Federal Legislation
We can now identify three defining moments in federal legislation concerning reforms in educational policies in US.
First, there was Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 1965, which aimed to support greater educational equity and to close the achievement gap by providing federal funding for schools with underserved populations, including low-income, ELLs, and immigrant students.
In 2002, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law was enacted which increased the demands for school accountability through statewide testing, adequate yearly progress (AYP) reports, and penalties for schools that did not meet their AYP goals. Although the law was designed to level the playing field for the disadvantaged students, schools most adversely affected by penalties were so-called Title I schools, with a disproportionate number of low-income students.
In 2015, ESEA was reauthorized as Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), promoting further equity and prioritizing the expansion of educational opportunity and improvement of student outcomes, with a special focus on protecting the interests of disadvantaged and high-needs students. While allowing for certain flexibility at state level, ESSA mandates influence state legislation by requiring states to come up with accountability systems for all public schools to improve student achievement, and by requiring states to provide the public with annual report cards, identifying schools that need support and improvement.
MN State Legislature
According to literacy goals articulated in the 2018 MN Statutes, every child (including ELLs) is expected to be reading at or above grade level by the end of grade 3 (120b.12, Subd. 1).
Schools are required to identify and evaluate students’ areas of academic need related to literacy, to notify and inform parents about their student’s assessments, progress, needs, and available supports, and to provide adequate interventions (Subd. 2 & 3).
At district level, the legislature mandates that schools use student data to identify staff development needs and provide training to increase instructional effectiveness of licensed teachers (Subd. 4).
Furthermore, each school district is required to adopt a local literacy plan to enable every child to read proficiently no later than the end of grade 3, including programs and processes related to assessment, data use, interventions, staff development, and parent communication (Subd. 4a).
Sources:
Aleksandra's Literacy Blog 
Hi Aleksandra,
Thanks for the great information. I want comment further on how asinine this cookie-cutter legislation is.
Since the government wants involvement, I do wish they would be involved with the aspect of accountability. In my state, when a school does not perform at a certain level (three years) the state takes it into conservator-ship, in hopes that it will do better. The ideal accountability would be to track schools each year and then provide intervention methods if they are not up-to-par. By tracking each year, the state could pin-point the school’s weaknesses and address them. Why wait three years and have a total failing school???
I wanted to share a government fiasco that is happening as I write this. In my city’s district Two Hundred and Forty Teachers for the past three years have not attained their permanent licensing, so the state told the district–those teacher could not receive a contract. So, if the still want to teach, they must become Substitute Teachers who make average 64 dollars a day and of course one has no benefits.
If I were one of these teachers, I would just change professions. How say you?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Stephania, I agree that government involvement and initiatives, while being peppered with optimistic and concerned language, have not contributed much to positive changes on a local level. As someone who is not native to US, and also not teaching at a public school, I admit that I am still learning the ins and outs of this process, but it seems to me that a larger breakdown of this government support system on a higher level causes the trickle-down effect that slows down progress down the road. Your example seems to confirm this. When we have such delayed assistance at a district and school-wide level, it is no surprise that our high-needs classrooms are full of students who have been let down year after year, reaching middle school without being able to read proficiently. Very sad.
As for the teachers you mention, I am not surprised by low retention rates and high attrition in difficult-to-staff schools. Teachers can only do so much in such circumstances as you describe. Many have indeed changed professions, and these are people with dedication, love, and passion for teaching. I don’t judge them or blame them at all. It is my impression that education and educators do not seem to be valued in this society.
LikeLike
Great conversation, Stephania and Aleksandra!
I agree that it’s the teachers who are stuck dealing with the effects of legislation. As I’ve read on several blog posts on this topic, schools are all expected to follow the same laws and requirements despite the difference in resources. I think you make a good point about low retention rates in struggling schools. Why would I stay at a struggling school if I could get a job at a higher paying and more successful school? Or as you both stated, why should I stay in education at all? Great points to think about!
LikeLike
Aleksandra,
Great job on this post. I appreciated your breakdown on No Child Left Behind (NCLB). I really didn’t touch much on NCLB in my post. The idea behind NCLB was grand. Unfortunately, it ended up hurting those who it was intended to help.
Great job!
LikeLike