This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
ESSA: Implications for Music Education


Kevin Tutt


Author’s Note: I wrote my original column be- low for a November 1st deadline. As with all legislation, substantial changes in elected and appointed officials can result in significantly different policies at the time of implementation. All of us at MMEA will continue to monitor fed- eral and state policy and strive to keep you up- dated through our regular emails and updates to our website: www.mmeamichigan.org.


Introduction


On December 10, 2015, President Obama signed into law the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) which is the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). The previous re-authorization, No Child Left Behind (NCLB), was enacted in 2002. The policies outlined in ESSA, and their subsequent implementation, may foretell a significant change in federal education policy. The new legislation has identified music as an important component of a well-rounded educa- tion. It also appears to place more responsibil- ity on the states for determining educational success as outlined below, but the specifics of those responsibilities still need to be established through federal rulemaking and subsequent ac- tion in Michigan’s Legislature and Department of Education. ESSA does maintain many of the priorities of ESEA and subsequent reauthori- zations. The legislation continues the practice of supporting at-risk students through Title I guidelines, while maintaining the “supplement, not supplant” rules for use of federal education funding. This means federal funds are intended for use in addition to state and local sources (to supplement), and not as a way to replace (sup- plant) those funds.


Changes


Some components of NCLB and Race to the Top (RTTT), however, have been replaced by ESSA, which has adjusted the role of the fed- eral Department of Education in academic goal setting and teacher qualifications. Under the new guidelines, the responsibility for determin-


ing accountability, resources, interventions, and teacher evaluation systems now falls primarily to the states. In addition, the federal terms of adequate yearly progress and highly qualified teachers are eliminated in the new law, as well as a list of core subject areas, which previously only listed the “arts”. For the first time in federal law, music is listed as a necessary requirement of a well-rounded education and the law makes it clear that schools must assess their ability to provide that education, including music study. This also means that federal funds can be used to support any remediation needed to address de- ficiencies in giving students these experiences. The elevation of music as a specifically required subject and the shifting of decision making to the state and local level has produced a series of crucial items for our profession to monitor and pursue.


Opportunities


Negotiations continue between the federal leg- islative and executive branches in regards to both the interpretation and funding of the new law. ESSA, Title IV, Part A, Sec. 4101 includes a block grant titled “Student Support and Aca- demic Enrichment Grants”. These grants are de- signed to “improve students’ academic achieve- ment by increasing the capacity of States, local educational agencies, schools, and local com- munities to in part, “provide all students with access to a well rounded education” including music (Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-95 § 114 Stat. 1177 (2015- 2016). One significant action that all citizens can take is to write their federal representatives and request that the Title IV, Part A block grants be fully funded. The authorization in ESSA was for $1.65 billion, but budget proposals from President Obama and Congress ranged from $300 million to $1 billion. In addition, block grants, as opposed to categorical grants, allow states more flexibility in deciding how to spend awarded funds. To ensure music programs are included in the distribution of these funds, mu- sic educators should contact state and district representatives.


22


Advocacy / Policy


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36