National Rural Education Advocacy Coalition 2006 Legislative Agenda

The “65 Percent” Deception

Urging the National Assessment Governing Board to do a Rural Achievement Study

National Rural Education Advocacy Coalition

2006 Legislative Agenda

Developed on January 31, 2006

Official State Representatives:

Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)

The members of the National Rural Education Advocacy Coalition (NREAC) strongly believe that children in poverty should have access to a level of service regardless of where they live.

In support of the reauthorization of ESEA, the NREAC believes:

The terms of the basic agreement between school districts and the federal government under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, ESEA, must be clearer and fairer.  School districts should enter into a contractual relationship with the federal government to provide services to eligible students based on the cost of activities required by ESEA.  To make accountability for school districts clearer Title I students should be considered as a separate subgroup and schools/ school districts should be held accountable to the terms of the contract with the federal government for their success. The contractual process should have the flexibility to provide waivers as needed.

All funding under ESEA should be allocated according on a formula basis that will ensure sufficient resources to rural school districts, with a funding floor, allowing for consortia school districts.  School districts should be guaranteed a minimum amount of formula dollars.

School districts and states should continue reporting results on statewide tests either in terms of growth of cohorts of students in aggregate or in identified groups or by comparing the percentage of students making adequate yearly progress by scoring at the proficient level on annual test scores by grade levels to parents and the public for all public schools and school districts.

Rewards or sanctions for school districts based on the performance of their Title I students should be considered on a graduated scale; with greater consequences for those school districts that miss their targets in a larger number of areas.

Teachers funded through ESEA should meet the federal government’s requirements for highly qualified.   

Current state accountability systems must be improved to evaluate the performance of schools and school districts by establishing:

• An evaluation scale for state wide test results for both schools and school districts using ESEA funds that identifies degrees of success and failure to meet state performance standards.

• A statistically valid reporting format for results both individual students and cohorts of students being served by ESEA funds  on state wide tests, and local option assessments, if used, of all public school students disaggregated by major demographic categories for ethnicity and income.

• Vertically aligned state content and performance standards that permit using either adequate yearly progress as a measure of success or benchmarks for student progress that establish annual expectations for growth in achievement, based on progress of a sample of other students across the state

• Statistically valid statewide tests, and local option assessments if used, for all special education students in schools using ESEA funds that are consistent with the annual achievement benchmarks in the students IEP toward mastery of state content and performance standards.

• Statistically valid state assessments for all public school students in schools using ESEA funds who are not proficient in English, based on the judgment of a team of teachers, administrators and parents and the state content and performance standards.

E-Rate

NREAC strongly supports maintaining E-Rate as an element of the Universal Service Fund.  The E-Rate serves an important role in increasing the connectivity of rural schools to the internet and helping to bridge both the digital and geographic divides that impact rural schools.

The coalition supports the current E-Rate distribution matrix and opposes any efforts to distribute E-Rate through a formula.

NREAC supports a streamlined application process that encourages more rural school districts to apply for E-Rate support.  NREAC believes in accountability within the E-Rate program but opposes any changes to the program that would increase participation costs to local school districts.  Increases in paperwork within the application process often prevent rural districts from applying.  School districts already have fiscal accountability requirements that they must meet for their states.

NREAC believes the Universal Service Fund should be permanently exempt from the Anti-Deficiency Act.

Success in the program should focus on the level and quality of the connectivity. Connectivity is important but so is the speed and reliability of the connectivity in order to ensure the highest quality distance learning services.

Budget

The NREAC believes that the education of our nation’s children should remain a high priority within the federal budget.  Children being educated today are our nation’s future.

NREAC strongly supports the fulfillment of Congress’ promise to pay 40 percent of the National Average per Pupil Expenditure for every child in special education.  Mandatory funding of IDEA is the only way to ensure that Congress reaches this goal.

Higher Education Act

NREAC supports efforts to increase the number of quality teachers in rural schools. Therefore, Title II of the Higher Education Act should encourage best practices to attract teachers to rural settings.  Additionally, NREAC supports the creation of a tax-credit incentive to encourage teachers to work in rural settings.

NREAC supports the expansion of the definition of a high-need school district to include rural school districts in addition to high-poverty districts, recognizing the unique staffing needs and shortages of geographically isolated districts.

Vouchers

NREAC strongly believes that public funds should be used to fund only public schools.   Federal funds should not be used to fund private schools through vouchers, scholarships or tuition tax credits.  With limited funding available, dollars should be focused on the public districts that must face public accountability.

Definitions of Rural

NREAC supports a definition of rural that accurately reflects the nuanced complexities of the location of rural schools and additional funding to support those schools and districts and allows a focus on the rural student.

Medicaid Reimbursement

NREAC believes that rural districts should be reimbursed for medical expenses attributed to Medicaid eligible students.   The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Solutions should work with rural districts to make reimbursement more feasible for geographically isolated districts.

The “65 Percent” Deception:
If a city spends less than 65 percent on its police force,
does that make the community less safe?   

In the face of news that Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue has signed legislation mandating that “schools spend at least 65 percent of their dollars in the classroom,” AASA has disclosed its research comparing police protection costs as a portion of local police and municipal administration spending, combined.

It would appear that, just as schools display a wide range of statistics that compare classroom spending with overall school district dollars, municipalities report the same degrees of variations with respect to their police operations and overall municipal administration dollars.

There seem to be differing definitions of what ‘police protection’ is, and how it relates as a portion of a city’s budget.

For example:

1996 Local Expenditures – from a statistical sample by Statistical Abstract of the United States

Direct Expenditures: 

Police protection as a percentage of total police and governmental administration expenditures: 54%

1996 City Government Expenditures for the Largest Cities

Police protection as a percentage of total police and government administration expenditures

Source: Statistical Abstract of the United States

No one would suggest that a person in Tucson is less safe than a person in Charlotte, yet the bald statistics, as applied by public school critics, would have us arrive at such a conclusion.

Nicholas J. Penning

Senior Legislative Analyst

American Association of School Administrators

April 6, 2006

Urging the National Assessment Governing Board to do a Rural Achievement Study 

Information about achievement of students in public schools is increasing and improving as a result of both state wide testing programs and the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP.)  NAEP was originally created to provide a national look at the achievement of low-income and minority students.  In the early 1990’s NAEP’s purposes were expanded to compare NAEP results between the states.  The purposes of NAEP have more recently been expanded to examine the achievement of urban students and compare achievement of students in charter schools with achievement in traditional public schools. NAEP has also been used to compare achievement on NAEP teats between public and private schools.  

It is time for NAEP to study the achievement of the 15% of the nation’s students who live in rural areas and attend rural schools. 

The NREAC urges Congress to implement the first national study of the achievement of students in rural schools in reading, math, and science beginning in 2008.  A study of students educated in rural America would provide needed insight into achievement that would help Congress, the U. S. Department of Education, governors, state legislators and local school system leaders begin to shape policy that fits rural schools.  

NREAC believes that a valid rural achievement study requires a large enough over-sample of students in rural schools that the results would give an understanding of regional findings as well as national findings.

NREAC urges Congress to require that NAEP work closely with rural organizations, including NREAC, as they plan and implement the rural study.