SR33 SD1

WHEREAS, the United States Congress must decide in 2007 whether to reauthorize the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 or let it die and replace it with a new law; and

WHEREAS, the No Child Left Behind Act, unprecedented in the history of federal and state roles in public education by the mandated imposition of a federally prescribed, single accountability model for all public schools, undermines the established constitutional role of state and local public education governance; and

WHEREAS, the No Child Left Behind Act, while purporting to create an accountability system for public schools, has in reality, been an enormous financial and programmatic burden on schools and taxpayers; and

WHEREAS, even if states and schools are satisfied with their educational programs and outcomes, they are forced to participate in this top-down system in order to continue to receive federal funds for education, such as Title I funds; and

WHEREAS, the No Child Left Behind Act mandates consequences to schools if just one of thirty seven possible adequate yearly progress calculation outcomes are not met, and makes no distinction in the consequences imposed on schools that did not meet one or did not meet all thirty seven, resulting in dilution of energy, time, and money by mandating the treatment of all such schools to include identical sanctions; and

WHEREAS, the No Child Left Behind Act employs a view of motivation that is misguided and objectionable, using threats, punishments, and pernicious comparisons to "motivate" teachers, students, and schools; and

WHEREAS, private K-12 schools have chosen not to spend their time or money adopting key elements of the No Child Left Behind Act's intensive testing and accountability regimen; and

WHEREAS, the No Child Left Behind Act's narrow focus on the "basics" has discouraged the implementation of best practices and cutting edge educational research in order to achieve higher test scores; and

WHEREAS, the No Child Left Behind Act has driven many schools and school systems into a narrowing of curriculum, often focused on only tested subjects, to the detriment of subjects and rich educational experiences, such as the arts; and

WHEREAS, the goal of achieving one hundred per cent proficiency, including special education students, is unrealistic, and the pursuit of which channels millions of dollars into tactically targeted programs that divert limited resources from other critical school programs, professional training, as well as the educational and physical environment of schools; and

WHEREAS, the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act penalize schools who enroll students who have inherent educational deficiencies and who, as a group, will continue to remain below ever increasing No Child Left Behind "annual measurable objectives"; and

WHEREAS, while there has recently been some interest in the development of so-called "growth models" to recognize the contributions of a school to individual students over time, the lack of adequate funding and the prohibition against states developing their own growth models has rendered this initiative almost meaningless; and

WHEREAS, the No Child Left Behind Act does not provide additional funds for teacher education or training if a school is in "status" or under restructuring, which creates a punitive environment with little commitment on the part of the federal government for improving teaching and learning, or for supporting increased school success; and

WHEREAS, Adequate Yearly Progress does not take into account a school's adoption of meaningful educational innovation or judicious use of research; and

WHEREAS, the No Child Left Behind Act has channeled countless dollars into high-stake testing, which has largely benefited national private testing companies, but at the expense of ignoring genuine student accomplishments; and

WHEREAS, the No Child Left Behind Act appears biased towards a one-size fits all multiple choice testing system, and tends to ignore other means of engaging and assessing students such as project-based, hands-on, or problem-solving demonstrations of competency; and

WHEREAS, the United States Department of Education has shown little or no interest in creating incentives among colleges and universities to incorporate innovative portfolios or project-based competencies into their admissions decisions, thus reinforcing the use of high-stake, multiple-choice private contractors; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED by the Senate of the Twenty-fourth Legislature of the State of Hawaii, Regular Session of 2007, that the United States Congress is strongly urged to proposed specific amendments to, or recommend the repeal of, the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that among the issues and amendments the United States Congress should address are the following:

(1) Improving teacher quality, preparation, and training by:

(A) Building support for a comprehensive incentive program to recruit, place, and retain experienced, well-qualified teachers in high-need schools (e.g., high poverty, or geographically-isolated communities);

(B) Providing significant support for teacher education, professional development, in-service training, and career opportunities;

(D) Improving qualifications of teacher candidates at colleges of education;

(E) Providing financial incentives for institutions of higher learning to incorporate portfolios and demonstrations of competency into their admissions decisions;

(F) Strengthening teacher education preparation programs in areas such as science, mathematics, technology, measurement, data analysis, and evaluation;

(G) Recognizing teachers having achieved certification by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards as "highly qualified" in their respective fields; and

(H) Providing flexibility in recognizing certified secondary level special education teachers as qualified teachers in their own right, and removing the unrealistic expectation that such teachers be additionally certified in every single core subject area;

(2) Improving assessment measures and systems by:

(A) Refining student assessment instruments designed specifically for use in improving instruction as well as school accountability;

(B) Encouraging states and school districts to utilize a wider range of useful assessments, including project-based competency and portfolios;

(C) Developing more appropriate means of assessing the academic progress of English Language Learners, special education students, and those with behavioral health issues; and

(D) Supporting the development and implementation of comprehensive statewide data collection and exchange systems that allow for more efficient support for student record keeping and informed educational policy decision making (e.g., electronic student transcript systems, and longitudinal analyses of growth in academic achievement);

(3) Improving accountability models, indicators of performance, and consequences by:

(A) Supporting states and the educational research community in research and development efforts to further the pioneering work required in refining the technology underlying growth (toward standards) analysis models;

(B) Permitting each state to adopt and pilot its own growth model to calculate adequate yearly progress under the No Child Left Behind Act to take advantage of inherent benefits that motivate students at all levels of proficiency;

(C) Supporting wholesale changes to the "adequate yearly progress" model for educational accountability that would provide for a fairer and more balanced appraisal of school performance and quality;

(D) Replacing punitive, conjunctive "miss one, miss all" criteria;

(E) Expanding accountability indicators to reflect performance on standards in other important disciplines and countering unintended consequences such as a narrowing of curriculum;

(F) Allowing for current limitations in reliable and valid assessments of students within a wide range of disability classifications; and

(G) Allowing for deferrals to test new immigrant students with limited English proficiency for up to three years of entering the country;

(4) Augmenting resources to assist states in efforts to accomplish challenging educational initiatives by:

(A) Requiring schools to maintain a broad and comprehensive curriculum to support adopted content and performance standards, including the arts and physical education;

(B) Fully funding special education programs, as once promised;

(C) Providing adequate funding to research and develop multiple and more valid means of assessing student competence, skills and knowledge for use in both improvement and educational accountability; and

(D) Providing funding and training support for data and technology infrastructure requirements;

(5) Supporting innovation, capacity building, and flexibility to address state and local education needs by:

(A) Recognizing schools that demonstrate successful strategies using innovative curriculum and methodologies;

(B) Developing new initiatives for school facilities that do not push educational funding toward ever larger schools and economy-of-scale construction mentality;

(D) Addressing unique needs of "high-need" schools (e.g., high poverty, high immigration, extreme geographic isolation); and

(E) Allowing states to determine which and how many grade levels are best to test; and

(6) Returning to the original intent and purpose of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) by:

(A) Restoring the foundational precepts of ESEA and its focus on equity in educational attainment despite disadvantages stemming from socio‑economic background;

(B) Allowing states to "opt out" of requirements that impact schools that do not receive ESEA entitlements, without loss of federal funds;

(C) Promoting strategies that directly reduce achievement gaps through better instruction, such as incentives for experienced, well-qualified teachers to accept positions in high-need schools and for reducing class size;

(D) Resolving to build the best public education system and teacher work force in the world, rather than promoting lofty rhetoric and ploys that undermine and divert public funds to private schools; and

(E) Returning policy setting and curriculum and teaching decision making control back to states, school districts and local communities; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certified copies of this Resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States, the Vice President of the United States, the President pro tempore of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and the members of Hawaii's Congressional delegation.

Report Title:

No Child Left Behind Act; Amendments; U.S. Congress

THE SENATE	S.R. NO.	33
TWENTY-FOURTH LEGISLATURE, 2007		S.D. 1
STATE OF HAWAII