ESSA implementation across different states.

Ward-Sell, Krista,

Topic: ESSA

Darling-Hammond, L. Soung, B. Channa, M. Cook, H. Lam L., Mercer, C. Podolsky, A. and Stosich, E.L.  Pathways to New Accountability Through the Every Student Succeeds Act (Palo Alto: Learning Policy Institute, 2016). Retrieved from 

https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/pathways-new-accountability-through-every-student-succeeds-act

Summary:

A report on the proper implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act, which places an emphasis on local control of accountability in three areas. Deep learning, “Professionally skilled and committed educators, Adequate and appropriate resources that enable and support the first two pillars.” The emphasis being on continual rounds of improvement. This report documents the structure that multiple states have put into effect, highlighting some of the best strategies for compliance.  The part of this report that specifically concerns us as librarians is the third pillar, the adequate and appropriate supports. While the report categorizes most of the support coming from counsellors and social workers. There is a part to play here for librarians, both in the instructional and the support columns. 

Evaluation:

I sit on the California program committee for my school site and have done for the last three years, I will most likely continue to sit on it for the next year. This local control group has input into how to fix the problems sourced from local stakeholders. Getting the ear of members of the LCAP (Local Control and Accountability Program) or sitting in on these meetings can be very helpful in the struggle to fight for more of the resources your library program needs. The description of this program and the contrast this report gives to other state’s plans for accountability is interesting. This report is worth reading for anyone who wants to know more about how different states meet the accountability requirements set out by ESSA.

Potential Effects of Teaching Strategies on Students’ Academic Performance under a Trump Administration

Lopez, Carrie

CA

Guirguis, R. & Pankowski, J. Potential Effects of Teaching Strategies on Students’ Academic Performance under a Trump Administration Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1133888.pdf


Article examines the potential effects of the Trump Administration on teaching in NY state, examines possible effects on ELLs and low socio-economic status students as privatization could possible affect access to programs such as Head Start, etc. Though this article focuses on New York State, the implications certainly extend to other areas, food for thought for anyone teaching in an economically disadvantaged school or area.

Complicated Politics to the Core

McGuinn, P. (2015). Complicated politics to the Core. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(1), 14-19. doi:10.1177/0031721715602229

CA, ET

This article discusses the growing opposition from teachers, educators and parents to the Common Core Standards implemented nationwide in 2014-2015. The author discusses issues including how Common Core was established, how it was implemented and the effect of the monetary incentives promised by the Obama administration in order to convince states to voluntarily adopt the standards of Common Core. As a result of the Obama administration endorsement, opponents view implementation as a “federal Initiative” and as unconstitutional. This author provided a detailed discussion of relevant topics such as culture wars, privacy, corporate concerns, and data mining related to test scores.  While Common Core has been widely criticized, the author noted that surveys show that “most people do not know much about common core and that much of what they know about it is incorrect.” (McGuinn, 2015).

Review/Research

The article did not address certain practical issues, such as how a student can opt-out of CC, how long it would take, or what curriculum they would follow instead of Common Core.  Further, the discussion of federal over-reach was vague.  The author suggests that Common Core was implemented too quickly, leaving teachers and students confused on what to teach, how to teach it, and how to study in order to comply with Common Core requirements. As quoted by the author, “most people do not know much about common core and that much of what they know about it is incorrect.” (McGuinn, 2015).

Standards: Who, What, Where, and Why

Jolene Nechiporenko

ET, CA

McClure, p. (2005). Where standards com from. Theory into practice, 4(1),4-10.
     doi:  10.1207/s15430421tip4401_2

Have you ever wondered where educational standards come from?  If so, start by reading this article in which the author does a nice job of simplifying and explaining the history and current development of standards. 

She explains that common standards are “rooted in the struggle for equal education.”  Keep in mind that several different factors can contribute to inequality: socioeconomic conditions, minorities, etc.

In the early 1990s an achievement gas was recognized and addressed by a congressionally mandated study that suggested “There was a clear difference in standards, expectations, and curriculum” between states and schools.

in 1993 federal grants were given to state departments to develop curriculum and/or content standards.

In 1995 brought about the reform of professional development and teaching.  “The inequalities in the delivery of funding of educational and the achievement gasp between school and among groups of students could not be seriously addressed without setting uniform guidelines and regulations for the teaching profession.

McClure also mentions the implementation of Title 1 programs.