Chicago Board of Education to address NCLB requirements on school restructure plans

Board to discuss restructuring plan for 18 schools

Schools that have not made Adequate Yearly Progress for five years are required to develop restructuring plans.

May 26, 2009

Schools that have not made Adequate Yearly Progress for five years are required to develop restructuring plans.

The Chicago Board of Education will be presented on Wednesday, May 27, with restructuring plans for 18 schools that have been identified to meet Adequate Yearly Progress requirements under the No Child Left Behind act.

At the same time, the Board will be asked at its monthly meeting to formally approve restructuring plans for 78 schools that missed their AYP goals in previous years. The restructuring plans for those schools were developed and have been implemented in a timely fashion over the last several years.

“This action, once it receives Board approval, will bring us into full compliance with NCLB requirements regarding restructuring plans for schools that fail to meet their AYP requirements,” said Chicago Public Schools Chief Executive Officer Ron Huberman.

“As a result of our work this year to ensure we are meeting NCLB mandates, we determined the need for formal Board of Education approval of restructuring plans that were put in place for specific schools as they entered the 2006-07 and 2007-08 school years. That board action will correct a technical deficiency.”

Huberman pointed out that the restructuring plans for those schools were developed as required and that schools and their students have been getting the interventions set out under those plans.

CPS schools that have not made AYP for five years are required to develop restructuring plans to address the areas in which the school requires improvement. Restructuring plans typically are developed at the school or area level.

Those restructuring plans are designed to align with each school’s School Improvement Plan for Advancing Academic Achievement (SIPAAA). A SIPAAA is approved annually by an individual school’s Local School Council or the Board, depending on the school’s status.

Schools that entered restructuring planning in 2008-09 based on 2008 AYP were: George Armstrong, Bontemps, Brighton Park, Chicago Discovery, Dvorak, Hale, Hampton, Hedges, Henry, Jordan, Morgan Park, National Teachers, Phoenix Military, Pulaski, Sawyer, Scammon, Tonti, and Waters.

Since 2006, most CPS restructuring plans were filed directly with the Illinois State Board of Education after they were adopted at the local level. However, as part of an internal review of NCLB compliance procedures, plans developed in 2006 and 2007 are now being submitted to the Chicago Board of Education to comply with a technical requirement in state law that the local Board formally approve such plans.

The proposed action will ensure that all restructuring plans meet the technical filing requirements. In most cases, no substantive changes to the plans are proposed though for several schools, outdated activities have been removed or new activities added.

“The decentralized way in which these plans were developed has presented challenges to the district in terms of tracking compliance with ISBE’s procedural requirements,” Huberman said.

“In response, we are developing more centralized lines of authority to ensure that restructuring plans are developed, implemented, monitored and filed with ISBE in a timely manner. Primary responsibility for these duties will reside in the Office of Chief Education Officer.”

CPS monitors the performance of all schools every year based on achievement data. Restructuring plans can target school structure, practice and organization, among other factors, to positively impact the quality of education a school offers.

“Where a restructuring plan is proving effective in improving educational outcomes for students, we will continue to implement the plan. Where a plan is not effective, we will make adjustments to the interventions or implement more aggressive actions to address the school’s failure to improve,” Huberman said.

Also on Wednesday, Board members will be presented with 10 updated plans from CPS schools that were restructured prior to 2006 but were part of the CPS turnaround process. Huberman noted that in these cases the district is going “over and above” NCLB provisions, as there is no requirement that those plans be revisited.