1. 4 Principles of ESEA Flexibility 1 January 2012 1.College-and-Career-Ready Expectations for All Students ( ) 2.State-Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support (synthesizing feedback) 3.Supporting Effective Instruction and Leadership ( ) 4.Reducing Duplication and Unnecessary Burden ( )

2. For Principle 2 o Annual Measurable Objectives o Subgroups and differentiated targets o Priority, Focus and Reward Schools 2 January 2012

3. ESEA: AMO Issue 1 Reduce Not- Proficient by ½ in 6 years (by 2017) Sets targets in a different way than NCLB Target perceived as more achievable 100 % Proficient by 2019-2020 Emphasizes goal of all students meeting proficiency Allows more time to fulfill target 3 AB Recommended

4. ESEA: AMO Issue 2 Same Targets for All Subgroups Same expectations Different Targets for Each Subgroup Recognizes different starting points for different subgroups 4 AB Draft Jan 3, 2012 Recommended

5. Gap Closure 5 Gap Closure over time.

6. Understanding New AMOs 6 2010-2011 Baseline 2011-2012 Targets 2012-2013 Targets 2013-2014 Targets 2014-2015 Targets 2015-2016 Targets 2016-2017 Targets Reading Subgroup GSHSGSHSGSHSGSHSGSHSGSHSGSHS Total (All students) 72.884.275.185.577.386.879.688.281.989.584.190.886.492.1 Native American 57.772.861.275.164.877.368.379.671.881.975.384.178.986.4 Asian 79.181.080.882.6 84.284.385.886.187.387.888.989.690.5 Black 54.074.757.876.861.778.965.581.069.383.173.285.277.087.4 Hispanic 57.675.661.177.664.779.768.281.771.783.775.385.878.887.8 Multiracial 73.386.675.587.777.888.880.090.082.291.184.492.286.793.3 White 81.790.483.291.284.892.086.392.887.893.689.394.490.995.2 Economically Disadvantaged 57.975.661.477.664.979.768.481.771.983.775.485.879.087.8 Limited English proficent 37.232.142.437.847.743.452.949.158.154.763.460.468.666.1 Students With Disabilities 39.545.944.550.449.654.954.659.459.763.964.768.469.873.0 100 - 57.6 means 42.4% are not proficient. Decrease by half in equal increments over 6-years means 42.4/2 = 21.2. 21.2 point improvement over 6 years 21.2/6 ≈ 3.5 point increase every year

7. 7 Two important results of this method are 1)Acknowledges that subgroups have different starting points 2)Differentiated targets are ambitious and feasible Understanding New AMOs

8. ESEA: Priority, Focus, & Reward Determined by Reading + Math Performance Composite < 50 % in 2010-11 school year and one of the two previous years (2008-09 or 2009-10) Graduation rate < 60 % Determined by Schools with the largest in-school gaps for 2010- 11 school year and one of the two previous years (2008-09 or 2009-10) Above state average 38.7% Title I schools with a subgroup with proficiency score below 50% for 2010-11 school year and one of the two previous years Determined by Poverty rate at or above 50% and gap between highest and lowest performing subgroups below state average and Schools made AYP and all subgroups have performance composite above state performance composite and graduation rate, if any, above state graduation rate or Schools in the highest 10% performance composite progress and graduation rate progress, if any, for “all students” over a 2-year period. PriorityFocusReward

9. ESEA: Priority, Focus, & Reward PriorityFocusReward ~130 Schools ~80 Schools ~127 Schools

10. 3 potential levels of support Intensive Support and Intervention Moderate Support and Intervention Independent with General Support