March 16, 2003
Schools Chief Jack O'Connell Issues Statement
on New No Child Left Behind Policies
"The new policies for implementing No Child Left Behind show a welcome recognition by the U.S. Department of Education that flexibility is needed to make this law work in the best interests of our children.
"As we understand it, the changes announced by Secretary Paige will give our rural school districts needed relief by expanding the ways in which new teachers in certain rural areas could be designated as 'highly qualified.'
"The new federal policies regarding the designation of 'highly qualified' for science teachers will not have any immediate effect in California, where credentialing laws require science teachers to be credentialed in the specific areas of science they teach - biology or chemistry, for example.
"What continues to be a problem for California, however, is the distinction the law makes in social science disciplines, and I was disappointed that was not addressed in these changes. NCLB still requires a degree in specific areas of social science - economics, geography, history, government/civics - rather than allowing a teacher with a degree in social sciences to be considered highly qualified in any of those subjects. This rigidity makes no sense when hiring, for example, a full-time 'highly qualified' teacher for economics, a high school subject that constitutes only one semester in high school.
"The third change, streamlining the evaluation process of current multi-subject teachers, does not provide added flexibility to California teachers as we have employed a streamlined process from the beginning.
"Unfortunately, none of the changes addresses what is a central concern with the implementation of NCLB in California and other states with well-established accountability systems based on rigorous academic standards. That is, NCLB judges schools not on annual improvement, but based on whether they have jumped over a status bar. NCLB would be a better tool for improving schools and helping all students if it gave states the flexibility to focus on achieving growth, rather than punishing schools simply because they didn't reach an arbitrary bar."
