FR Doc E9-1548[Federal Register: January 26, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 15)]
[Notices]
[Page 4403-4416]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26ja09-30]
Download: 
----------------------------------------------
[[Page 4403]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Compliance Agreement
AGENCY: Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of written findings and compliance agreement with the
Vermont Department of Education.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice is being published in the Federal Register
consistent with section 457(b)(2) of the General Education Provisions
Act (GEPA). Section 457 of GEPA authorizes the U.S. Department of
Education (the Department) to enter into a compliance agreement with a
recipient that is failing to comply substantially with Federal program
requirements. In order to enter into a compliance agreement, the
Department must determine, in written findings, that the recipient
cannot comply with the applicable program requirements until a future
date.
On January 6, 2009, the Department entered into a compliance
agreement with the Vermont Department of Education (VTDOE). Section
457(b)(2) of GEPA requires the Department to publish written findings
leading to a compliance agreement, with a copy of the compliance
agreement, in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon Hall, U.S. Department of
Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue, SW., Room 3W214, Washington, DC 20202-6132. Telephone: (202)
260-0998.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may
call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an
accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
(Title I), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, requires
each State receiving Title I funds to satisfy certain requirements.
Under Title I, each State was required to adopt academic content
and student academic achievement standards in at least mathematics,
reading or language arts, and science. These standards must include the
same knowledge and levels of achievement expected of all public school
students in the State. Content standards must specify what all students
are expected to know and be able to do; contain coherent and rigorous
content; and encourage the teaching of advanced skills. Achievement
standards must be aligned with the State's academic content standards
and must describe at least three levels of proficiency to determine how
well students in each grade are mastering the content standards. A
State must provide descriptions of the competencies associated with
each student's academic achievement level and must determine the
assessment scores (``cut scores'') that differentiate among the
achievement levels.
Title I also requires each State to implement a student assessment
system to evaluate whether students are mastering the subject material
reflected in the State's academic content standards. By the 2005-2006
school year, States were required to administer mathematics and reading
or language arts assessments yearly during grades 3-8 and once during
grades 10-12. Further, beginning with the 2007-2008 school year, each
State was required to administer a science assessment in at least one
grade in each of the following grade spans: 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12.
In addition to a general assessment, Title I requires States to
develop and administer at least one alternate assessment for students
with disabilities who cannot participate in the general assessment,
with or without accommodations. An alternate assessment may be based on
grade-level academic achievement standards, alternate academic
achievement standards, or modified academic achievement standards. Like
the general assessment, any alternate assessment must satisfy the
requirements for high technical quality, including validity,
reliability, accessibility, objectivity, and consistency with
nationally recognized professional and technical standards.
In May 2007, VTDOE submitted evidence of its standards and
assessment system. The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary
Education (Assistant Secretary) submitted that evidence to a panel of
experts for peer review. Following that review, the Assistant Secretary
concluded that VTDOE's standards and assessment system did not meet a
number of the Title I requirements.
Section 454 of GEPA, 20 U.S.C. 1234c, sets out the remedies
available to the Department when it determines that a recipient ``is
failing to comply substantially with any requirement of law''
applicable to Federal program funds the Department administers.
Specifically, the Department is authorized to--
(1) Withhold funds;
(2) Compel compliance through a cease and desist order;
(3) Enter into a compliance agreement with the recipient; or
(4) Take any other action authorized by law.
20 U.S.C. 1234c(a).
In a letter dated December 19, 2007, to Richard H. Cate, Vermont's
former Commissioner of Education, the Assistant Secretary notified
VTDOE that, to remain eligible to receive Title I funds, it would have
to enter into a compliance agreement with the Department. The purpose
of a compliance agreement is ``to bring the recipient into full
compliance with the applicable requirements of law as soon as feasible
and not to excuse or remedy past violations of such requirements.'' 20
U.S.C. 1234f(a). In order to enter into a compliance agreement with a
recipient, the Department must determine, in written findings, that the
recipient cannot comply until a future date with the applicable program
requirements.
In accordance with the requirements of section 457(b) of GEPA, 20
U.S.C. 1234f(b), on June 5, 2008, Department officials conducted a
public hearing in Vermont to assess whether a compliance agreement with
VTDOE might be appropriate. Dr. Michael Hock testified at this hearing
on behalf of VTDOE. The Department considered the testimony provided at
the June 2008 public hearing and all other relevant information and
materials and concluded that VTDOE would not be able to correct its
non-compliance with Title I standards and assessment requirements
immediately.
On January 12, 2009, the Assistant Secretary issued written
findings holding that compliance by VTDOE with the Title I standards
and assessment requirements is genuinely not feasible until a future
date. Under Title I, VTDOE was required to implement its final
assessment system no later than the 2005-2006 school year. The evidence
that VTDOE submitted in May 2007 indicated that, well after the
statutory deadline had passed, its standards and assessment system
still did not fully meet Title I requirements. In addition, the
compliance agreement sets out the action plan that VTDOE must implement
to come into compliance with Title I requirements. Due to the enormity
and complexity of the work that is needed to bring VTDOE's standards
and assessment system into full compliance, VTDOE cannot immediately
comply with all of the Title I requirements.
[[Page 4404]]
Vermont's Acting Commissioner of Education, Bill Talbott, and the
Assistant Secretary signed the compliance agreement on January 6, 2009.
As required by section 457(b)(2) of GEPA, 20 U.S.C. 1234f(b)(2),
the text of the Assistant Secretary's written findings is set forth as
Appendix A and the compliance agreement is set forth as Appendix B of
this notice.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site:
http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.
To use PDF, you must have the Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF,
call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-
293-6498; or in the Washington, DC area at (202) 512-1530.
Note: The official version of a document is the document
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations is available on GPO Access at:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html.
Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1234c, 1234f.
Dated: January 16, 2009.
Kerri L. Briggs,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
Appendix A
Written Findings of the Assistant Secretary for Elementary and
Secondary Education Regarding the Compliance Agreement Between the U.S.
Department of Education and the Vermont Department of Education
I. Introduction
The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education
(Assistant Secretary) of the U.S. Department of Education
(Department) has determined, pursuant to 20 U.S.C. 1234c and 1234f,
that the Vermont Department of Education (VTDOE) has failed to
comply substantially with certain requirements of Title I, Part A of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Title I), as
amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. 6301 et
seq., and that it is not feasible for VTDOE to achieve full
compliance immediately. Specifically, the Assistant Secretary has
determined that VTDOE did not meet, within the statutory timeframe,
a number of the Title I requirements concerning the academic
achievement standards, technical quality, alignment, and reporting
of results for Vermont's alternate assessment based on alternate
academic achievement standards for students with the most
significant cognitive disabilities.
For the following reasons, the Assistant Secretary has concluded
that it would be appropriate to enter into a compliance agreement
with VTDOE to bring it into full compliance as soon as feasible.
During the effective period of the compliance agreement, which ends
January 6, 2011, VTDOE will be eligible to receive Title I funds as
long as it complies with the terms and conditions of the agreement
as well as the provisions of Title I and other applicable Federal
statutory and regulatory requirements.
II. Relevant Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
A. Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
Title I provides financial assistance, through State educational
agencies, to local educational agencies to provide services in high-
poverty schools to students who are failing or at risk of failing to
meet the State's student academic achievement standards. Under Title
I, each State, including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico,
was required to adopt academic content and student academic
achievement standards in at least mathematics, reading or language
arts, and science. These standards must include the same knowledge
and levels of achievement expected of all public school students in
the State. Content standards must specify what all students are
expected to know and be able to do; contain coherent and rigorous
content; and encourage the teaching of advanced skills. Academic
achievement standards must be aligned with the State's academic
content standards and must describe at least three levels of
proficiency to determine how well students in each grade are
mastering the content standards. A State must provide descriptions
of the competencies associated with each student's academic
achievement level and must determine the assessment scores (``cut
scores'') that differentiate among the achievement levels.
Each State was also required to implement a student assessment
system used to evaluate whether students are mastering the subject
material reflected in the State's academic content standards. By the
2005-2006 school year, States were required to administer mathematics
and reading or language arts assessments yearly during grades 3-8 and
once during grades 10-12. Further, beginning with the 2007-2008 school
year, each State was required to administer a science assessment in at
least one grade in each of the following grade spans: 3-5, 6-9, and 10-
12. A State's assessment system must:
Be the same assessment system used to measure the
achievement of all public school students in the State;
Be designed to provide coherent information about
student attainment of State academic content standards across grades
and subjects;
Provide for the inclusion of all students in the grades
assessed, including students with disabilities and limited English
proficient (LEP) students;
Be aligned with the State's academic content and
student academic achievement standards;
Express student results in terms of the State's student
academic achievement standards;
Be valid, reliable, and of adequate technical quality
for the purposes for which they are used and be consistent with
nationally recognized professional and technical standards;
Involve multiple measures of student academic
achievement, including measures that assess higher order thinking
skills and understanding of challenging content;
Objectively measure academic achievement, knowledge,
and skills without evaluating or assessing personal family beliefs
and attitudes;
Enable results to be disaggregated by gender, each
major racial and ethnic group, migrant status, students with
disabilities, English proficiency status, and economically
disadvantaged students;
Provide individual student reports; and
Enable itemized score analyses.
20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(3); 34 CFR 200.2.
In addition to a general assessment, States were required to
develop and administer at least one alternate assessment for students
with disabilities who cannot participate in the general assessment,
with or without accommodations. 34 CFR 200.6(a)(2). An alternate
assessment may be based on grade-level academic achievement standards,
alternate academic achievement standards, or modified academic
achievement standards. Like the general assessment, any alternate
assessment must satisfy the requirements for high technical quality,
including validity, reliability, accessibility, objectivity, and
consistency with nationally recognized professional and technical
standards.
B. The General Education Provisions Act
The General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) provides a number of
options when the Assistant Secretary determines a recipient of
Department funds is ``failing to comply substantially with any
requirement of law applicable to such funds.'' 20 U.S.C. 1234c. In
such a case, the Assistant Secretary is authorized to:
(1) Withhold funds;
(2) Compel compliance through a cease and desist order;
(3) Enter into a compliance agreement with the recipient; or
(4) Take any other action authorized by law.
20 U.S.C. 1234c(a).
Under section 457 of GEPA, the Assistant Secretary may enter
into a compliance agreement with a recipient that is failing to
comply substantially with specific program requirements. 20 U.S.C.
1234f. The purpose of a compliance agreement is ``to bring the
recipient into full compliance with the
[[Page 4405]]
applicable requirements of law as soon as feasible and not to excuse
or remedy past violations of such requirements.'' 20 U.S.C.
1234f(a). Before entering into a compliance agreement with a
recipient, the Assistant Secretary must hold a hearing at which the
recipient, affected students and parents or their representatives,
and other interested parties are invited to participate. At that
hearing, the recipient has the burden of persuading the Assistant
Secretary that full compliance with applicable requirements of law
is not feasible until a future date. 20 U.S.C. 1234f(b)(1). If, on
the basis of all the evidence presented, the Assistant Secretary
determines that full compliance is genuinely not feasible until a
future date, the Assistant Secretary must make written findings to
that effect and must publish those findings, together with the
substance of any compliance agreement, in the Federal Register. 20
U.S.C. 1234f(b)(2).
A compliance agreement must set forth an expiration date, not
later than three years from the date of the written findings, by
which time the recipient must be in full compliance with all program
requirements. 20 U.S.C. 1234f(c)(1). In addition, a compliance
agreement must contain the terms and conditions with which the
recipient must comply during the period that agreement is in effect.
20 U.S.C. 1234f(c)(2). If the recipient fails to comply with any of
the terms and conditions of the compliance agreement, the Assistant
Secretary may consider the agreement to be no longer in effect, and
may take any of the compliance actions set forth above. 20 U.S.C.
1234f(d).
III. Analysis
In deciding whether a compliance agreement between the Assistant
Secretary and VTDOE is appropriate, the Assistant Secretary must
determine whether compliance by VTDOE with the Title I standards and
assessment requirements is genuinely not feasible until a future
date. 20 U.S.C. 1234f(b)(2).
A. VTDOE Has Failed to Comply Substantially With Title I Standards and
Assessment Requirements
In May 2007, VTDOE submitted evidence of its standards and
assessment system. The Assistant Secretary submitted that evidence
to a panel of experts for peer review. Following that review, the
Assistant Secretary concluded that VTDOE's standards and assessment
system did not meet a number of the Title I requirements.
Specifically, the Assistant Secretary determined that, to
demonstrate its compliance, VTDOE had to submit the following
evidence:
Academic Achievement Standards
1. Evidence of approved/adopted alternate academic achievement
standards for students with the most significant cognitive
disabilities in reading/language arts and mathematics for each of
grades 3 through 8 and at least one grade in the 10-12 grade span.
2. Documentation of the development of academic achievement
descriptors for the alternate assessment in the content area of
science.
3. Evidence that the alternate academic achievement standards
include for each content area:
a. At least three levels of achievement, including two levels of
high achievement (e.g., proficient and advanced) that determine how
well students are mastering a State's academic content standards,
and a third level of achievement (e.g., basic) to provide
information about the progress of lower-achieving students toward
mastering the proficient and advanced levels of achievement;
b. Descriptions of the competencies associated with each
achievement level; and
c. Assessment scores (``cut scores'') that differentiate among
the achievement levels.
4. Evidence that the Board or other authority has adopted all
alternate achievement standards.
5. Documentation that the State has reported separately the
number and percent of those students with disabilities assessed on
the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards,
those assessed on an alternate assessment based on grade-level
standards, and those included in the regular assessment (including
those administered that assessment with appropriate accommodations).
6. Evidence that the State has documented the involvement of
diverse stakeholders in the development of its alternate academic
achievement standards.
Technical Quality
1. Evidence that the State has documented validity (in addition
to the alignment of the alternate assessment with the content
standards), as described in the Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testing (AERA/APA/NCME, 1999).
2. For the alternate assessment, evidence that the State has
provided documentation of the standard setting process, including a
description the selection of judges, methodology employed, and final
results.
3. For the alternate assessment(s), evidence that the State has
considered the issue of reliability, as described in the Standards
for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA/APA/NCME, 1999).
4. Evidence that the State has established:
a. Clear criteria for the administration, scoring, analysis, and
reporting components of its alternate assessment; and
b. A system for monitoring and improving the ongoing quality of
its alternate assessment.
Alignment
1. Evidence that the Alternate Grade-Level Expectations (AGEs)
and all associated tasks across grade spans submitted for the
Portfolio Assessment of Alternate Grade Expectations are aligned
with State academic content standards in reading and mathematics.
2. Evidence that the State has developed ongoing procedures to
maintain and improve alignment between the alternate assessment and
standards over time, particularly if gaps have been noted.
Reports
1. Evidence that the State will produce individual student
alternate assessment reports in terms of the State's revised
alternate achievement standards. With respect to such individual
student reports:
a. Evidence that these individual student reports provide
information for parents, teachers, and principals to help them
understand and address a student's specific academic needs. This
information must be displayed in a format and language that is
understandable to parents, teachers, and principals, for example,
through the use of descriptors that describe what students know and
can do at different performance levels. The reports must be
accompanied by interpretive guidance for these audiences; and
b. Evidence that the State ensures that these individual student
reports will be delivered to parents, teachers, and principals as
soon as possible after the alternate assessment is administered.
B. VTDOE Cannot Correct Immediately Its Noncompliance With the Title I
Standards and Assessment Requirements
Under Title I, VTDOE was required to implement its final
assessment system no later than the 2005-2006 school year. 20 U.S.C.
6311(b)(3). The evidence that VTDOE submitted in May 2007 indicated
that, well after the statutory deadline had passed, its standards
and assessment system still did not fully meet Title I requirements.
In addition, substantial work is required to bring VTDOE into
compliance with the Title I requirements.
At the public hearing, which was held on June 5, 2008, VTDOE
presented evidence that compliance is not feasible until a future
date, particularly in light of the work necessary to come into full
compliance with the Title I standards and assessment requirements.
In particular, Dr. Michael Hock, Vermont's Director of Educational
Assessment, testified that, to bring Vermont's standards and
assessment system into compliance, Vermont must document the
successful completion of a number of tasks, including: Revising the
State's alternate academic achievement standards for reading and
mathematics to reflect an increased emphasis on academic content;
using a validated standard-setting process that includes direct
input from teachers or other individuals with specific expertise in
the academic content areas; revising the guidelines for the
collection, scoring, and reporting of student performance relative
to the alternate academic achievement standards; and revising the
scoring materials and procedures for the alternate assessment based
on alternate academic achievement standards. Dr. Hock further
testified that VTDOE intended to hold extensive training sessions
for teachers on the revised frameworks for the alternate academic
achievement standards. Dr. Hock stated that VTDOE needs the time
afforded by a compliance agreement to bring its standards and
assessment system into compliance to ensure that its alternate
assessment remains an appropriate assessment for students with
disabilities and that teachers are knowledgeable about the changes
in the types of skills assessed as well as the types of evidence to
be submitted for the portfolio assessment. Dr. Hock's testimony is
consistent with the comprehensive action plan that VTDOE has
[[Page 4406]]
developed and that is incorporated into the compliance agreement.
That action plan sets out a very specific schedule that VTDOE has
agreed to meet during the next two years for completing all of the
work necessary to attain compliance with the Title I standards and
assessment requirements.
Due to the enormity and complexity of the work that is needed to
bring VTDOE's standards and assessment system into full compliance,
VTDOE cannot immediately comply with all of the Title I
requirements. As a result, the Assistant Secretary finds that it is
not genuinely feasible for VTDOE to come into compliance until a
future date.
IV. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the Assistant Secretary finds that
full compliance by VTDOE with the standards and assessment
requirements of Title I is genuinely not feasible until a future
date. Therefore, the Assistant Secretary has determined that it is
appropriate to enter into a compliance agreement with VTDOE.
Dated: Jan. 12, 2009.
------ /s/ ------
Kerri L. Briggs, PhD
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
Appendix B
Compliance Agreement Under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act Between the United States Department of Education and the
Vermont Department of Education
Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
(Title I), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001,
requires each State receiving Title I funds to satisfy certain
requirements.
Each State was required to adopt academic content and
achievement standards in at least mathematics, reading/language
arts, and, beginning in the 2005-2006 school year, science. These
standards must include the same knowledge and levels of achievement
expected of all public school students in the State. Content
standards must specify what all students are expected to know and be
able to do; contain coherent and rigorous content; and encourage the
teaching of advanced skills. Achievement standards must be aligned
with the State's content standards and must describe at least three
levels of proficiency to determine how well students in each grade
are mastering the content standards. A State must provide
descriptions of the competencies associated with each achievement
level and must determine the assessment scores (``cut scores'') that
differentiate among the achievement levels.
Each State was also required to implement a student assessment
system used to evaluate whether students are mastering the subject
material reflected in the State's academic standards. By the 2005-
2006 school year, States were required to administer mathematics and
reading/language arts assessments yearly during grades 3-8 and once
during grades 10-12. Further, beginning with the 2007-2008 school
year, each State was required to administer a science assessment in
at least one grade in each of the following grade spans: 3-5, 6-9,
and 10-12. A State's assessment system must:
Be the same assessment system used to measure the
achievement of all public school students in the State;
Be designed to provide coherent information about
student attainment of State standards across grades and subjects;
Provide for the inclusion of all students in the grades
assessed, including students with disabilities and limited-English-
proficient students;
Be aligned with the State's content and achievement
standards;
Express student results in terms of the State's student
achievement standards;
Be valid, reliable, and of adequate technical quality
for the purpose for which they are used and be consistent with
nationally recognized professional and technical standards;
Involve multiple measures of student academic
achievement, including measures that assess higher order thinking
skills and understanding of challenging content;
Objectively measure academic achievement, knowledge,
and skills without evaluating or assessing personal family beliefs
and attitudes;
Enable results to be disaggregated by gender, each
major racial and ethnic group, migrant status, students with
disabilities, LEP students, and economically disadvantaged students;
Provide individual student reports; and
Enable itemized score analyses.
In addition to a general assessment, States were required to
develop at least one alternate assessment for students with
disabilities who cannot participate in the general assessment, with
or without accommodations. An alternate assessment may be based on
grade-level achievement standards, alternate achievement standards,
or modified achievement standards. Like the general assessment, any
alternate assessment must satisfy the requirements for high
technical quality, including validity, reliability, accessibility,
objectivity, and consistency with nationally recognized professional
and technical standards.
The Vermont Department of Education (VTDOE) failed to timely
meet certain of the statutory and regulatory requirements for its
standards and assessment system. In order to be eligible to continue
to receive Title I funds while working to comply with the
requirements, Richard Cate, Commissioner of Education, indicated
VTDOE's interest in entering into a compliance agreement with the
United States Department of Education (Department). On June 5, 2008,
the Department conducted a public hearing regarding: (1) Whether
VTDOE's full compliance with Title I is not feasible until a future
date; and (2) whether VTDOE is able to come into compliance with the
Title I standards and assessment requirements within three years.
Pursuant to this Compliance Agreement under 20 U.S.C. Section
1234f, VTDOE must be in full compliance with the outstanding
requirements of Title I no later than three years from the date of
the Assistant Secretary's written findings, a copy of which is
attached to, and incorporated by reference into, this Agreement. To
achieve compliance with the standards and assessment requirements,
VTDOE must submit the following evidence:
Academic Achievement Standards
1. Evidence of approved/adopted alternate academic achievement
standards for students with the most significant cognitive
disabilities in reading/language arts and mathematics for each of
grades 3 through 8 and at least one grade in the 10-12 grade span.
2. Documentation of the development of academic achievement
descriptors for the alternate assessment in the content area of
science.
3. Evidence that the alternate academic achievement standards
include for each content area:
a. At least three levels of achievement, including two levels of
high achievement (e.g., proficient and advanced) that determine how
well students are mastering a State's academic content standards,
and a third level of achievement (e.g., basic) to provide
information about the progress of lower-achieving students toward
mastering the proficient and advanced levels of achievement;
b. Descriptions of the competencies associated with each
achievement level; and
c. Assessment scores (``cut scores'') that differentiate among
the achievement levels.
4. Evidence that the Board or other authority has adopted all
alternate achievement standards.
5. Documentation that the State has reported separately the
number and percent of those students with disabilities assessed on
the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards,
those assessed on an alternate assessment based on grade-level
standards, and those included in the regular assessment (including
those administered that assessment with appropriate accommodations).
6. Evidence that the State has documented the involvement of
diverse stakeholders in the development of its alternate academic
achievement standards.
Technical Quality
1. Evidence that the State has documented validity (in addition
to the alignment of the alternate assessment with the content
standards), as described in the Standards for Educational and
Psychological Testing (AERA/APA/NCME, 1999).
2. For the alternate assessment, evidence that the State has
provided documentation of the standard setting process, including a
description of the selection of judges, methodology employed, and
final results.
3. For the alternate assessment(s), evidence that the State has
considered the issue of reliability, as described in the Standards
for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA/APA/NCME, 1999).
4. Evidence that the State has established:
a. Clear criteria for the administration, scoring, analysis, and
reporting components of its alternate assessment; and
b. A system for monitoring and improving the ongoing quality of
its alternate assessment.
[[Page 4407]]
Alignment
1. Evidence that the Alternate Grade-Level Expectations (AGEs)
and all associated tasks across grade spans submitted for the
Portfolio Assessment of Alternate Grade Expectations are aligned
with State academic content standards in reading and mathematics.
2. Evidence that the State has developed ongoing procedures to
maintain and improve alignment between the alternate assessment and
standards over time, particularly if gaps have been noted.
Reports
1. Evidence that the State will produce individual student
alternate assessment reports in terms of the State's revised
alternate achievement standards. With respect to such individual
student reports:
a. Evidence that these individual student reports provide
information for parents, teachers, and principals to help them
understand and address a student's specific academic needs. This
information must be displayed in a format and language that is
understandable to parents, teachers, and principals, for example,
through the use of descriptors that describe what students know and
can do at different performance levels. The reports must be
accompanied by interpretive guidance for these audiences; and
b. Evidence that the State ensures that these individual student
reports will be delivered to parents, teachers, and principals as
soon as possible after the alternate assessment is administered.
During the period that this Compliance Agreement is in effect, VTDOE
is eligible to receive Title I, Part A funds if it complies with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement, as well as the provisions of
Title I, Part A and other applicable Federal statutory and
regulatory requirements that are not specifically addressed by this
Agreement. The attached action steps constitute a detailed plan and
specific timeline for how VTDOE will come into compliance with the
Title I standards and assessment requirements. The action steps are
incorporated by reference into this Compliance Agreement as though
fully set forth herein and may be amended by joint agreement of the
parties, provided full compliance is still feasible by the
expiration of the Agreement.
In addition to all of the terms and conditions set forth above,
VTDOE agrees that its continued eligibility to receive Title I, Part
A funds is predicated upon its compliance with all statutory and
regulatory requirements of that program, including those that are
not specifically addressed by this Agreement, including any
amendments to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
If VTDOE fails to comply with any of the terms and conditions of
this Compliance Agreement, including the action steps attached
hereto, the Department may consider the Agreement no longer in
effect and may take any action authorized by law, including the
withholding of funds or the issuance of a cease and desist order. 20
U.S.C. 1234f(d).
It is so agreed.
For the Vermont Department of Education.
----/s/------
Bill Talbott,
Acting Commissioner of Education.
Date: Jan. 6, 2009.
For the United States Department of Education.
----/s/------
Kerri L. Briggs, PhD,
Assistant Secretary, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.
Date: Jan. 6, 2009.
Date this Compliance Agreement becomes effective: Jan. 6, 2009.
Expiration Date of this Agreement: Jan. 6, 2011.
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
[[Page 4408]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26JA09.020
[[Page 4409]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26JA09.021
[[Page 4410]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26JA09.022
[[Page 4411]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26JA09.023
[[Page 4412]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26JA09.024
[[Page 4413]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26JA09.025
[[Page 4414]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26JA09.026
[[Page 4415]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26JA09.027
[[Page 4416]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26JA09.028
[FR Doc. E9-1548 Filed 1-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-C