AFT panel develops coordinated response to NCLB
Task force seeks to draw attention to educators’ concerns

A panel of AFT leaders is looking at strategies to marshal the combined power of the AFT’s more than 1.3 million members to battle problems associated with the No Child Left Behind Act, while preserving the union’s support for sound and sensible approaches to help students reach high academic standards.

The union’s NCLB task force, which includes state and local leaders from the AFT Teachers and PSRP divisions, used its regularly scheduled meeting in February to develop some of the broader components and objectives of this coordinated effort. Among the goals of this initiative are aggressive efforts to inform AFT members, policymakers and the public at large of the problems and promises of NCLB. The task force anticipates harnessing a number of vehicles for getting the union’s message across—from radio ads to informal meetings that bring teachers and educators together with lawmakers in their home districts for frank discussions of how the law is really playing out in the classroom.

The task force will submit its plans to the AFT Teachers and PSRP program and policy councils for review and approval, but “you’ll see some elements of this [initiative] as early as this spring,” says AFT executive vice president Antonia Cortese, who heads the task force. The coordinated campaign is a major attempt to fulfill the mandates of a resolution on NCLB approved by delegates at the 2004 AFT national convention.

The resolution pledges that the union will “work tirelessly to remedy the problems with NCLB so that its promised benefits reach every child.”

A key component of the coordinated message, Cortese says, will be to emphasize that “laws and tests aren’t enough to get kids to meet the goals of the law” and that sensible implementation, adequate resources and supports for educators are critical and often neglected components of the effort to raise achievement. When it comes to NCLB or any standards-based effort, “just saying ‘it shall be’ is not enough to make it happen.’”

The task force currently is eyeing several elements needed to make this coordinated response work. These include a legislative action program, an internal and external communications effort, membership mobilization, and a system of technical assistance for state and local affiliates working to promote positive and research-proven solutions to NCLB problems. The union’s response will address immediate needs and concerns faced by educators in the classroom while also readying the union for effective lobbying and advocacy when reauthorization of NCLB begins to heat up next year.

The initiative will be implemented through the AFT executive vice president’s office. It will harness the resources of every department at the AFT national office and work through the union’s state federation structure, including the state educational issues coordinators, communications directors and lobbyists of these affiliates. Additionally, many of the materials and resources will be available to field service specialists in their internal and external organizing activities.

Several task force members also emphasized that, while the coordinated effort will address immediate concerns tied to NCLB, it will go far beyond a simple line-by-line reaction to what’s included in the law. Instead, the response will seek to reinforce and solidify the union’s traditional leadership in standards-based school improvement in the NCLB era and beyond.

Union seeks AYP changes that reward progress

The AFT has developed and circulated concrete strategies to help states implement adequate yearly progress (AYP) benchmarks under the No Child Left Behind Act in a way that can improve the accuracy of AYP and more fairly treat schools that make progress in improving student achievement.

In March, policy recommendations were distributed to AFT state leaders around the nation. The action points, tailored to each state’s particular circumstances, can help states give credit for academic growth and avoid unfair school sanctions. They detail possible amendments to state accountability plans that have been used in at least two states and approved by the U.S. Department of Education.

The amendments also can help inform regulators on how other states are dealing with such subgroups as English language learners in a way that promotes statistical reliability. The AFT recommendations also warn against some state accountability plan amendments that run counter to the goals of fairness and “leaving no child behind.”

One idea that is generating much discussion around the states involves moving away from the “three-speed” method of gauging improvement when it comes to basic, proficient and advanced performance levels. Most states give no credit for improving student achievement until a student reaches the proficient standard. But others, such as Minnesota, add a “partially proficient” level that allows students and schools to receive some credit when students at very low achievement levels show meaningful growth.

Also on the books in some states are AYP calculations based on “confidence intervals,” which take into account the “margin of error” the same way public opinion polls do. The U.S. Education Department has approved the use of confidence intervals, and there have been a substantial drop in the number of schools failing to make AYP in the states that make use of this statistically sound method.

“While these recommendations do not rectify fundamental flaws in AYP, they do provide important tools to be used in the short term,” the union notes in “Improving the Accuracy and Fairness of AYP Determinations: Recommended Amendments to State NCLB Plans,” a paper that provides an overview of possible state remedies to AYP shortcomings. “If incorporated into state plans, the suggested modifications would improve the fairness and accuracy of AYP designations, help schools achieve AYP by demonstrating growth in student achievement and change the extent to which many schools are unfairly subjected to sanctions.”