U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
+ + + + +
EDUCATION STAKEHOLDERS FORUM:
ESEA Flexibility
+ + + + +
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2011
+ + + + +
The Education Stakeholders Forum was held at the U.S. Department of Education, Barnard Auditorium, at 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. at 1:30 p.m., Massie Ritsch, Deputy Assistant Secretary, External Affairs and Outreach, presiding.
PRESENT:
ARNE DUNCAN, United States Secretary of
Education
CARMEL MARTIN, Assistant Secretary for
Planning, Evaluation and Policy
Development
ELIZABETH GRANT, Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education
KAY RIGLING, Office of the General Counsel
MASSIE RITSCH, Deputy Assistant Secretary,
External Affairs and Outreach
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction by Mr. Ritsch...... 3
2. Opening Remarks by Secretary Duncan.....5
3. Q&A with Secretary Duncan...... 12
Reggie Felton...... 12
Steve Pines...... 15
Jim Kohlmoos...... 19
Tor Cowan...... 21
Amy Lozario...... 24
Saba Bireda...... 26
4. Presentation by Assistant
Secretary Martin...... 31
5. Q&A with Panel...... 44
Robert Mahaffey...... 44
Mike Blakesley...... 48
Will Kinder...... 49
Erik Peterson...... 51
Lee Posey...... 54
Steve Pines...... 56
Wendy Uptain...... 57
Reggie Felton...... 59
Jacqueline Ayers...... 62
Veronica Rivera...... 64
6. Wrap-up and adjournment...... 67
P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S
(1:30 p.m.)
MR. RITSCH: Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the U.S. Department of Education. Thanks for being here this afternoon for our stakeholders forum, where we will focus today on our ESEA flexibility package that the President announced last Friday, and some other topics as well that will come up.
My name's Massie Ritsch. I'm the Deputy Assistant Secretary for External Affairs and Outreach. And I want to welcome the folks in the room, as well as the folks who are tuning in online through our UStream channel, as well as Department employees tuning in various places, as well as some in the room.
You have three things on your chairs today. You have an evaluation form that I hope you'll turn in to us afterward, let us know if this was a useful forum for you.
And then, two brochures that we created to try and streamline, simplify, the more complicated documents that are also online around our ESEA flexibility package. The first, which has the younger students on it here, is intended especially for parents and community members, folks who don't necessarily know this stuff inside and out, but are interested to learn more about it.
And then the second, with these graduates, is intended for practitioners: superintendents, principals, teachers, as well as folks who want to get into a deeper level. Again, everything else is online at
So as we said, of course, last Friday the President announced this package at the White House. What we're offering to states is an opportunity to receive regulatory relief from several key provisions in No Child Left Behind, but in exchange for commitments to reform and increased student achievement. And we'll talk you through that today.
We'll hear from Secretary Duncan on this package, as well as hear more about the American Jobs Act. That's another big piece of news from this administration since the last time we met here at the Department.
We have a panel of our experts, members of the ESEA flexibility team, with us today to talk you through it and take your questions. We'll have Carmel Martin, our Assistant Secretary from the Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development; Liz Grant from the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education; and Kay Rigling from the Office of the General Counsel. And we'll try to get you out of here on time, as always.
So let's first hear from our secretary, Arne Duncan.
SECRETARY DUNCAN: Thank you. I'll be very brief, and happy to open up for any questions you might have. So the two big topics I want to talk about, as Massie mentioned, were the Jobs Act, and then the flexibility package that we've put out.
Obviously, for us, getting the Jobs Act passed would be a huge, huge deal. As many of you know, for Education it would mean an additional 60 billion dollars, 30 billion to save teacher jobs around the country.
And I have to tell you, as I'm out traveling, to hear about the cutbacks, to hear about the class size increasing, and after-school and extracurriculars being eliminated, it’s tough. I was in Milwaukee on the bus tour, and in the past couple years, they've gone from 100 arts educators on the elementary side to 11 for the district, so a 90 percent reduction there.
I just think we have to do something better. In Pittsburgh, they're thinking about eliminating all extracurriculars. Not because they want to, because that's just the reality of their financial situation.
So if we can get that bill passed, keep those teachers teaching, keep after-school, keep summer school, keep these extended day activities that are so important; it's just the right thing to do.
On the capital side, it’s an additional 30 billion dollars. Sounds like a lot of money. It is a lot of money. But as you look across the country, the actual need is about 270 billion dollars.
So this would be a step in the right direction, but a long, long way to go. And many school districts have done exactly what I would have done when I was in Chicago Public Schools. When money's tight, what do you do? You defer maintenance. That's what you do.
And so roofs don't get fixed, and windows don't get fixed when they're broken, and you don't have the math labs and the science labs that our students need today. But just because you can get by, it doesn't make it the right thing to do.
So we're pushing very, very hard to get the Jobs Act passed. In tough economic times, it would be a huge step in the right direction. Obviously, getting much passed in Congress these days is an uphill battle, and we more than recognize that. I just think, again, at lots of levels, this is something the country desperately needs. And so we're continuing to work as hard as we can to get this passed.
Second, the flexibility package. I feel really, really good about it, and I'm happy to take questions or comments. And let me just say up front that I've said publicly exactly what I mean. What I'll say today is that this is not substitute for Congress fixing the law together. And this is hopefully a bridge, or transition, to them doing it for the country. Honestly, I wish we didn't have to take this step. But you have to play the cards you're dealt, and Congress simply didn't do the right thing here, and so we felt compelled to act.
But today, tomorrow, next week, next month, when and if they move, we're going to do everything we can to help them move forward in a bipartisan way to fix the law for everybody. But the premise is really simple: where states are doing the right thing, where they're raising standards, where they're being creative around teacher and principal evaluation, where they're taking on the tough issues, closing achievement gaps, challenging underperforming schools, we want to give them a lot more flexibility to hit that high bar. So keep the bar very high, hold them accountable for getting there, but give them room to be creative and to be flexible.
This is never going to be a pass on accountability. There have been concerns on that. Hopefully, you have seen with everything we've done, we've had a high bar. We will continue to have a high bar, and that's never going to change. But looking at disaggregated data, looking at achievement gaps, understanding which states are serious and which aren't, that will determine where we play.
Very different from Race to the Top, this is no competition between states. We encourage states to work together. We're going to provide all the technical assistance we can. There's a huge amount of interest. While you'll probably hear some sniping in Washington, I've talked to almost every governor around the country, Republican and Democrat, and they're basically saying "Thank goodness someone in Washington is listening and paying attention."
A lot of interest on this. We're going to have, probably, a set of states that will come in early. And we hope to have the first set of waivers out pretty quickly, by the end of the calendar year, or early in January at the latest. We'll have another round after that, so we'll sort of do it on a rolling basis. And we'll work with states when they're ready.
The final thing I'll say on this is that the peer review process is hugely important to me. And while I retain the right to change or do something differently than what the peer reviewers recommend, I've never taken that up. Peer reviewers in the competitions we’ve run have done just an amazing job. And so if you guys know of folks who are interested in being a peer reviewer for this process, please get those names to us.
And having the right folks who are making these decisions, who are doing this work very publicly and transparently, I think, will drive this conversation the right way. And if we have the right set of states come in in that first, early round, and set a very high bar with that, then I think it helps the other states to know where they need to go and how they need to get there.
So I'll stop there, take any questions you might have, and then you can ask all the hard questions to our panel, which is a lot smarter than I, when I'm done.
MR. RITSCH: So, folks, we have got microphones, as usual, here and here. If you will make your way to those microphones, we are, as always, transcribing this and broadcasting it online. So tell us your name, who you're representing, and we'll kick it to the appropriate person. Reggie?
MR. FELTON: Yes, good afternoon. Reggie Felton, National School Boards Association. Obviously, we're very pleased with the direction that the package is taking. We've been arguing for flexibility, or at least deferral of sanctions, for a few years now.
One concern we have, though, is that there could be local school districts that have needs that aren't necessarily addressed in the package, or application package, to ED. Could you just comment briefly on your concept of how to ensure that the needs of local school districts throughout the state are addressed in the package, and what they should do -- or might do -- in the event it's not addressed?
SECRETARY DUNCAN: So this is one we're not going to do perfectly, that obviously we made a choice, which people may or may not agree with, to basically play at the state level.
MR. FELTON: Right.
SECRETARY DUNCAN: And we think, just from a capacity standpoint, I think we can handle 50 states pretty well. Handling 15,000 districts was a bit of a stretch for us. So rather than trying fix something that's broken at the back end, my strong advice would be to do whatever you can to help districts, to help local boards, be part of their state's process.
One of the things we insisted on in the states' applications is that they demonstrate what they did to reach out to the community, and how they've taken that input. So we don't want this just coming down from on high, from the governor or chief state school officer in a vacuum.
So the more teachers, principals, school board members, superintendents, and others are helping shape the state's application, that's really important. If states come in, all this information's going to be publicly shared, so states should not be doing this in isolation. There's lots of learning.
A couple applications that have come to me early look extremely interesting, and I think show a lot of lessons learned. So as much as those local needs can be addressed in the application, that's obviously far preferable.
How we fix things individually at the back end, if somehow districts' needs aren't addressed, I don't have an easy answer on that. As always, we'll try and listen. We'll be a good partner. But how we do that systemically, I don't quite know yet, to be honest with you.
MR. FELTON: Thanks.
SECRETARY DUNCAN: So the more they can help create a great application at the front end, that would be, I think, in everyone's best interests.
MR. FELTON: Thank you.
MR. RITSCH: Thanks, Reggie. Steve?
MR. PINES: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Steve Pines, from the Education Industry Association. Really two questions, one about the process and then a second part about more the substance of the waivers themselves.
So as the Department receives both notification of intent by October, and then the first wave of waiver applications come in, will the Department publicize, on your website or wherever, the actual application as they come in by the applicant state?
SECRETARY DUNCAN: Yes.
MR. PINES: And then the decisions, the disposition as they are made?
SECRETARY DUNCAN: Absolutely. Again, this is one we just all want to be learning together. And so we'll publish the applications, we'll publish what we decide, we'll publish the peer reviewers' comments. And so all of this, again, just so the country's learning and working together. That's the right way to do it.
MR. PINES: Again, thank you. That's perfect. But that will be in real time, though? As the applications are received, we'll know whether it's Ohio, Maryland, or wherever, and then a month or two later we'll know the disposition?
SECRETARY DUNCAN: Absolutely.
MR. PINES: Great. That's perfect. And then more on the substance, for the Focus Schools, if the state agrees to all of the principles that are part of the quid pro quo, I notice that tutoring is allowed at the option of states for the Focus Schools.
But if an application comes in that meets all the other check-the-box stuff, could they offer tutoring for other schools beyond the Focus Schools?
SECRETARY DUNCAN: Absolutely. And so this is again where -- just to be real clear on where I am philosophically -- hold folks accountable to a high bar, but give them a lot more room to get there.
And so whether it's additional tutoring, whether it's longer days, whether it's paying math and science teachers a heck of a lot more money to go work in the inner city, or go work in a rural, remote community, I just think those decisions are best made not by me and my team, but best made at the local level. And we'll hold them accountable for results.
So a lot more latitude than folks are used to. And we recognize we're taking some risks there, and I understand that. But at the end of the day, again, where I see a high bar, where I see a good faith commitment and courage, I honestly believe that we have been too prescriptive, too top-down from here.
MR. PINES: Sure.
SECRETARY DUNCAN: And I'm trying to sort of flip that in a pretty significant way.
MR. PINES: So just because tutoring is only mentioned in the context of Focus Schools, you're not excluding it from being offered in other types of schools.
SECRETARY DUNCAN: No.
MR. PINES: Okay.
SECRETARY DUNCAN: We're not precluding, or including, or excluding anything, across the board. So to be real clear: what's working, we want to see a lot more of it. What's not working, we want to see a lot less of that. And we think I'm the wrong one to make those decisions.
MR. KOHLMOOS: Great. My name's Jim Kohlmoos from Knowledge Alliance, and thank you Mr. Secretary and Assistant Secretaries. Speaking of what works and what doesn't work, and trying to learn lessons from this incredible opportunity, I notice that you've included an evaluation provision in your package that says something to the effect that states will be encouraged to work as partners with the Department in designing evaluation systems.
Could you elaborate a little bit on that? And is there additional funding involved in that piece?
MS. MARTIN: Jim, we do have funding available --
MR. RITSCH: Make sure the green light is on. You might need to flip that.
MS. MARTIN: It's on. Can you hear me now? Yes, so we do have some funding available to carry out those evaluations. And we want to work with the states to determine what the subject of the evaluation would be. It could be a strategy that's embedded in their new accountability system, or an aspect of the accountability system.
And we're going to be looking to do the most rigorous evaluations that we can do. We want to work with states very early in the process, so they can set up for rigorous evaluation. And we will have funds available for states that choose to do it. It is not a mandatory part of the package, but something that states can opt to do.
MR. KOHLMOOS: That is a great move. Thank you.
SECRETARY DUNCAN: And I just keep repeating myself, but the more states are working together, the more all of you with strong opinions are helping states applications, I can't overemphasize how important that is.
MR. COWAN: Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary. Tor Cowan, for the American Federation of Teachers. I appreciate your availability and having us in today. Might be going in the weeds here a little bit, but I'll throw this out there. Our question is, for Priority Schools that are going to receive future SIG grants, are they going to be limited to using the four models in SIG, or can they use that money to do some of the interventions, including the turnaround principles, in those schools?
SECRETARY DUNCAN: We're giving a little more flexibility. Hopefully you'll be pleased.
MS. MARTIN: So with respect to the Priority Schools identified in the waiver package, they can take advantage of the additional flexibility in the documents, where they can construct alternatives to the four models.
If they choose the four models, that's totally acceptable. If they decide to opt for something else, we're going to ask them to present to us and have peer reviewed what the alternative would be, and it needs to abide by the principles that we lay out in the package, which include tackling leadership, tackling the instructional staff in the school, looking at the curriculum, finding ways to use data to improve instruction, looking at extending learning time, and looking at using community resources as levers to address not just academic, but non-academic needs of the students.