Hurdles for NCLB state waiver

Duncan proposes way around gridlock

With congressional Democrats and Republicans looking like they’re headed for more gridlock, this time on education, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan confirmed Monday that the Obama administration would permit states to seek waivers from the tightening screws of the No Child Left Behind law.

California could certainly benefit from waivers and would prefer its own accountability system as an alternative to the feds’. But it also could have a hard time persuading the feds to grant it a waiver.

The details of the waiver requirements won’t be published until next month; Paul Hefner, spokesman for Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson, said the state would wait to see them before deciding whether to apply for a wavier.

But Duncan and others have indicated that states would have to commit to conditions for reform similar to those required of states seeking money from Race to the Top: using a statewide data system to inform decisions; creating teacher evaluation systems based on multiple criteria, including student test results; taking actions to turn around the lowest performing schools; and adopting career and college readiness standards. California at this point might flunk the first three of the four measures.

The statewide student data system, CALPADS, remains behind schedule and more limited in scope than other states’ systems. Gov. Jerry Brown mystified Duncan by rejecting $2 million in federal money to build a teacher database, CALTIDES, which would have provided insights into teacher training programs and teacher placements.

A bill on teacher evaluations, AB 5, amended to appease the California Teachers Association, may go nowhere this year – and could be interpreted to prohibit using standardized tests to judge teachers’ performance. And the state Department of Education was chastised this spring by the feds for their inadequate monitoring of the lowest performing schools that received more than $133 million last year in federal School Improvement Grant money.

Furthermore, years ago officials in the Bush administration for technical reasons rejected California’s request for a waiver to implement a different accountability model, using growth in API scores.  California has made no efforts to design a new assessment system to accommodate the feds’ objections. Put all these factors together, and California would face tough odds in persuading the feds to grant a waiver.

Exceeding his authority under the law?

Duncan’s critics charge him with using waivers to swap the Administration’s concept of education reform for NCLB’s requirements, superseding the intent of Congress. That would appear to be the case. But Duncan is also responding to states’ call for relief from NCLB’s chief provision: the unrealistic demand that all students be proficient in math and English language arts by 2014 – with stiff penalties for schools that fail to comply.

Duncan has predicted that 82 percent of schools across America would fail to make NCLB’s targets this year. I and others have doubted that estimate; even in California, with very high academic standards among states, only about half of schools will fail to meet targets because of a “safe harbor provision” that lets many schools improve at a slower rate.

Nonetheless, states resent the 100 percent proficiency requirement, and there has been bipartisan resolve to modify  or abolish the provision when No Child Left Behind – or the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as it’s formally known – is reauthorized. Duncan said he could be criticized for tone deafness” if he ignored states’ pleas.

But reauthorization is already years late, and now it’s appearing unlikely that a new version will be passed before the November 2012 elections. That’s why U.S.  Rep. George Miller, the veteran East Bay congressman who is the ranking Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee, now supports Duncan on waivers, reversing a position he had a few months ago. Then, he agreed with his Republican counterpart, Committee Chairman John Kline of Minnesota, that waivers would distract the Committee from its goal of reauthorization this year. Since then, Kline and Republicans pushed through the Committee a bill that would give states flexibility to spend Title I funds as they want. For Democrats and civil rights groups, that violated a 50-year commitment to improve education for poor children and English learners and was a clear signal that reauthorization was in trouble.

The Title I bill was “a partisan reality check,” Miller said. “I share the Secretary’s concern that the push for legislation is in some peril.”

Miller is hoping that Duncan does not take a rigid approach to the waivers. He wants Duncan to permit alternatives to turning around the lowest performing schools to only the four models allowed under Race to the Top. And he doesn’t favor  the federal government setting the percentage that student test results must comprise a teacher’s evaluation.

In general, Miller supports the Duncan’s conditions for waivers, and he said is disturbed by Brown’s position on data use. “California continues to get itself twisted in knots over data. The politics in the state does not want to encourage a modern, effective data system.”


  1. This sounds a lot like the beginning of public seed money to jump start the next agenda,  Distance Learning to conform to international “core” standards (forget about national core standards).  All the states have to adopt standards (the Feds standards of course) which common core standards specify must comport with “international” standards.   Another Federal enticement to states in the name of “liberation” from Federally instigated juggernauts designed to fail in their stated purpose.    It should be becoming obvious to those concerned about education at state and local level, that  Federal funding and accompanying requiremenst and stipulations have been  destroying rather than improving schools.  Get the Federal government out of education starting with REPEAL of NCLB rather than more control in the name  “waivers”, next abolish the Department of Education and all its tennacles built up through the few  decades of its existence.   A few congressional calls to do that, already exist.   Teachers should be lining up to support the idea, for they are the ones who end up struggling with the Federal Mandates in their local classrooms.   Teachers should begin to research the implications of  Distance Learning which is in the wings and will be the vehicle through which they will face offshoring of their jobs not much different from what happened to the local workers in the tech industry.  Before ESEA and other Federal involvment in education, schools flourished in California and elsewhere.   It is past time for some serious dot connecting .     

    Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

  2. Race to the Top was bad enough, as California lawmakers demonstrated the worst aspect of the grant program, rushing through ill-considered policy changes just in the hopes of vying for an amount of money that really wasn’t going to be worth the effort (as some of the “winners” have complained since).  Meanwhile, NCLB has always been destined to fail, and while almost everyone agrees now that it can’t work, Duncan and Obama are now holding states hostage to the worst aspects of NCLB unless they get their way on some of the same stupid “reform” ideas they peddled – without evidence of their likely efficacy – during Race to the Top.  Will Republican members of Congress try to shut this down on the basis that the Federal Government is overreaching?  If not, I can only assume that they’re setting aside some of their core principles because they’re so enamored of the Obama/Duncan ed policy – which says what about our supposed Democratic leadership?
    I wrote about Duncan’s waiver idea in this blog post a while back, (and may need to revisit the topic again):

    Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity


  1. Fewer Schools Make No Child Left Behind

"Darn, I wish I had read that over again before I hit send.” Don’t let this be your lament. To promote a civil dialogue, please be considerate, respectful and mindful of your tone. We encourage you to use your real name, but if you must use a nom de plume, stick with it. Anonymous postings will be removed.

2010 elections(16)
2012 election(16)
A to G Curriculum(27)
Achievement Gap(38)
Adequacy suit(19)
Adult education(1)
Advocacy organizations(20)
Blog info(5)
Career academies(20)
Character education(2)
Common Core standards(71)
Community Colleges(66)
Did You Know(16)
Disabilities education(3)
Dropout prevention(11)
© Thoughts on Public Education 2016 | Home | Terms of Use | Site Map | Contact Us