Recent expansion in natural gas production, primarily as a result of new or improved technologies e. The terrorist attacks, which claimed nearly 3, lives, involved four civilian airplanes hijacked by 19 members of the Al Qaeda terrorist network. The first two airplanes were crashed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New Constitution provide for presidential disability or inability.
These nine Iowa school districts include: This parallels trends generally seen nationwide. Use of set-aside funds in this manner will better meet the needs of Iowa students and result in increased student achievement because: Additional concerns expressed by districts include the following: Annually, districts set aside enough money which they do not spend on SES or School Choice to hire numerous additional staff members who could be providing focused reading and math interventions to students.
SES providers are generally for-profit businesses. When it becomes apparent that profit is unavailable or small due to lack of enrollment, some vendors have walked away or failed to provide services, leaving children without additional support.
Some providers went door-to-door, talking to parents and informing them they would get a computer if they signed up for a certain provider.
SES providers are not assessing student progress related to their services through measures parents are familiar with, which is often confusing to parents. Communication between the provider and district regarding student progress generally occurs monthly.
The district and providers do not use the same measures to monitor academic progress; therefore districts are not able to use academic information from providers to inform classroom instruction. If the program was offered by the district, the same assessments would be utilized and communication would be on a more frequent basis, allowing the services to inform classroom instruction.
District costs for providing similar programming are less than costs of the SES provider program. Districts can offer more time to students for the same amount of funding.
Many of the students who received SES were already performing at or above grade level academically. Most students whose families who utilized the School Choice option were unhappy with the school for reasons other than academic performance.
The system for School Choice does not take into consideration the likelihood of crowded conditions at those schools that are chosen by many children.
The response that districts should erect portable classrooms is not a well-planned solution and drains the districts of funds that have been identified for other purposes.
Other costs have been incurred by districts to accommodate school choice requests, including the purchase of additional instructional material because new classrooms had to be added. Methodology used to measure the progress for meeting these goals will be enhanced through monitoring of additional goals based on student performance on Iowa Assessments.
AYP results will continue to be monitoring and reported as they are currently. We anticipate AYP results will be positively impacted as a result of these additional school-level academic interventions.
Each of the nine districts will collect and report data each school year to measure the impact of the waiver request on student achievement. During the first year,baseline data for each participating school in all nine districts will be collected. It is expected that most subgroups will increase percent proficient and increase the number of students progressing at least one achievement level from the previous year.
The nine districts represent a significant portion of the children in Iowa, in particular, those who are poor and struggling academically.
Significant resources are being set aside for unproductive uses and affecting very few children. It is critical that these Title I funds are reprogrammed in these nine districts to support effective instructional practices.
Any low-income student in identified schools qualifies regardless of achievement. Funds now set aside for School Choice and SES will be utilized to provide additional school-level academic interventions for identified low-performing students in any Title I school.
Any comments resulting from these notices will be provided to the United States Department of Education by July 15, an elementary school received Title I reading services resulting in a low performing responsibilities on your shoulders and never asked for a moment’s assistance.
Thank you school districts around the country were permitted to apply for waivers to the mandates of NCLB. Guidelines for states interested in applying for waivers were. The federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was signed into law in and affects every result of a potential state decision to discontinue implementation of the NCLB Act.
In , MDE sought waivers in eight areas from DOE. Since MDE has yet to receive approval • Sanctions for districts resulting from not making AYP.
And though the waivers do liberate states from the proficiency requirements, compliance with NCLB still rides on standardized test scores, resulting in continued concerns around the narrowing of curriculum and teaching to the test.
First, despite NCLB, educating students remains the basic responsibility of states and localities, not the federal government. Even with increased federal appropriations, national spending is just eight percent or so of the overall education As a result they sought to fortify the underpinnings of AYP, and the Impact of No Child Left Behind.
On January 8, , President Bush signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act of , reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This is the text of the legislation. Until then, all NCLB waivers granted by the Department of Education should be contingent on states requiring districts to implement modern career and compensation ladders in a timely manner.