What’s In a Name? NCLB vs. ESSA
Wendy Clark
WAETAG Board Member
Spring 2016
Although I speak a comfortable amount of Spanish, I don’t think of myself as bilingual. That was, until I considered my acquired second language of Teacher-Ease. If your vocabulary is filled with acronyms like IEP, TPEP, OSPI, GT, and SBAC you know what I mean. Recently in the world of education we replaced one acronym for another. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was, in effect, left behind to become Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), also referred to as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). But what does this mean for those of us in the field of gifted education? Is it yet another policy that could result in the focus being even further removed from our highest-achieving students? Alas, no!
Not only was the JAVITS grant retained but, for the first time, ESSA/ESEA was also written to include several provisions for gifted and talented students. These provisions come from the TALENT Act (S.363/H.R. 2960), a lengthier acronym which stands for To Aid Gifted and Talented Learners by Empowering the Nation’s Teachers. This legislation recognizes that in order for success in the 21st century, there are numerous fields that need high levels of talent. It also states that our top students are not performing at internationally competitive levels. Importantly, it addresses the serious imbalance of students of color or from poverty being included in the percentage of top students. Not only does it address needs for students currently performing at high levels, but also those with the potential and ability to become high achievers. This is such promising news for those of us that have long been advocating for the needs of ALL gifted and talented students, rather than those that seem to fit a stereotypical mold.
According to the Fordham Report, in the era of NCLB the highest achieving students made only minimal gains, while also receiving some of the lowest levels of attention from their teachers. “Were Congress to accept teachers’ views about what it means to create a “just” education system—i.e., one that challenges all students to fulfill their potential, rather than just focus on raising the performance of students who have been “left behind”—then the next version of NCLB would be dramatically different than today’s.” (Fordham, 2008) It appears somebody was listening. The TALENT Act, introduced these four key emphases:
Encouragingly, the support mentioned above also comes with avenues for possible funding. Title I funds may be used to identify and serve gifted and talented students, while Title II funds may be used to provide professional development in the area of gifted education. All districts and states will be required to include the advanced level students as a subgroup in their reports for achievement data. Additionally, districts applying for Title II funds must include information as to how the learning needs will be met for gifted and talented students. Both Washingtons (state and D.C.) seem to agree. We have decreed that highly capable services are part of basic education. Similarly, ESSA specifically states that the needs of “all students” include the gifted and talented.
So, what’s in a name? When the WASL became the MSP, those of us in the classroom didn’t feel like there was much of a difference. Had we simply swapped one assessment for another that looks and feels the same? Will the same be true for NCLB vs. ESSA? I think not. This seemingly small name change comes with exciting and promising aspects for our best and brightest. I encourage all advocates for gifted and talented students to learn more about how these changes, set to start taking effect in the 2016-2017 school year, will improve our abilities to meet our students’ unique needs.
For more information, go to www.NAGC.org
High-achieving students in the era of NCLB. (2008). Washington, D.C.: Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
Wendy Clark
WAETAG Board Member
Spring 2016
Although I speak a comfortable amount of Spanish, I don’t think of myself as bilingual. That was, until I considered my acquired second language of Teacher-Ease. If your vocabulary is filled with acronyms like IEP, TPEP, OSPI, GT, and SBAC you know what I mean. Recently in the world of education we replaced one acronym for another. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was, in effect, left behind to become Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), also referred to as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). But what does this mean for those of us in the field of gifted education? Is it yet another policy that could result in the focus being even further removed from our highest-achieving students? Alas, no!
Not only was the JAVITS grant retained but, for the first time, ESSA/ESEA was also written to include several provisions for gifted and talented students. These provisions come from the TALENT Act (S.363/H.R. 2960), a lengthier acronym which stands for To Aid Gifted and Talented Learners by Empowering the Nation’s Teachers. This legislation recognizes that in order for success in the 21st century, there are numerous fields that need high levels of talent. It also states that our top students are not performing at internationally competitive levels. Importantly, it addresses the serious imbalance of students of color or from poverty being included in the percentage of top students. Not only does it address needs for students currently performing at high levels, but also those with the potential and ability to become high achievers. This is such promising news for those of us that have long been advocating for the needs of ALL gifted and talented students, rather than those that seem to fit a stereotypical mold.
According to the Fordham Report, in the era of NCLB the highest achieving students made only minimal gains, while also receiving some of the lowest levels of attention from their teachers. “Were Congress to accept teachers’ views about what it means to create a “just” education system—i.e., one that challenges all students to fulfill their potential, rather than just focus on raising the performance of students who have been “left behind”—then the next version of NCLB would be dramatically different than today’s.” (Fordham, 2008) It appears somebody was listening. The TALENT Act, introduced these four key emphases:
- Support Educator Development to Ensure Academic Growth for High-Ability Students
- Confront and Address Excellence Gaps
- Provide Public Transparency of Student Achievement Data
- Continue Research and Dissemination on Best Practices in Gifted Education
Encouragingly, the support mentioned above also comes with avenues for possible funding. Title I funds may be used to identify and serve gifted and talented students, while Title II funds may be used to provide professional development in the area of gifted education. All districts and states will be required to include the advanced level students as a subgroup in their reports for achievement data. Additionally, districts applying for Title II funds must include information as to how the learning needs will be met for gifted and talented students. Both Washingtons (state and D.C.) seem to agree. We have decreed that highly capable services are part of basic education. Similarly, ESSA specifically states that the needs of “all students” include the gifted and talented.
So, what’s in a name? When the WASL became the MSP, those of us in the classroom didn’t feel like there was much of a difference. Had we simply swapped one assessment for another that looks and feels the same? Will the same be true for NCLB vs. ESSA? I think not. This seemingly small name change comes with exciting and promising aspects for our best and brightest. I encourage all advocates for gifted and talented students to learn more about how these changes, set to start taking effect in the 2016-2017 school year, will improve our abilities to meet our students’ unique needs.
For more information, go to www.NAGC.org
High-achieving students in the era of NCLB. (2008). Washington, D.C.: Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
RSS Feed
