Norton to Adjust to No Child Left Behind Changes

A handful of states applied for the No Child Left Behind Act Waiver, which would give more flexibility to current standards, and Massachusetts was one of six granted in the first round. Curriculum director Jennifer O’Neill explained what this would mean for Norton to School Committee members Monday night

In 2002, the original No Child Left Behind act was signed by President George Bush. The main goal was to help students across the country reach a level of proficiency. In Massachusetts, the goal was for 100 percent of students to be considered proficient by 2014.

The Obama administration found that this program wasn’t necessarily serving states and schools in the best way. About eighty percent of the nation’s school districts were not on track to meeting their 2014 goals.

This past September the current administration and U.S. Department of Education offered a voluntary opportunity for states to submit a waiver for No Child Left Behind. The waiver is meant to give leeway to states that promise to improve how they prepare and evaluate students.

“States had to come up with a rigorous and comprehensive state developed plan upholding the high standards of No Child Left Behind but giving states the option to change things here and there to meet their needs in a better way,” O'Neill said.

In Massachusetts, the proposal they submitted in November focused on unifying the accountability at the state and national levels. The idea was to provide attainable goals and give incentives to districts that have improved and focus on what they are doing differently. Student growth is also going to be a factor.

Some changes include the ability to transfer all funding from federal grants to Title 1 if desired; requiring reduction of closing professional gaps by half by 2016-2017 instead of 100% of gaps by 2013; measurable objectives based on MCAS, progress and performance, closing gaps, percent of warning and failing, dropout rates and graduation rates; a 10th subgroup that includes a minimum of 30 students who fall under multiple subgroups, such as English language learner and low income, so it counts against the school only once; classification of schools based on new progress and performance index; and up to 25 percent of Title 1 grant for districts in level 2 to 5 used to support district students needs as assessed in relation to conditions for school effectiveness.

“My major concern was that they were going to cut No Child Left Behind,” said School Committee member Andrew Mackie. “But all they are doing is making it a bit more gentle and just makes us try harder.”