After a rocky start in which U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos鈥� team was criticized for being too heavy-handed, confusing, or inconsistent in responding to states鈥� plans for the Every Student Succeeds Act, approvals of state plans are now coming at a fast clip.
Six states鈥擟onnecticut, Delaware, Louisiana, Nevada, New Jersey, and New Mexico鈥�had received the on their plans as of mid-August.
In addition, all the other states that have turned in plans鈥攊ncluding Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, North Dakota, Tennessee, Oregon, and Vermont鈥攁nd the District of Columbia have received from the department. The remaining 34 states are expected to submit their plans next month.
Even though DeVos and her team are taking a close look at each plan, it鈥檚 not clear just how much of a role the federal feedback is having in shaping states鈥� final products. For instance, the Education Department dinged Tennessee for using so-called 鈥渟upersubgroups,鈥� which combine different historically overlooked groups of students, such as English-language learners and students in special education, for accountability purposes.
But the Volunteer State, which revised its plan based on the department鈥檚 feedback, decided to stick with its original vision. The state provided some data to explain its reasoning behind having a combined black, Hispanic, and Native American subgroup, showing that more schools will actually be identified as needing help using the supersubgroup approach than would be otherwise.
Refusing to Budge
And some states are getting their plans approved even if they don鈥檛 take the federal feedback to heart.
For instance, Connecticut was told it could not use so-called average scale scores, which convert student grades to a comparable scale, say 1 to 100, to measure student achievement. But, in submitting a revised plan to the department, the Nutmeg State refused to make the change, arguing that scale scores are 鈥渏ust another way to express grade-level proficiency.鈥� The state鈥檚 plan was approved despite its refusal to budge on the issue.
So far, there鈥檚 only one state that looks like it may have a tough time making it over the approval finish line: DeVos鈥� home state of Michigan. The , Brian Whiston, the information it provided 鈥渨as insufficient鈥� to 鈥渁dequately review鈥� the section of the plan dealing with the state鈥檚 accountability system, arguably the heart of ESSA.
Where Do States鈥� Plans Stand?
The Every Student Succeeds Act is set to be fully in place this school year. But before a state can roll out its plan, the U.S. Department of Education needs to sign off. Where does your state鈥檚 plan stand in the process?
For a complete breakdown of what states and the District of Columbia plan to do with their new flexibility under the Every Student Succeeds Act, view our complete breakdown.
Missing Information
That could be partly because in the state鈥檚 application, filed this spring, Michigan offers three possible approaches on accountability. (Michigan has since settled on one of them, a 鈥渄ashboard,鈥� Whiston said.) There is also a host of missing information, including how the state will identify low-performing schools and what it will take for a school to no longer be considered low-performing.
Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder and Lt. Gov. Brian Calley, both Republicans, have each expressed concerns with the state鈥檚 plan. And outside experts who have reviewed ESSA plans consider Michigan鈥檚 one of the weakest of the 17 that have been filed so far.
Whiston, who was appointed to his position in 2015 by a state board with a Democratic majority, still anticipates the plan will get the green light.
鈥淚t鈥檚 no big deal,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e鈥檒l get the little stuff back to them in a matter of a couple days.鈥�
Brian Gutman, the director of public engagement for Education Trust Midwest, an advocacy organization that looks out for disadvantaged students, had an entirely different take on the federal response. He doesn鈥檛 think the department should approve the state鈥檚 plan in its current form.
鈥淭his is yet another person who is saying this plan is just simply inadequate for Michigan students,鈥� Gutman said. 鈥淭here seems to be a real disconnect between what we鈥檙e hearing from the U.S. Department of Education and what the Michigan department of education seems to be taking from that.鈥�
Transparency Concerns
Meanwhile, the department after getting pushback for going overboard on its feedback to Delaware. The department questioned the ambitiousness of that state鈥檚 academic goals and whether it could use Advanced Placement tests and dual enrollment to gauge college readiness. Delaware was approved anyway.
But as of late July, instead of sending a letter outlining where a state鈥檚 plan falls short, the department intends to first schedule two-hour phone calls with states to go over trouble spots. If the state explains a potential hiccup to the federal agency鈥檚 satisfaction, the department might not mention that issue in its official feedback letter, to be made public after the call.
The change has raised big questions about transparency, including from two key Democratic ESSA authors, Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state and Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia.
In a , the pair wrote that the change would 鈥渓imit the public鈥檚 knowledge鈥� about ESSA-related agreements between states and the department.
鈥淲e are deeply concerned that this decision will result in inconsistent treatment of state agencies, leading to flawed implementation of our nation鈥檚 education law and harm to our nation鈥檚 most vulnerable students,鈥� Murray and Scott wrote. The Education Department hasn鈥檛 responded to inquiries about the Murray-Scott letter, and it鈥檚 unclear if their concerns will have any impact on the agency鈥檚 approach.
