69传媒

States seeking leeway from the mandates of the No Child Left Behind Act are proposing ways to execute the Obama administration鈥檚 playbook for turning around their lowest-performing schools.

Although the U.S. Department of Education gave states significant flexibility on other areas in crafting their waiver applications, the administration was much more specific when it came to the right prescriptions for improving the bottom 5 percent of schools in every state, defined as 鈥減riority schools鈥� in the waiver process.

In the turnaround area, the department is requiring that states spell out how they would address such 鈥減rinciples鈥� as extending learning time, using student achievement data to inform instruction, putting in place an instructional program backed up by research, and considering nonacademic factors in student achievement, such as students鈥� social and emotional needs.

Experts often cite as a weakness the part of the NCLB law that explains how to fix schools that perennially miss achievement targets. Under the law, a state could require such a school to close down, reopen as a charter, or choose another option. Most states picked the most flexible, 鈥渙ther鈥� option.

That last option 鈥減rovided a loophole from meaningful reform for the lowest-performing schools,鈥� said Carmel Martin, the assistant secretary for planning, evaluation, and policy development at the Education Department.

The federal agency is hoping to help states think through more specific steps under the waiver process. 鈥淭hrough flexibility, states will implement comprehensive interventions that address specific steps to improve these schools with the overall goal of dramatically improving student achievement,鈥� Ms. Martin said.

The new waiver guidelines would not apply to schools receiving federal School Improvement Grant money, however; they would still have to use the stringent options spelled out in the sig regulations.

Shared Strategies

Some common turnaround approaches emerge in the first round of applications, which were submitted last month. While most of the states address all the areas outlined in the department鈥檚 principles, in general, they do not go far beyond them, according to an Education Week review of the applications.

Common ideas include hiring data coaches to help teachers and principals better understand where students are in terms of performance, putting in place instructional 鈥渨alkthroughs鈥� to check out teachers鈥� practices, and working with districts to extend the school day or add extra planning time.

The shared strategies are to be expected because the 鈥渢urnaround principles"鈥攁reas the department is asking states to specifically address鈥攎ake sense, said Jeremy Ayers, a senior policy analyst at the Center on American Progress, a think tank in Washington. 鈥淭hese are the right ingredients,鈥� he said. The test is, 鈥渉ow are you implementing them, are you getting the accountability and support you need to meet those goals?鈥�

Some states have put their own twist on school improvement.

For instance, Tennessee has designed what it calls the state-run Achievement School District, modeled on the Recovery School District set up in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina. 69传媒 in the special, statewide district would be run by charter operators, or directly by the Achievement School District itself. 69传媒 directly operated by the new authority would be given charterlike leeway when it comes to hiring, budgeting, scheduling, and programming.

Districts with low-performing schools could choose to take part in an 鈥渋nnovation鈥� zone. That would require the district to give schools autonomy and intensive support, similar to what schools are getting from the state-operated ASD district.

Professional Development

Staff development is also a key component of the applications. In Georgia, for instance, the school leadership teams of 鈥減riority schools鈥� would attend a summer leadership academy, where they would develop their improvement plan for the year.

In Kentucky, data coaches and math and reading specialists鈥攕elected and trained by the state鈥攚ould be placed directly in the priority schools.

For the most part, the applications do not call for the removal of a particular percentage of teachers, a much criticized hallmark of the Obama administration鈥檚 turnaround models.

Still, states are proposing to look closely at the performance of teachers in priority schools. In Florida, for example, teachers that don鈥檛 increase learning gains at a rate of 65 percent or more in reading and math鈥攐r don鈥檛 contribute to school improvement鈥攚ould be replaced.

The performance of subgroup students, such as English-language learners, was another consideration. In Minnesota, schools that are identified as priority schools because of the performance of student subgroups would get a chance to learn from high-performing schools with similar demographics.

In the areas of parent engagement and support services, at least two states鈥擣lorida and Kentucky鈥攕ay they would like schools to use an approach known as positive behavior supports, a classroom-management strategy.

Different Endgames

States vary widely in how they would determine when a school could exit from priority status and no longer be deemed low-performing or given special attention.

In Massachusetts, schools would have to meet numerous benchmarks. For instance, elementary and middle schools would need to improve student performance at a rate that鈥檚 consistent with low-performing schools that made substantial gains between 2006 and 2009.

And in Minnesota, schools would no longer be considered 鈥減riority鈥� if they get out of the bottom quartile of performers for two consecutive years.

Kentucky schools would have to meet the state鈥檚 new achievement benchmarks for three years in a row, and actually get out of the bottom 5 percent, statistically speaking, when it comes to student achievement.

The states鈥� approach to turnarounds in their waiver applications may be a harbinger of what鈥檚 to come in the reauthorization of the nation鈥檚 main education law, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Under a comprehensive reauthorization bill approved by the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee in October, states would no longer have to use the four SIG models for schools that receive federal improvement dollars. Instead, they would be allowed to submit their own improvement plans to the secretary of education for approval.