UPDATED
The U.S. Department of Education granted an unprecedented waiver Tuesday under the No Child Left Behind Act to eight California districts that together educate 1 million students, upending a long tradition of state-based school accountability.
The first-of-its-kind waiver, good for one year, essentially allows the eight districts to set up their own accountability system outside of the state of California鈥檚鈥攁nd largely police themselves through their own board of directors. The districts known as , will operate under a new 鈥渟chool quality improvement index鈥� that will be based 60 percent on academic factors such as test scores and graduation rates, 20 percent on social-emotional factors such as the absentee rate, and 20 percent on culture and climate factors such as student and parent surveys. The CORE districts are Fresno, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Oakland, Sacramento, San Francisco, Sanger and Santa Ana.
The districts did create a new, separate oversight board, which will include a cross-section of stakeholders from the education community that will meet biennially, that will serve as 鈥渁n unbiased external compliance review of each district鈥檚 progress.鈥� For more from the district angle, see my colleague Lesli Maxwell鈥檚 .
U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, in announcing the decision in a call with reporters today, said, 鈥淔rankly, working with districts wasn鈥檛 an easy decision.鈥� He said his department isn鈥檛 doing it because it鈥檚 鈥渟imple鈥� but because it鈥檚 the 鈥渞ight thing to do.鈥�
According to the , the CORE waiver can be renewed next year only if the districts fully implement their school-rating system and teacher-evaluation plans. The department must then approve both systems.
The final deal came together with lightning speed鈥攋ust last Thursday, . But the clock was ticking for school districts as they planned for the fast-approaching 2013-14 school year. Under the existing NCLB law, for example, districts needed to start signing contracts with tutoring providers. (Before today鈥檚 announcement, there were nine CORE districts, but has dropped out.)
For districts, the most important flexibility this waiver brings is financial. A waiver will free up about $150 million in federal funds a year among the districts鈥攎oney that鈥檚 now locked up in providing interventions such as tutoring and school choice in schools that do not meet annual academic targets.
Duncan, in the call, said one of the most important components of this waiver application is that no longer will thousands of students be 鈥渋nvisible鈥� as they are under NCLB. The 鈥渘鈥� size in California鈥攚hich is how big a subgroup of students needs to be for its test scores to count for school accountability purposes鈥攊s 100. For CORE, it鈥檚 been lowered to 20.
The CORE districts started pursuing their own waiver in earnest in January, after federal officials rejected the state鈥檚 application in part because it didn鈥檛 meet the requirements for implementing a new teacher-evaluation system. CORE officials .
Until now, states have been the only recipients of the broad NCLB waivers first announced by President Barack Obama in 2011鈥攁nd only if they agreed to the strings attached, such as implementing teacher-evaluation systems linked to student test scores. In exchange, states get out from under key requirements of the NCLB law, such as that schools bring all students to proficiency in reading and math by the end of the 2013-14 school year. Now, these eight California districts, which include Los Angeles, Fresno, and Long Beach, will have that same flexibility.
鈥淲e are trying to hold ourselves to an even greater accountability system,鈥� said Christopher Steinhauser, superintendent of the Long Beach Unified School District, in the call.
The Education Department previously has granted districts , such as to serve as their own tutoring providers. But this waiver is unprecedented for its scope, and for how it changes the dynamic between districts, the state, and the federal government.
鈥淚鈥檓 shocked,鈥� said Andy Smarick, a partner for Bellwether Education Partners in Washington. 鈥淔or the secretary to unilaterally dispense with 30-plus years of state-led accountability is incredible.鈥�
Others disagree.
鈥淭he Council of the Great City Schools is in complete agreement with Secretary Duncan in his approval of the district waiver application submitted by CORE. The approval is within his authority and does not undermine state authority in any meaningful way,鈥� said the council鈥檚 executive director, Michael Casserly.
Granting such a waiver is a risky move for a federal department that is already trying to manage an enormous portfolio of grants and programs鈥攆rom billions of dollars in Race to the Top and Investing in Innovation grants to a hodgepodge of new accountability systems that are emerging in the 39 states, plus the District of Columbia, that have waivers.
What鈥檚 more, this waiver could open the door for other districts that want their own tailor-made waiver. At a minimum, the department might have to deal with the administrative burden of fielding inquiries and even applications from other districts. Right now, however, Duncan said he doesn鈥檛 foresee any other districts applying.
There also are political implications. Duncan鈥檚 decision will at least mildly annoy鈥攐r even infuriate鈥攕ome state authority. ( of the CORE plan.)
鈥淭he U.S. Department of Education鈥檚 decision to approve the California district CORE Waiver marks an unprecedented shift in the federal role in education鈥攃learly usurping state leadership,鈥� said CCSSO Executive Director Chris Minnich in response to today鈥檚 announcement.
The list of critics is longer than just state chiefs. , warning that different expectations for students across the same state can often lead to 鈥渓owered鈥� expectations. They argue that the key to improving student performance is a strong state accountability system. ( of the CORE waiver, however.)
The local , calling the new accountability system a 鈥渟hadow system of education.鈥�
Many in Congress, particularly Republicans, aren鈥檛 thrilled with Duncan鈥檚 overall direction on waivers, either. On district waivers specifically, . He said today this turns the Education Department into a 鈥渘ational school board鈥� with districts lining up playing the old playground game 鈥淢other May I?鈥�.
And U.S. Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., the House education committee chairman, isn鈥檛 happy about this either. He said today, in a statement, 鈥淎s if state waivers weren鈥檛 convoluted enough, the administration has now decided to move forward with district-level waivers. One can only imagine the confusion this creates for families, teachers, and state and local education leaders.鈥�
On the flip side, however, Rep. George Miller, D-California, the top Democrat on the House education committee, is very supportive. He said today, in a statement, 鈥淭he approval of the CORE waiver application will provide the opportunity for more than a million students in California to break away from the most rigid requirements of NCLB that do little to ensure that all children are learning. I applaud CORE鈥檚 leadership in providing a student-centered vision for education in their districts, and I believe this action will provide the whole state an exciting opportunity to pilot new reforms and learn from some of the leading districts in California and the nation.鈥�
And Sen. Tom Harkin, the Iowa Democrat who chairs the Senate education committee, called the CORE waiver 鈥渘ecessary鈥� but not 鈥渋deal.鈥�