NCLB Waiver??

Over the course of this summer, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan signaled his potential willingness to “waive” some of the requirements for NCLB based on an application, etc. from individual states.  This seems to be the solution, rather than the 4-years-late reauthorization of ESEA (i.e., NCLB).  AND it seems to feel a lot like the coercive approach they took with Race to the Top [RTTT] – remember sign-on and we will tell you about all the details later.  In fact, as I understand this issue, there is once again not a clear definition of what is required to qualify for the “waiver” of the NCLB requirements and sanctions.

The beltway discussion seems to suggest that the requirements would include things like: 

• continued turn-around of poor performing schools [not bad],
• adopting and implementing teacher/adm evaluations based on student test data [this will probably create comment and concern], and
• adopting rigorous college / career-ready standards [so is this different than common core standards?].

In any case, California’s Superintendent of Public Instruction [SPI], Tom Torlakson, sent Duncan a letter on August 23^rd to apply for the waiver.  The need for the waiver was based on:

• a significant number of schools falling into Program Improvement,
• “insufficient” funding in California to meet NCLB requirements, and
• “NCLB’s flawed accountability system.” 

As a result the SPI requests a freeze of all AYP designations and sanctions for THIS year (11-12), and in return we in California will:  continue to work on improving schools, and will do something regarding teacher/principal evaluations in regards to data.  Torlakson further voices concern that the apparent requirements for the waiver would require a serious commitment without commensurate funding [sounding like RTTT?].