Rewards for Schools Key Facet of NCLB Waivers

One of the chief complaints about the No Child Left Behind Act has been that districts and schools that fail to meet achievement targets face serious sanctions, while schools that do a good job of closing the gaps between traditionally overlooked groups of students and their peers essentially get little in return.

To help alleviate those concerns, the U.S. Department of Education asked states to identify so-called “reward schools” in their applications for waivers easing demands of the NCLB law, the current version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which Congress has yet to revise. States had to include not only high fliers—schools with consistently high student achievement—but also schools making significant progress with groups of students who had often struggled in the past.

So far, 34 states and the District of Columbia have been approved for the NCLB flexibility. In their applications, states came up with a wide range of criteria for defining reward schools, one of three categories based on school performance, along with a broad array of ideas for giving those schools something extra for their efforts.

In some cases, the states, including New Jersey, are not allowing schools that are part of the “focus” category—schools singled out because of their difficulty in closing achievements gaps—to make the rewards list. But other states, such as Kentucky, are allowing “focus” and even “priority” schools—the lowest-performing category—to receive the distinction, if they make significant progress. And some states, such as Tennessee, are allowing rewards both for schools that are eligible for Title I aid for disadvantaged students and for those that do not have predominantly high-poverty populations.

Bonus Size Varies

The size of the potential bonuses also varies. For instance, reward schools in New York could get the chance to compete for grants of up to $100,000 to be used to help share promising practices, according to the state’s application. And in Delaware, up to two schools could be eligible for grants as high as $10,000.

Other states were more cautious about tangible rewards. For instance, Kansas wrote that it would provide a school with a gift to signify its reward status, “if funding provides.” And the gifts outlined in the application wouldn’t be extravagant; examples given included plaques and signage.

Kansas and a number of other states are also offering staff members at reward schools the chance to help bolster school improvement efforts across the state—for example, by serving as mentors at “priority” schools with similar demographics.

In other cases, states are offering flexibility on regulations. Mississippi, for instance, is allowing reward schools—and other high achievers—the chance to apply for flexibility in meeting a host of state regulations, including some that govern teacher-student ratios. That was already part of state law, but became a part of the state’s successful bid for ESEA flexibility.

In some cases, states simply haven’t had the money to fully finance their plans-on-paper for reward schools. For instance, Mississippi wrote in its application that it wanted to offer monetary bonuses to its reward schools. But that money doesn’t appear likely to materialize this year, in part because of sequestration, the across-the-board cuts to federal programs, including K-12 aid, that went into effect March 1.

“Our version of money is going to be more of the recognition and support phase,” said Staci Curry, the director of school support services for the Mississippi education department. The state is going to invite staff members from reward schools to serve on advisory councils to help pinpoint best practices in closing achievement gaps.

Right now, “we don’t really have a centralized resource for what good schools are doing,” Ms. Curry said.

But Louisiana distributed grants of more than $8,000 each to schools that made their growth targets. And one district got a check for $230,000 for its high gains in student achievement.