Head Start is also stationed within our district. We have a
strong preschool program with the Great Start Readiness Program,
and we have all-day kindergarten.
With our immigrant population, that has become very effective,
as well, and all-day, everyday kindergarten program. That solid
foundation between Bright Beginnings, Head Start, pre-school, and
all-day kindergarten has brought incredible results.
Mr. POLIS. Okay, yield back.
The gentlelady from California, Mrs. Davis?
Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to all of you for being here.
I wanted to focus on the diversity of the teaching force for a moment. According to the Department of Education statistics from
2007 and 2008and may well be quite aware of this83 percent
of public school teachers were white, 7 percent Latino, 7 percent
African-American, and overall, 75 percent were female.
So we have a problem. There arent enough Latino and AfricanAmerican teachers, but particularly male teachers for a diverse
teaching force.
The Washington Post ran an article last summer basically talking about the fact that young male African-American students really dont feel that they belong in a classroom. Interestingly enough,
it doesnt affect the young women quite as much, because at least
they have a female model, even though it may be an Anglo model
in the classroom.
58
And I wonder if you could speak a little bit to this issue. I actually was on the board of San Diego Unified from 1983 to 1992. And
at that time, we created the African-American Male Project, which
recognized that it was impossible to putto have a teacher in
every classroom, but if we could group students and at least they
could have a benefit of a really good and strong role model.
What isyou know, from your experience, how really as we move
forward with the new authorization, what is it that you would like
to see there that the Department of Education could be doing to increase that kind of diversity?
Mr. DALE. I would like to jump in on that one, because I share
with youand I would add into the mix the shortage of Asian
teachers in general, male and female both, is a very underrepresented group.
I think the incentive in the pipeline is there are a lot of people
who entered education with various incentive programs several
decades ago that no longer exist, but I think that is the key piece.
The other ones are new teachers for America programs that actually go out and overtly begin to recruit underrepresented groups of
individuals.
And the final piece that we need to pay attention to is our workforce is changing, and we are now experiencing people with multiple careers. And so it is not just the college area, but it is out of
the general workforce where people are now wanting to come into
to education. So we have to have our sights on not only recruiting
in the pipeline and through college, but also as people are changing
positions in their own careers and lives.
Mrs. DAVIS. And as a few more, if you can respondbut, you
know, I think intuitively, we know how important this is. I dont
know whetherdo we have really statistics that show that it really
does make a difference in terms of the performance of young African-American males, for example, or other groups?
Mr. GIPP. I was just going to say that teacher training initiatives
are a major priority for us with respect to tribal and Indian communities across the nation. We need to set a goal of recruiting at
least 2,500 new Indian teachers in our systems alone, and that is
probably the low side of it, out of the Department of Educations
goal of 200,000.
And we need to reauthorize teacher training initiative for tribal
colleges and universities that I was talking about earlier. And we
need to have a tribal priority allocation for native teacher recruitment. We need to do very strong recruitment. If we dont, then, you
know, nothing is going to move and nothing is going to happen.
And I am not convinced that enough is being done across the board
when we talk about these special populations, particularly with
Native Americans.
Mr. WOTORSON. I would just say very briefly that the federal government can support the incentivizing process to ensure that we
do, in fact, not only recruit more diverse teachers, but also to retain
and support them.
As you well know, part of what we are struggling against is a
perception in our country today that the teaching force is no longer
an honorable or desirable profession. We have to figure out a way
to reverse that trend.
59
Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you.
Mr. CURRY. And if I could add, continue to support alternative
routes to education. My community iseven though it is a rural
community, we are 25 percent African-American, we struggle just
the same, of getting enough good role models. Many times we get
them from the military. We continue also to support ways to get,
you know, troops into the classroom after their retirement after
they do their term.
Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. My time is up, but if I might just say,
I am very interested in the evaluation process that we are talking
about in the new reauthorization. If you have some ideas or
thoughts about that, I would certainly welcome how we can do a
better job of incentivizing school districts and schools to have good
oversight in terms of principal evaluations, as well as teachers.
Thanks a lot.
The chair now recognizes the gentlelady from California, Ms.
Chu.
Ms. CHU. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Diaz, I just wanted to commend you on your collaborative
model in your district, especially as it pertains to English-learner
students. Since I have so many in my district, I was very, very interested in that. And I was impressed by how you include every
stakeholder, including teachers, who are able to have input into the
process.
Now, my question pertains to assessment. According to No Child
Left Behind, English learners were supposed to be given tests that
were appropriate for them, but we had a problem in California and
continue to have it, where English learner students are given the
mainstream English language assessment test the moment they
walk in the door.
And, of course, the students dont understand it, they fail miserably, and that is their first experience with the school. I am wondering how you dealt with the whole assessment issue.
Ms. DIAZ. In Michigan, we have two tracks for assessing Englishlanguage learners. We are testing them, their language acquisition
knowledge, with LVA, and we are also assessing their content acquisition with the regular state assessment, the MEAP.
We have provided 9 months of reprieve for new immigrants that
are coming to the states for the first time. And we are grateful for
that. We do feel that as they increase in grade levels, it does become more difficult for the students to not only acquire the English
language, but the content level that is required.
And so 9 months is not quite enough, if you come in as a brandnew immigrant toas a sophomore, for example, in a high school
and are expected to know all the content area that goes along with
that. And so it is a challenge, and the modifications that would be
required would probably be more time, granting them more time to
be able to acquire the language and then, also, of course, the content.
It is important. We do our best, and it is difficult, and we have
to have high expectations, because weI also see it as a delicate
balance for educators to also get a little lazy with that time period
that we would give them as time to acquire, so there needs to be
60
a delicate balance between making sure that during that time effective teaching is happening and that we are not sheltering them
and mother-henning them, as I explained earlier, but also utilizing
that time very effectively to maximize their language acquisition
learning.
Ms. CHU. Are you giving them the same testdoes every student
get the same test? Because an alternative would be a test that may
be more appropriate for them.
Ms. DIAZ. Yes, they do have the same test. There are some modifications that we canstandard modifications that we could utilize
for ELL learners. And, again, we appreciate that, but there could
be more.
Ms. CHU. And do you do those modifications to the assessments?
Ms. DIAZ. Yes. Yes. We absolutely utilize every modification that
we are provided with.
Ms. CHU. Dr. Dale?
Mr. DALE. In Virginia, we have an alternative assessment that
was not only able to be used for special needs, but also our early
English-language learners in the assessment of reading competency
or literacy competency, really. And so we basically had an alternative assessment available for the first 2 years of their Englishlanguage learning, and they were able to demonstrate literacy competency versus trying totest could just become an English-language vocabulary test if it is not done in an alternative manner.
So we were able to do that during those first 2 years, and then
they moved into the regular assessment.
Ms. CHU. And what was the benefit of doing it that way?
Mr. DALE. The benefit of doing it that way was to allow our children to demonstrate literacy competency while still recognizing
they are still learning English. And they on the human side of it
could recognize that, oh, I actually know what is expected, and so
allow that kind of growth and development to continue to occur, instead of discouragement that you were speaking of.
Ms. CHU. Right. And, finally, Ms. Diaz, you emphasized parental
involvement. The California Association of Bilingual Educators
brought to my attention the elimination of funding in the presidents budget for parental information and resource centers. They
use the funding extensively to help ELL parents in California become involved in the school system. What impact does this funding
elimination have on your school districts ability to engage ELL
students? Or where did you get the funding to involve the ELL parents?
Ms. DIAZ. We utilized Title 3 immigrant funding and limited
English proficient funding for our parent involvement. We have
had this Parents Are Teachers program for about 10 years now,
and it has always come from the Title 3 funding.
With the immigrant funding, this year, we added the before-and
after-school tutoring. What is unique about that is that we have
the regular content teachers re-teaching the content for the students, and that is very critical.
You know, our parent involvement has been a very strong part
of our success in educating the parents. When they understand
what they can do at home, they are empowered to really make
those changes. They tell us that because of that, their lives have
61
changed, not just what they do routinely on a daily basis at home
with what we have taught, but their jobs. They are much more successful citizens, as well. They have gone on to, you know, go on to
college, get GEDs, get, you know, promotions at work to supervisory positions.
And so it empowers them as citizens, as well, when we can incorporate parental involvement.
Ms. CHU. Thank you.
Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much. This panel has individually and collectively been very helpful to the committee, as we
work our way through the reauthorization of this bill. I want to
thank the staff for bringing together such a distinguished group,
again, individually and collectively. It has been very helpful to us.
I love hearings, because you really get people who are expert in
this, see this every day, and bring that expertise here to Washington, and so I thank you very much.
As previously ordered, members will have 14 calendar days to
submit additional materials for the hearing record. And any member who wishes to submit follow-up questions in writing to the witnesses should coordinate with the majority staff within the requisite time.
Without objection and with thanks, this hearing is adjourned.
[An additional submission from Mr. Kildee follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Tribal Education Departments National
Assembly
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) is currently up for Reauthorization and it is the most important federal law that applies to American Indian
and Alaska Native tribal students. The ESEA currently has 10 Titles with multiple
programs. Some are general programs, like the Title I Improving Basic Programs,
and some are specific to Native Americans, like the Title VII Indian Education Act
programs. Tribal students, whether they attend Bureau of Indian Education (BIE)
funded schools or state public schools, are served by all of the ESEA programs. And,
all of the programs could do more to help tribal students by recognizing a role, or
by enhancing the role or roles, including in public school education, of tribal governments as sovereign nations. Tribal governments are a major untapped resource in
education, and this ESEA Reauthorization needs to change that.
Over 200 of the over 560 federally-recognized tribal governments today have education agencies. Known as Tribal Education Departments (TEDs) or Tribal Education Agencies (TEAs), these tribal governmental agencies can help the non-tribal
federal and state governments serve tribal students. TEDs / TEAs can assist with
the most fundamental education improvement and accountability functions like data
collection, reporting, and analysis. TEDs / TEAs can help in other areas as well, including the development of curricula, standards, and assessments; teacher training;
research; and, specific local initiatives like truancy intervention, drop out prevention, and tutoring programs.
In particular, TEDs / TEAs are in a unique position to coordinate data on tribal
students that is generated by various and sometimes multiple sources, including
federal education programs, public school systems, states, and BIE-funded schools.
For tribal students, this never has happened before; right now we can only imagine
accurate and current tribe-wide, statewide, or nationwide data-based reports on tribal students. But if such reports were available, agencies and legislatures of all governments could make data-driven decisions regarding tribal students as they implement the next Reauthorization of the ESEA.
For the data roles of TEDs / TEAs to reach their full potential, the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) needs to be clarified by an amendment that
includes TEDs / TEAs as being among the education agencies, authorities, and officials to whom protected student records and information can be released without the
advance consent of parents or students. Such an amendment to FERPA would be
consistent with the TED / TEA programs authorized by Congress since the ESEA
62
Reauthorizations of 1988 and 1994 and thus would bring FERPA up to date and
in accord with the ESEA.
TEDs and TEAs in the ESEA
The current ESEA authorizes TEDs / TEAs in Title VII and Title X. Both Titles
contemplate that TEDs / TEAs will coordinate education programs; develop and enforce tribal education codes, policies, and standards; and provide support services
and technical assistance to schools and programs. Unfortunately, the funding authorized to support this work in Titles VII and X never has been appropriated. This
Reauthorization should retain both TED / TEA program provisions, increase their
funding levels to at least $25 million, and strengthen them. Moreover, each ESEA
Title needs to better connect TEDs / TEAs with states, public school districts, BIEfunded schools, and the various federal education programs that serve tribal students.
Title I: TEDs as SEAs, Increased Tribal-State Relations; and Teaching Tribal Sovereignty
Title I is and always has been the biggest ESEA program (over $15 billion annually). State Educational Agencies (SEAs) can get Title I funds if they submit proper
plans that address academic standards, assessments, and accountability; teaching
and learning support; parental involvement; and reporting. In the development of
these state education plans, which are a prerequisite for Title I funds; there is no
specified role for TEDs / TEAs. This has severely limited or impaired the ability of
TEDs / TEAs to work with SEAs. The following three recommendations should be
incorporated into Title I:
1) TEDs / TEAs should be Authorized to Perform SEA functions within Tribal
Geographic Territories
TEDs / TEAs should be authorized to perform SEA functions within significantly
large tribal geographic territories that include a high percentage of tribal students
served by Title I. For example, twelve Indian reservations are larger than the State
of Rhode Island, and nine reservations are larger than the State of Delaware. Instead of being part of a states Title I education plan, the TEDs / TEAs that serve
these large tribal geographic bases should be allowed to develop a reservation-wide
or a tribal-wide plan for Title I funds, which the TED / TEA should submit directly
to the U.S. Department of Education. If the U.S. Education Department approves
the TEDs / TEAs plan, the TED / TEA should get Title I funds directly from the
Department and perform the SEA services within the Tribes geographic territory.
Presumably, not every TED / TEAs would immediately seek SEA statussome
TEDs / TEAs are ready and willing to perform SEA functions immediately while
others will take several years to develop the necessary capacity and infrastructure.
For example, the TED / TEA of the Navajo Nation is already performing SEA-like
functions on the Navajo Reservation and is currently working with the BIE to seek
official designation as a SEA. Another TED / TEA that is seeking SEA status is that
of the Oglala Sioux Tribe. But although the vast majority of TEDs / TEAs are not
likely to seek SEA status in the immediate future, they should have that option
when they are ready.
Where TEDs / TEAs do get Title I funds directly under an approved tribal-wide
plan, TEDs / TEAs should have the option of sub-granting the Title I funds to the
public schools that serve tribal students, or co-administering the Title I funds with
the public schools, or even administering the Title I funds themselves.
These changes will connect Title I funds and programs with states and tribes. The
recommendations may sound radical, but the fact is that the BIE-funded schools
have long been able to administer Title I grants directly. And the most recent ESEA
Reauthorizationthe No Child Left Behind Actwent even further to allow TEDs
/ TEAs to set standards in BIE-funded schools and even accredit BIE-funded
schools. The public schools, where 92% of tribal students go, now need these same
kinds of options.
2) States should be Required to Meet with TEDs or TEAs as a Condition of
Receiving Title I funds
In other instances, outside of significantly large tribal geographic territories,
where there are TEDs / TEAs located within states, the ESEA should, at a minimum, require the SEAs of those states to identify the TEDs / TEAs, meet with
them on a quarterly basis, develop joint strategies for improving education in
schools with tribal students served by Title I, and jointly report on the results of
such meetings to the U.S. Education and the Interior Departments as a condition
of receiving Title I funds.
63
3) Encourage or Mandate the Teaching of Tribal Sovereignty as a Condition
of Receiving Title I Funds
Yet another suggestion for the Title I program would be to encourage those states
receiving Title I funds that have TEDs / TEAs operating within their borders, if
they do not already have one, and there are five states that doCalifornia, Maine,
Montana, Oregon, and Wisconsinto enact state laws that mandate the teaching
of tribal sovereignty in their K-12 curriculum on a regular basis. If a state chooses
not to enact such a law, TEDs / TEAs with students served by Title I funding must
be allowed to develop such a curriculum mandate that the public schools must follow.
Titles II and III: Native Language Curricula and Teacher Certification
Twelve statesArizona, Idaho, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyomingnow have
laws that address tribal language curriculum and the certification of teachers for
these curricula in their public schools. All of these laws acknowledge a role of tribes
as sovereigns in the development and implementation of these laws. The Reauthorized ESEA should require the SEAs and the TEDs / TEAs in these states to jointly
track the progress made in implementing these laws and their impacts on students,
and to jointly report on these matters to the Department of Education and Congress. Further, the ESEA Reauthorization should authorize, at least on a nationwide pilot project basis, other states and tribes to enter into compacts or agreements
for tribal language curricula development and teacher certification, and authorize
appropriate funding to implement such compacts or agreements.
Titles VII and VIII: Tribal Eligibility or Increased Eligibility as Grantees
In the ESEA Reauthorization, for the Indian Education Act Formula Grant programs and for Impact Aid funding, tribes should be eligible or increasingly eligible
to receive directly these funds, if a tribe has a TED / TEA and is willing to enter
into a compact with a public school district to co-manage and co-administer these
funds. For the most part, public school districts have not been willing to voluntarily
agree to such arrangements, and thus the ESEA should allow the funding to go to
eligible Tribes that then would be required to enter into cooperative agreements
with public school districts.
Title IX: Definition, Tribal Consolidated Plans and Reporting, Tribal Waivers
1) Definition
The ESEA and other federal statutes at present have several different definitions
of TEDs / TEAs which has caused some confusion. The following definition of TEDs
/ TEAs should be included in the next ESEA Reauthorization definitional section:
(ll) Tribal educational agency
The term Tribal educational agency means the authorized governmental agency
of a federally-recognized American Indian and Alaska Native tribe (as defined in 25
U.S.C. 450b) that is primarily responsible for regulating, administering, or supervising the formal education of tribe members. Tribal education agency includes
tribal education departments, tribal divisions of education, tribally sanctioned education authorities, tribal education administrative planning and development agencies, tribal education agencies, and tribal administrative education entities.
2) Tribes receiving ESEA funding should, like SEAs, be Eligible to Consolidate
Administrative Funds eligible for Consolidation
Currently, Part B of Title IX allows SEAs to consolidate administrative funds
available in ESEA programs eligible for consolidation if the SEA can demonstrate
that the majority of its resources are from non-Federal sources. TEDs / TEAs receiving ESEA funding should be able to consolidate administrative funds according to
the same set of requirements.
Tribal students are served by programs funded from federal, private, tribal, and
state sources. Potentially all of these programs contain funds to be used for administrative purposes. The authority of TEDs / TEAs to consolidatie administrative funds
received will reduce waste and ensure efficient program management at the tribal
level.
3) Tribes, Like SEAs, should be Authorized to Submit ESEA Consolidated
Plans and Consolidated Annual Reports
Currently, Title IX Part C allows SEAs to submit ESEA consolidated plans and
consolidated annual reports. Consolidated plans include general information about
each program and a single set of assurances applicable to each program. Consolidated annual reports replace individual annual reports for each program included
64
in the consolidated annual report. TEDs / TEAs receiving ESEA funding similarly
should be eligible to submit consolidated plans and consolidated annual reports.
The purposes of Part C are to improve teaching and learning, by encouraging
greater cross-program coordination, planning and service delivery and to provide
greater flexibility through consolidated plans, applications, and reporting. No Child
Left Behind Act, 20 U.S.C. 7841. For tribal students, the potential need for program coordination is particularly great. Authorizing TEDs / TEAs to submit consolidated plans and consolidated reports is consistent with the express purposes of Part
C.
4) Tribes should be Eligible to Request Title IX Waivers for Public Schools
within Tribal Geographic Territories
Currently, Title IX Part D allows for waivers by the Secretary of Education of
ESEA statutory and regulatory requirements. Tribes are among the eligible entities
that may request a waiver for tribally operated schools. The ESEA reauthorization
should retain this option and extend the option for TEDs / TEAs to seek waivers
of statutory and regulatory requirements for public schools at least within significantly large tribal geographic territories.
Such waivers have the potential to allow TEDs / TEAs the flexibility and local
control needed to improve the academic performance of tribal students. Specifically,
various reports and research show that tribal students generally perform better
when taught using tribal language and culture. The Navajo Nation has requested
a Title IX waiver to develop its own definition of AYP. Other Tribes could request
waivers to develop their own standards, assessments, and curriculum to meet the
unique cultural-academic needs and goals of their communities.
Conclusion
The drop out rate of tribal secondary and elementary students nationwide remains an alarmingly high 50%. All stakeholders that are affected by this dire statistic and other troubling statistics regarding tribal student academic achievement,
test scores, and college readiness, stand to gain from enhanced roles of TEDs / TEAs
in the ESEA Reauthorization. The recommendations in this report will result in crucial structural and programmatic changes and support to develop TED / TEA roles
and capacity to better-serve tribal students.
[An additional submission from Mr. Miller follows:]

March 25, 2010.
Chairman GEORGE MILLER,
Committee on Education and Labor, 2181 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Re: Supplemental Testimony for Subcommittee hearing on Elementary and Secondary Education Act Reauthorization: Addressing the Needs of Diverse Students
DEAR CHAIRMAN MILLER: National Disability Rights Network (NDRN) staff attended the March 18, 2010 hearing of the Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education Subcommittee on Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA) Reauthorization: Addressing the Needs of Diverse Students and offers this
letter to supplement the record on the use of a students Individual Education Program (IEP) as in accountability tool.
Dr. Daniel Curry testified that one of the ways in which rural school districts
could be helped in ESEA reauthorization would be to use a students IEP as an accountability measure under the ESEA. No other witness testified in support of this
position. Dr. Jacqui Farmer Kearns testified that the IEP should not be used as an
accountability tool, as that was not its intent. She also testified that if the IEP were
to be used as an accountability tool it could result in an increase in litigation under
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
NDRN strongly agrees with Dr. Kearns testimony that a students IEP should not
be used as an accountability measure for ESEA purposes. The IEP lists a students
current level of educational performance, annual goals designed to meet the needs
arising from the disability, how progress is to be measured, and the services to be
provided to the student. Therefore, even for students with the most severe disabilities, the IEP does not address all areas of a student with a disabilitys education
and does not serve as the students curriculum. Furthermore, the IEP is not necessarily grounded in any outside objective measure, such as the regular education
curriculum. Thus, strong performance on a students IEP goals need not have any
connection to progress in the general curriculum.
65
One of the benefits of the NCLB is the expectation that all students, including
students with disabilities, are expected to learn. This was operationalized by requiring that all but a small percentage of students with disabilities be given the same
assessments as all other students. This requirement allows us to know how students
with disabilities are performing compared to their peers who do not have disabilities. It provides an objective way to determine how students with disabilities are
performing on an outside measure of performance tied to the expectations for all
students. It would be harmful to remove this critical, objective mode of comparison
at this time, as students with disabilities, even those who should be expected to perform at grade level, continue to lag behind their peers who do not have disabilities.
There are other options within NCLBs current framework that could be utilized
to more accurately measure how students with disabilities are performing on grade
level content without removing them from the ESEA accountability system. For example, NCLB currently allows students with disabilities to take the same assessment which is given to all other students, but with accommodations as approved
within an IEP. However, certain accommodations have been deemed to invalidate
the test, even if the accommodations have been approved by the IEP team, are used
by the student in all course work, and may very well be used by the student for
the rest of his or her life. These restrictions should be lifted from any reauthorization of the ESEA to better enable students with disabilities to demonstrate their
proficiency.
Finally, as Dr. Kearns testified, using the IEP as an accountability measure
would increase litigation under IDEA. It is our experience that the ways in which
a students progress is measured are not the subject of IDEA due process hearings
with any frequency. The primary issues raised in due process tend to pertain to the
nature or amount of services being provided to a student, whether the students
placement is in the least restrictive environment, and other issues concerning the
nature of the students program. If the IEP were to become the accountability measure, it would place this issue at the forefront of litigation. An increase in litigation
would only divert resources from cash-strapped schools and increase tension between those schools and parents. Given the negative academic and financial consequences of using the IEP as an accountability mechanism, NDRN strongly advises
against it.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit our views on this very important issue.
Sincerely,
RONALD M. HAGER,
Senior Staff Attorney.
[Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

House Hearing, 111TH Congress - Elementary and Secondary Education Act Reauthorization: Addressing The Needs of Diverse Students

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

House Hearing, 111TH Congress - Elementary and Secondary Education Act Reauthorization: Addressing The Needs of Diverse Students

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

House Hearing, 111TH Congress - Elementary and Secondary Education Act Reauthorization: Addressing The Needs of Diverse Students

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY

EDUCATION ACT REAUTHORIZATION:

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD,

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, MARCH 18, 2010

Serial No. 11153

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

GEORGE MILLER, California, Chairman

John Kline, Minnesota,

Mark Zuckerman, Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD,

Michael N. Castle, Delaware,

Hearing held on March 18, 2010 ............................................................................

ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in room

Mr. WOTORSON. Chairmen Kildee, Ranking Member Castle, and

G., and C. Lee. (2005)

Chairman KILDEE. Thank you.

Chairman KILDEE. Thank you, Dr. Gipp.

Ms. DIAZ. Good morning, Mr. Kildee, Ranking Member Castle,

Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much.

Ms. KEARNS. Thank you, Chairman Kildee, Ranking Member

Chairman KILDEE. Thank you.

Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much.

Mr. DALE. Thank you, Chairman Kildee and Governor Castle,

Chairman KILDEE. Thank you very much.

[An additional submission from Mr. Miller follows:]

[Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

You might also like