# data[].attributes.body
High school counselors must be familiar with the assessments Florida students are required to take, how each assessment figures into student and school grades, and the impact each has on graduation requirements and diploma designations.  Also, state assessments are mandated by the Every Student Succeeds Act (20 USC § 6311).
This guide provides and overview of the laws and ethics surrounding state-mandated testing.  School counselors, school administrators, and educators can benefit from this guide.
Reference
Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 USC § 6311.

# data[].attributes.body
A knowledge of the required assessments is important for school counselors because one of their primary responsibilities is to ensure that students are scheduled in courses that will support them in meeting the requirements to earn a standard high school diploma.  State-mandated assessments impact the field of education in many ways.  They are used to determine student progress which impacts scheduling for intensive reading and/or math courses.  Student growth and the number of students performing at grade level are components that figure into the state-issued school grade as well as teacher evaluations each year.

Issues emerge for many aspects of public education and testing is no different.  One testing issue that school officials should be aware of is the amount of testing Florida students are exposed to.  Many advocacy groups are working to reduce the number of tests students take while making sure the quality and data provided by these test is more meaningful and useful.  For example, eliminating the Geometry and Biology end of course exams has been a recent topic of note.  The Florida Department of Education provides memos and resources to keep school officials aware of changes that affect them and their students.

The link from the Florida Department of Education articulates the plan for eliminating the Florida Common Core standards and transitioning to the Benchmarks for Excellent Student Thinking (B.E.S.T.) Standards in Florida.

# data[].attributes.body
The Florida Education Association (FEA) believes that the state of Florida has become obsessed with testing public school students.  The negative impact of overtesting affects students and teachers alike.  Low wages and teacher evaluation policies are driving highly effective educators out of the teaching profession.  The testing is costly and damaging to Florida's students as well.  Some of the negative impact on students include time taken away from more meaningful instruction, closing certain services within school sites to accommodate testing, and that the assessments are given without a clear purpose despite the Florida statute (Florida Education Association, 2019).
Reference
Florida Education Association. (2019). Overtesting of Florida's students. Retrieved from https://feaweb.org/news/frontline/overtesting-of-floridas-students/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Part IV: Test Mania - How Florida Lost its Focus on What Matters in Education

Florida's students have suffered from the policy decisions made in Tallahassee over the past two decades.

Low wages have forced many dedicated educators to leave the profession because they simply can't afford to do what they love to do.

To make matters worse, students suffer from policy decisions that force highly effective teachers to leave a school just weeks into the school year because of their VAM score. And too many teachers do not have the freedom to teach or to stand up for their students' best interest because of annual contracts.

As bad as all of that is, perhaps the single greatest negative impact on Florida's students over the past two decades is our state's obsession with testing, which has cost billions of dollars and even more importantly sucked the joy out of teaching and learning. This combination of bad policy and low pay has resulted in more than 300,000 Florida students without a certified teacher at the start of the 2019-20 school year.

In part four of our series, we examine Florida's Test-Mania.

Testing, Testing, and More Testing

To gain a full understanding of just how much testing Florida's students are subjected to, take a look at the 19-page assessment schedule from Osceola County. It's easy to see that once students take their first standardized test within their first 30 days of kindergarten; they spend much of their next 13 years in public schools either taking a test or preparing to take a test.

Supporters of Florida's accountability system would make a couple of arguments to defend the status quo, but those claims are, at best, disingenuous.

The most common refrain heard from the supporters of Florida's testing bureaucracy is that students spend just a few hours annually taking the Florida Standards Assessment (FSA).

While it is true that students spend less than 11 hours of the total school year taking the FSA, what is most important is not how much time an individual student spends taking tests. Instead, the metric should be how much instructional time is impacted due to testing.

Increasingly, standardized tests are given online, and lack of sufficient technology and infrastructure causes schools' schedules to be upended for weeks, or months, on end in order to test every student.

The South Florida Sun Sentinel reports that Westward Elementary in West Palm Beach had to close its media center for 90 days - a full one half of the school year - in order to accommodate testing. Of course, it's not just media centers that are impacted. All too often, vital school personnel such as counselors and speech and language pathologists are pulled from their assigned duties to help monitor and/or proctor testing.

It should be clear that the impact of testing on students extends far beyond simply calculating the amount of time they spend taking the FSA.

Tallahassee politicians also like to blame school districts for over-testing. They point out that most of the time students spend testing is for district tests, not state tests. This, too, has a kernel of truth but misses a much larger point of the district-administered tests.

The names, number and length of time to administer these tests vary by school district, but what is clear is that Florida law requires a "schoolwide system of progress monitoring for all students ..." and that translates to benchmark testing and computer programs such as i-Ready, which many students around the state use in excess of an hour each week.

Instead of engaging in learning, students are forced to spend an inordinate amount taking "progress monitoring" assessments. All this testing is purported to serve a larger purpose of identifying areas where students need remediation and or enrichment, but the reality is very different.

Assessment Without Purpose

The stated purpose in law of Florida's standardized tests is to provide data that can be "used by districts to improve instruction; by students, parents, and teachers to guide learning objectives ..." The reality is far different.

Students in Florida's public schools take their first standardized test, the Florida Kindergarten Readiness Screener ( FLKRS), within 30 days of entering kindergarten. What educational value is there in administering a standardized test to a 5-year old? None.

This is not just our opinion. The Erikson Institute's Research Center for Children and Social Policy had this to say about standardized test results for children ages 8 and younger:

Given that young children are undergoing significant changes in their first eight years of life in terms of brain growth, physiology, and emotional regulation, and recognizing that children come into this world with varied inheritance, experience, and opportunities for nurturance, it is not difficult to imagine that a brief snapshot of a child's skills and abilities taken on a single occasion will be unable to capture the shifts and changes in that development. To draw long-term conclusions from such assessments seems baseless. ( page 9)

It is not just the FLKRS that serves no discernable, educational purpose. That holds true for most, if not all, of the high-stakes tests that Florida's students are subjected to. One only need to look at the Florida Standards Assessment (FSA) report students receive to understand just how little educational value the test has.

Months after taking a test, students receive a report that tells them how many points they earned in vague categories such as "craft and structure" and "integration of knowledge and details." What possible benefit is it to a student, teacher or parent to know a child earned 20 out of 22 points on craft and structure? Does that score provide useful, actionable information that was previously unknown? Will a student head back to school the next year with a renewed focus and determination to master craft?

Despite Florida's decades-long obsession with high-stakes standardized testing, the reality is little or no useful information for individual students is gleaned from these tests. Whatever purpose standardized testing serves, it is not for the educational benefit of students.

Narrowing of the Curriculum

It should be clear by now that the excessive testing and data monitoring has led to a significant loss of instructional time.

When a researcher from the University of Central Florida investigated the impact of high stakes testing on music classes, he found the following:

"[D]emands to meet FCAT standards were resulting in students being pulled from classes for remediation and music teachers being required to teach reading as opposed to music." (p. 105)

Unfortunately, since the time this research was conducted things have only gotten worse. It's not just that music teachers are being asked to teach reading instead of music, for far too many students there are no music classes at all. The irony of this is that there is a considerable amount of research which suggests that arts education is beneficial to overall student success. So, one of the things that we know would help students academically (as well as socially and emotionally) has been reduced or eliminated due to the pressures to get students to perform better academically. Such is the plight of students under the Florida model of accountability.

However, it is not just the arts that students are missing out on due to increased testing pressures. In recent years, both the National Science Teachers Association and the Education Commission of the States have lamented the loss of science instruction in elementary school due to the heavy emphasis of preparing for high-stakes testing in reading and math.

There is hardly a legislative session that goes by in Tallahassee without significant discussion on ensuring that a greater emphasis is placed on civics in Florida's public schools. Civics education is something that we strongly support and tends to be one area of bipartisan support in the Legislature as well. But it must be noted that many of the champions of returning civics instruction to the classroom also supported SB 736, the largest expansion of high-stakes testing that Florida has ever seen, which has been largely responsible for the narrowing of the curriculum.

Cashing in on Kids

Beyond the very real cost of lost instructional time and narrowing of the curriculum, there are significant financial costs to Florida's testing obsession.

Since September 2017, the Florida Department of Education has expended almost $3.5 million on the FLKRS test that all kindergarten students must take within the first 30 days of the school year.

In 2014, Florida contracted with the American Institutes of Research (AIR) for administration of the FSA. Since that time, AIR has received more than one-quarter of a billion dollars from Florida's taxpayers and is slated to receive millions more before the contract expires.

The same time that AIR was being paid for the FSA, another corporate testing giant, NCS Pearson, had raked in almost $200 million for additional standardized tests including End of Course (EOC) exams. This is on top of the millions of dollars Pearson received from Florida's taxpayers for the creation of PARCC, a standardized test which was never administered in Florida.

And the state-mandated progress monitoring tests that districts use cost money as well. Duval County alone received an almost $1 million quote from Curriculum Associates, the parent company of i-Ready, for its progress-monitoring tests. In fact, monetizing progress-monitoring assessments has made Curriculum Associates one of the fastest growing companies in Massachusetts. Their revenues have quintupled since 2012.

It remains unclear how students have benefitted from these assessments, but the standardized testing industry has reaped tremendous financial benefits. Florida's students deserve better. They deserve a system of education that recognizes students are much more than datapoints, and they deserve a system that returns autonomy to professional educators instead of trying to implement one-size-fits-all solutions from Tallahassee.

A Better Way

We are not opposed to assessment. In fact, as educators we believe that teacher-driven, student-centered assessment is a vital part of every student's educational journey. Each assessment must serve a specific purpose, and the purpose should never be to simply fulfill a state mandate or to enrich Pearson or AIR.

In addition to removing the high stakes associated with standardized testing, there are four specific steps the Legislature should take to return assessment to its intended purpose.

Fewer tests
Current federal law requires states to implement statewide assessments in math and English Language Arts annually in grades 3-8 and once in grades 9-12. Florida should have no mandated testing beyond the federal requirements. Teachers must be treated as professionals and trusted to monitor the progress of their students without spending millions of dollars and countless time on standardized progress-monitoring assessments.

Feedback by standard
Since 2015 state law has dictated, "When available, instructional personnel must be provided with information on student achievement of standards and benchmarks in order to improve instruction." However, this information has never been provided. If the purpose of standardized testing is to measure what students have and have not mastered, test results should be able to provide that information. To do otherwise is to serve the needs of adults, not students.

Test transparency
State law also dictates that the Department of Education, starting in 2021, "shall publish" statewide assessments "at least once on a triennial basis." While certainly an improvement over the current absolute lack of transparency, it's still a far cry from being sufficient considering the impact of the outcomes. High-stakes decisions are made based on these tests including student retention and graduation decisions and employment decisions for educators. Those who suffer the repercussions of these high stakes should not have to wait until 2021 to see the tests. Furthermore, the tests should be released on an annual basis, not a triennial basis.

Return test-making to state universities
Florida's state tests have not always been made by for-profit multinational corporations like Pearson and AIR. A timeline of standardized testing on the Department of Education website serves as a reminder that many of the educators who are currently working in Florida's schools took standardized tests that were created by professional educators and by state universities in Florida. Returning the process of creating these tests to educators and the state university system would go a long way toward ensuring that Florida actually follows the state law that states, the "primary purpose of the student assessment program is to provide student academic achievement and learning gains data to students, parents, teachers, school administrators, and school district staff."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Florida's students have suffered from the policy decisions made in Tallahassee over the past two decades. Low wages have forced many dedicated educators to leave the profession because they simply can't afford to do what they love to do.

# data[].attributes.body
In the article, Is It Time to Kill Annual Testing? Sawchuk (2019) outlines several points related to standardized testing:

the standardized testing system in the United States is dysfunctional.

the testing is disliked by educators and the scores are reported too late in the school year to inform instruction.

currently, federal law mandates testing so it cannot be eliminated but policies can be rewritten.

although the results offer "longitudinal, comparable data in each state on student performance" (p. 16) alternatives that better capture student learning like portfolios and writing prompts are far more expensive, take more time, and are difficult to compare.

some alternatives to annual testing are testing samplings of students as opposed to every student, test students every two to three years, integrate essay tests with curriculum, and using student artifacts from classwork.

disadvantages to eliminating annual testing are also recognized-equity, transparency, and loss of data are of utmost concern.

some states are experimenting with alternatives to annual standardized assessments.

Reference
Sawchuk, S. (2019, January 8). Is it time to kill annual testing? Education Week, 38(17), 16-17. https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2019/01/09/is-it-time-to-kill-annual-testing.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Editor's Note: Associate Editor Stephen Sawchuk covers curriculum and instruction. This analysis is part of a special report exploring pressing trends in education. Read the full report: 10 Big Ideas in Education.
Ask anyone from a school accountability expert to a parent of a school-age child, and you will get near universal agreement that we have a dysfunctional standardized-testing system in the United States.

Educators do not like the annual statewide tests: They inform school penalties, not learning, because the results come so late in the school year. They fail to match any specific curriculum, and generally don't deeply measure students' analytical capabilities or the dispositions employers and colleges value.

Our nearly 20-year experiment with yearly federally required exams has boosted math scores, research indicates, but those gains have petered out as accountability pressures have grown more acute. And efforts over the last decade to produce better tests have been met with tepid enthusiasm.

Could classroom assignments really measure student progress as effectively as standardized testing? Scroll down for more from Keith Dysarz.

For most teachers and students, testing remains the educational equivalent of a root canal. It's endured, and then recalled with relief. It's not something deeply integrated with teaching that reinforces long-term educational goals like developing students' ability to engage in thoughtful, reasoned argumentation.

The opt-out movement was a warning sign, the first rumble of a sentiment that has spread, just like the teacher protests of the past year. If policymakers want to preserve the long-term health of our testing ecosystem-and help teachers feel invested in, rather than victimized by it-the time to act is now.

The main questions on the table: Should we rethink the annual testing of every student? Could such a revision be balanced against the clear need to maintain a focus on those students who have been least well-served by K-12 education?

For now, annual testing isn't going anywhere; it's enshrined in federal law. But if the politics of the last two years prove anything, it's that longstanding policies, even those long thought inviolable, can be rewritten.

With testing, you can't have your cake and eat it too: Year-end testing offers longitudinal, comparable data in each state on student performance. But it's severely limited in scope and depth. The alternative-testing that better captures student learning, including portfolios and extended writing prompts-costs far more in money and time and is harder to make valid and comparable.

The Obama administration attempted to square this circle by providing seed funding for richer annual tests, but the results were less revolutionary than proponents had hoped, and they were quickly caught up by the anti-common-core and opt-out movements.

What would a world with less-frequent testing look like? There are alternatives worth considering, although each contains significant tradeoffs:

* Do what the National Assessment of Educational Progress does, by measuring samples of students rather than every student. The resulting savings could be put into test formats that better measure students' ability to integrate knowledge and analyze.

* Continue to test every student, but do so only every two to three years, again investing the cost savings into more useful systems.

* Integrate testing with curriculum practices, as is the case in the United Kingdom and most European countries-where mandatory tests used to grant "leaving certificates" and other student credentials directly reflect the actual curriculum taught in schools and require the extensive use of essays.

* Revisit the notion of drawing from classroom artifacts of student work to inform less-frequent testing results.

No discussion of these alternatives can be complete without pointing out their very real disadvantages, for equity and transparency, at a time when education advocates are pushing harder for both.

The point of testing every child, every year, was to expose the serious performance gaps among and within schools. That's why many civil rights groups support the practice so strongly, and fear what could happen if it's lost.

Doing away with annual testing could also hurt efforts to study what's working at scale. After all, annual testing led to the development of data systems that could track kids' trajectories over time, prompting a new wave of empirical research on school and teacher quality.

Finally, the ideas above are also ambitious. Linking classroom practice to testing is rarely done in the United States, and previous attempts to use informal data from classroom work samples have faltered. Technology could help, but in the age of Big Data, it also raises all kinds of privacy challenges.

Nevertheless, there are signs of the beginnings of a transformation: States and school districts are experimenting with several ideas.

Georgia is revisiting the idea of using a series of smaller, classroom-based tests better aligned to everyday lessons under its own state-level initiative.

A few other innovations are emerging thanks to a small (and not terribly popular) pilot run by the U.S. Department of Education. Louisiana, for instance, is hard at work creating a reading test based on the actual novels and texts students read, rather than dull, random reading passages that favor students with the most background knowledge. And with federal permission, New Hampshire allows districts to use shared performance-based tasks developed by teachers for some grades, and traditional tests in others.

Some individual districts are also charting their own paths: Prince William County, Va., among others, uses a British exam system more tightly integrated with curriculum goals in a handful of its schools.

What will happen next in testing? It's largely anyone's guess. But our current divorcing of standardized testing from the everyday aims of schooling seems untenable for the long haul. It's time for smart policymakers, educators, and testing experts to lay out a new path.

PERSPECTIVE

How to Make Classroom Assignments Count
By Keith Dysarz
Measuring student learning is a critical component of education. Assessments, when done well, provide essential data for guiding students' learning and inform teachers, parents, and school leaders of students' progress. But when done haphazardly and without strategy, assessments waste time and have limited value.

As frustration with standardized testing regimes continues to roil educational waters, districts and schools should pay attention to an option that can be just as informative in measuring student progress: classroom assignments. The tasks that teachers ask students to complete daily are an important piece of the larger assessment puzzle.

Assignments that challenge students provide an opportunity for simultaneous learning and assessing. Tasks that reflect grade-level standards can help students build their critical thinking skills. Such high-quality tasks are a type of formative assessment, yielding immediate and actionable data on students' proficiency.

The problem? As significant as assignments can be, research from the Education Trust shows that most student assignments fall far short of demanding college- and career-ready standards. In the more than 6,000 assignments we analyzed, less than 12 percent pushed student thinking to higher levels. The majority of assignments were low-level, provided little-to-no opportunity for students to communicate their understanding in writing or through discussion, and did little to engage them in content. Similarly alarming results were found in research by TNTP.

Notice the contrast, for instance, between a 10th grade English assignment that asks students studying a Susan B. Anthony essay, "What does 'suffrage' mean?" and "What was the central idea of the article?" with another assignment that calls for 10th graders to write an essay reflecting on power differences linked to cultural accommodation using the short story they have just read and other specific evidence.

If what teachers are asking students to do is not on grade level and does not push their thinking or provide opportunities to justify their reasoning, there is little value in using it for formative assessment.

Educators must be equipped to recognize the features of high-quality classroom assignments, whether garnered from highly rated instructional programs, district curriculum, or teacher-created tasks. When such assignments are the norm, educators will also have the kind of meaningful formative assessments our students deserve.
Keith Dysarz is the director of P-12 Practice at the Education Trust.
Published in Print: January 9, 2019, as The End of Annual Testing?

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Editor's Note: Associate Editor Stephen Sawchuk covers curriculum and instruction. This analysis is part of a special report exploring pressing trends in education. Read the full report: 10 Big Ideas in Education. Ask anyone from a school accountability expert to a parent of a school-age child, and you will get near universal agreement that we have a dysfunctional standardized-testing system in the United States.

# data[].attributes.body
In the article It's time to rethink state assessment, Minnich (2020) suggests that district leaders and teachers would like less testing and tests that are timelier and offer more meaningful summative results. In turn state education departments are seeking ways to reduce testing and support teachers. If district and state goals are shared, then why is there such a divide? The NWEA supports states by developing new approaches to testing. These adaptive, through-year assessments measure growth and proficiency. These assessments can offer a clearer view of school performance. Building an innovative approach to assessment is the goal.
Reference
Minnich, C. (2020, March 17). It's time to rethink state assessment. Education Dive.  https://www.educationdive.com/spons/its-time-to-rethink-state-assessment/573844/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
District leaders and teachers have long desired less testing―not to mention timelier and more meaningful summative test results.

State departments of education are looking for ways to reduce overall testing and support teachers in challenging students to meet or exceed grade-level expectations.

The goals are shared, and yet a divide between district and state assessment has persisted. It doesn't have to be this way. The Every Student Succeeds Act introduced the opportunity for states to bridge this divide by adopting innovative models for statewide testing. At NWEA, we're excited to support states in this effort by developing new approaches like adaptive, through-year assessment.

It uses assessments administered in the fall, winter, and spring to measure both growth and proficiency and produce summative proficiency scores at year's end. We are building this solution for grades 3-8 in English language arts, mathematics, and science. Our goal is to support state departments of education in thinking differently about accountability assessment and in partnering with districts to improve teaching and learning.

Through-year assessment takes what districts love about MAP® Growth™ -that it meets kids where they are, regardless of grade level-and adds measurement of grade-level performance (otherwise known as proficiency). Grade-level performance information from the three assessments culminates in summative proficiency scores, eliminating the need for the annual summative test.

We can unify state and district assessments to amplify impact.

State departments of education that adopt through-year assessment will benefit from a more coherent and efficient assessment system. They will also see how much learning is happening in schools from fall to spring, providing a clearer view of school performance.

Growth measures currently used by states are rooted in year-over-year changes in summative proficiency, which is important data. But it doesn't show when schools are growing students a lot, even if they aren't yet proficient. Considering within-year growth as an additional measure will better inform states about which schools need the most help and which ones are using promising practices that could be shared with similar schools.

Districts in states that implement through-year assessment will experience a reduction in overall testing because it will provide the growth and benchmark data they get from current interim assessments while also replacing the annual summative test. Through-year assessment will be configured to reflect the specific "blueprint" a state uses for its summative test. It will yield instructionally useful grade-level performance information, while still adapting outside of grade level as needed.

Each adaptive assessment draws from the full test "blueprint," so districts can retain local control over curriculum, scope, and sequence. In addition, each assessment informs the next one. Results from the three tests are not "added up"; if students aren't proficient in fall or winter, those scores won't count against them. They just get another chance in the spring to show what they know. Through-year assessment will also link to the MAP Growth scale, so districts in states that adopt it will still have access to RIT information and our national norms.

It takes time and partnership to change the system.

What we're doing has never been done before, so it is going to take time for us to build this solution. We're lucky to have two partners on board with us to serve as critical early adopters: the state of Nebraska and a consortium of districts in Georgia (as part of Georgia's participation in the federal innovative assessment pilot program). Both will engage in research studies with us beginning next school year to inform their transition to through-year assessment. Through our work together, we'll be able to ensure that we develop a valid, reliable solution that meets requirements for summative measures and produces timely information that is easily understood and applied in the classroom by educators.

That said, maybe as you've been reading this, you've thought to yourself, "That doesn't sound like the right fit for our state or for us." That's okay, too. We understand that some states are perfectly happy with the traditional summative test or are looking for other ways to improve it and know that MAP Growth-our flagship product-will continue to be the right solution for many districts. Through-year assessment is just one more solution we are adding to our portfolio to support educators in fostering equity in opportunity to grow-and to achieve-for all kids.

We must do better for our students. Now, we can.

It's time to challenge ourselves and the status quo. It's time to dismantle the barrier between assessments that drive student learning and assessments that measure school performance. Together, we can build a unified, innovative approach to assessment. What better time than now?

Join us and learn more about through-year assessment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
District leaders and teachers have long desired less testing―not to mention timelier and more meaningful summative test results. State departments of education are looking for ways to reduce overall testing and support teachers in challenging students to meet or exceed grade-level expectations. The goals are shared, and yet a divide between district and state assessment has persisted.

# data[].attributes.body
The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution

Source:  Constitutional (United States)

Summary:  The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution gives states gives powers not delegated to the United States under the constitution to the states (U.S. Const. amend. X). States are given the power to establish of a system of public education.
Reference
U.S. Const. amend. X

# data[].attributes.body
Every Student Succeeds Act

Source:  statutory (federal)

Summary:  The Every Student Succeeds Act gives states the authority to develop their own plans for student achievement accountability.  The states must follow the federal guidelines outlined in ESSA.  Plans for annual testing in reading and math for students in grades 3 through 8 and at least once in high school and testing in science once in elementary, middle, and high school must be included in the state plan.  Accommodations for these tests must be provided according to students’ Individualized Education Plan (IEP) and 504 if applicable (20 USC § 6311).
Reference
Every Student Succeeds Act, 20 USC § 6311.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
§6311. State plans

(a) Filing for grants

(1) In general

For any State desiring to receive a grant under this part, the State educational agency shall file with the Secretary a plan that is-

(A) developed by the State educational agency with timely and meaningful consultation with the Governor, members of the State legislature and State board of education (if the State has a State board of education), local educational agencies (including those located in rural areas), representatives of Indian tribes located in the State, teachers, principals, other school leaders, charter school leaders (if the State has charter schools), specialized instructional support personnel, paraprofessionals, administrators, other staff, and parents; and

(B) is coordinated with other programs under this chapter, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (20 U.S.C. 701 et seq.), the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.), the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (29 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.), the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.), the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858 et seq.), the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (20 U.S.C. 9501 et seq.), the Education Technical Assistance Act of 2002 (et. seq.), the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act (20 U.S.C. 9621 et seq.), the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11301 et seq.), and the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (29 U.S.C. 3271 et seq.).

(2) Limitation

Consultation required under paragraph (1)(A) shall not interfere with the timely submission of the plan required under this section.

(3) Consolidated plan

A State plan submitted under paragraph (1) may be submitted as part of a consolidated plan under section 7842 of this title.

(4) Peer review and Secretarial approval

(A) In general

The Secretary shall-

(i) establish a peer-review process to assist in the review of State plans;

(ii) establish multidisciplinary peer-review teams and appoint members of such teams-

(I) who are representative of-

(aa) parents, teachers, principals, other school leaders, specialized instructional support personnel, State educational agencies, local educational agencies, and the community (including the business community); and

(bb) researchers who are familiar with-

(AA) the implementation of academic standards, assessments, or accountability systems; and

(BB) how to meet the needs of disadvantaged students, children with disabilities, and English learners, the needs of low-performing schools, and other educational needs of students;

(II) that include, to the extent practicable, majority representation of individuals who, in the most recent 2 years, have had practical experience in the classroom, school administration, or State or local government (such as direct employees of a school, local educational agency, or State educational agency); and

(III) who represent a regionally diverse cross-section of States;

(iii) make available to the public, including by such means as posting to the Department's website, the list of peer reviewers who have reviewed State plans under this section;

(iv) ensure that the peer-review teams consist of varied individuals so that the same peer reviewers are not reviewing all of the State plans;

(v) approve a State plan not later than 120 days after its submission, unless the Secretary meets the requirements of clause (vi);

(vi) have the authority to disapprove a State plan only if-

(I) the Secretary-

(aa) determines how the State plan fails to meet the requirements of this section;

(bb) immediately provides to the State, in writing, notice of such determination, and the supporting information and rationale to substantiate such determination;

(cc) offers the State an opportunity to revise and resubmit its State plan, and provides the State-

(AA) technical assistance to assist the State in meeting the requirements of this section;

(BB) in writing, all peer-review comments, suggestions, recommendations, or concerns relating to its State plan; and

(CC) a hearing, unless the State declines the opportunity for such hearing; and

(II) the State-

(aa) does not revise and resubmit its State plan; or

(bb) in a case in which a State revises and resubmits its State plan after a hearing is conducted under subclause (I)(cc)(CC), or after the State has declined the opportunity for such a hearing, the Secretary determines that such revised State plan does not meet the requirements of this section.

(B) Purpose of peer review

The peer-review process shall be designed to-

(i) maximize collaboration with each State;

(ii) promote effective implementation of the challenging State academic standards through State and local innovation; and

(iii) provide transparent, timely, and objective feedback to States designed to strengthen the technical and overall quality of the State plans.

(C) Standard and nature of review

Peer reviewers shall conduct an objective review of State plans in their totality and out of respect for State and local judgments, with the goal of supporting State- and local-led innovation and providing objective feedback on the technical and overall quality of a State plan.

(D) Prohibition

Neither the Secretary nor the political appointees of the Department, may attempt to participate in, or influence, the peer-review process.

(5) Public review

All written communications, feedback, and notifications under this subsection shall be conducted in a manner that is transparent and immediately made available to the public on the Department's website, including-

(A) plans submitted or resubmitted by a State;

(B) peer-review guidance, notes, and comments and the names of the peer reviewers (once the peer reviewers have completed their work);

(C) State plan determinations by the Secretary, including approvals or disapprovals; and

(D) notices and transcripts of hearings under this section.

(6) Duration of the plan

(A) In general

Each State plan shall-

(i) remain in effect for the duration of the State's participation under this part; and

(ii) be periodically reviewed and revised as necessary by the State educational agency to reflect changes in the State's strategies and programs under this part.

(B) Additional information

(i) In general

If a State makes significant changes to its plan at any time, such as the adoption of new challenging State academic standards or new academic assessments under subsection (b), or changes to its accountability system under subsection (c), such information shall be submitted to the Secretary in the form of revisions or amendments to the State plan.

(ii) Review of revised plans

The Secretary shall review the information submitted under clause (i) and approve changes to the State plan, or disapprove such changes in accordance with paragraph (4)(A)(vi), within 90 days, without undertaking the peer-review process under such paragraph.

(iii) Special rule for standards

If a State makes changes to its challenging State academic standards, the requirements of subsection (b)(1), including the requirement that such standards need not be submitted to the Secretary pursuant to subsection (b)(1)(A), shall still apply.

(7) Failure to meet requirements

If a State fails to meet any of the requirements of this section, the Secretary may withhold funds for State administration under this part until the Secretary determines that the State has fulfilled those requirements.

(8) Public comment

Each State shall make the State plan publicly available for public comment for a period of not less than 30 days, by electronic means and in an easily accessible format, prior to submission to the Secretary for approval under this subsection. The State, in the plan it files under this subsection, shall provide an assurance that public comments were taken into account in the development of the State plan.

(b) Challenging academic standards and academic assessments

(1) Challenging State academic standards

(A) In general

Each State, in the plan it files under subsection (a), shall provide an assurance that the State has adopted challenging academic content standards and aligned academic achievement standards (referred to in this chapter as "challenging State academic standards"), which achievement standards shall include not less than 3 levels of achievement, that will be used by the State, its local educational agencies, and its schools to carry out this part. A State shall not be required to submit such challenging State academic standards to the Secretary.

(B) Same standards

Except as provided in subparagraph (E), the standards required by subparagraph (A) shall-

(i) apply to all public schools and public school students in the State; and

(ii) with respect to academic achievement standards, include the same knowledge, skills, and levels of achievement expected of all public school students in the State.

(C) Subjects

The State shall have such academic standards for mathematics, reading or language arts, and science, and may have such standards for any other subject determined by the State.

(D) Alignment

(i) In general

Each State shall demonstrate that the challenging State academic standards are aligned with entrance requirements for credit-bearing coursework in the system of public higher education in the State and relevant State career and technical education standards.

(ii) Rule of construction

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to authorize public institutions of higher education to determine the specific challenging State academic standards required under this paragraph.

(E) Alternate academic achievement standards for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities

(i) In general

The State may, through a documented and validated standards-setting process, adopt alternate academic achievement standards for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, provided those standards-

(I) are aligned with the challenging State academic content standards under subparagraph (A);

(II) promote access to the general education curriculum, consistent with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.);

(III) reflect professional judgment as to the highest possible standards achievable by such students;

(IV) are designated in the individualized education program developed under section 614(d)(3) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1414(d)(3)) for each such student as the academic achievement standards that will be used for the student; and

(V) are aligned to ensure that a student who meets the alternate academic achievement standards is on track to pursue postsecondary education or employment, consistent with the purposes of Public Law 93-112 [29 U.S.C. 701 et seq.], as in effect on July 22, 2014.

(ii) Prohibition on any other alternate or modified academic achievement standards

A State shall not develop, or implement for use under this part, any alternate academic achievement standards for children with disabilities that are not alternate academic achievement standards that meet the requirements of clause (i).

(F) English language proficiency standards

Each State plan shall demonstrate that the State has adopted English language proficiency standards that-

(i) are derived from the 4 recognized domains of speaking, listening, reading, and writing;

(ii) address the different proficiency levels of English learners; and

(iii) are aligned with the challenging State academic standards.

(G) Prohibitions

(i) Standards review or approval

A State shall not be required to submit any standards developed under this subsection to the Secretary for review or approval.

(ii) Federal control

The Secretary shall not have the authority to mandate, direct, control, coerce, or exercise any direction or supervision over any of the challenging State academic standards adopted or implemented by a State.

(H) Existing standards

Nothing in this part shall prohibit a State from revising, consistent with this section, any standards adopted under this part before or after December 10, 2015.

(2) Academic assessments

(A) In general

Each State plan shall demonstrate that the State educational agency, in consultation with local educational agencies, has implemented a set of high-quality student academic assessments in mathematics, reading or language arts, and science. The State retains the right to implement such assessments in any other subject chosen by the State.

(B) Requirements

The assessments under subparagraph (A) shall-

(i) except as provided in subparagraph (D), be-

(I) the same academic assessments used to measure the achievement of all public elementary school and secondary school students in the State; and

(II) administered to all public elementary school and secondary school students in the State;

(ii) be aligned with the challenging State academic standards, and provide coherent and timely information about student attainment of such standards and whether the student is performing at the student's grade level;

(iii) be used for purposes for which such assessments are valid and reliable, consistent with relevant, nationally recognized professional and technical testing standards, objectively measure academic achievement, knowledge, and skills, and be tests that do not evaluate or assess personal or family beliefs and attitudes, or publicly disclose personally identifiable information;

(iv) be of adequate technical quality for each purpose required under this chapter and consistent with the requirements of this section, the evidence of which shall be made public, including on the website of the State educational agency;

(v)(I) in the case of mathematics and reading or language arts, be administered-

(aa) in each of grades 3 through 8; and

(bb) at least once in grades 9 through 12;

(II) in the case of science, be administered not less than one time during-

(aa) grades 3 through 5;

(bb) grades 6 through 9; and

(cc) grades 10 through 12; and

(III) in the case of any other subject chosen by the State, be administered at the discretion of the State;

(vi) involve multiple up-to-date measures of student academic achievement, including measures that assess higher-order thinking skills and understanding, which may include measures of student academic growth and may be partially delivered in the form of portfolios, projects, or extended performance tasks;

(vii) provide for-

(I) the participation in such assessments of all students;

(II) the appropriate accommodations, such as interoperability with, and ability to use, assistive technology, for children with disabilities (as defined in section 602(3) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1401(3))), including students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, and students with a disability who are provided accommodations under an Act other than the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.), necessary to measure the academic achievement of such children relative to the challenging State academic standards or alternate academic achievement standards described in paragraph (1)(E); and

(III) the inclusion of English learners, who shall be assessed in a valid and reliable manner and provided appropriate accommodations on assessments administered to such students under this paragraph, including, to the extent practicable, assessments in the language and form most likely to yield accurate data on what such students know and can do in academic content areas, until such students have achieved English language proficiency, as determined under subparagraph (G);

(viii) at the State's discretion-

(I) be administered through a single summative assessment; or

(II) be administered through multiple statewide interim assessments during the course of the academic year that result in a single summative score that provides valid, reliable, and transparent information on student achievement or growth;

(ix) notwithstanding clause (vii)(III), provide for assessments (using tests in English) of reading or language arts of any student who has attended school in the United States (not including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) for 3 or more consecutive school years, except that if the local educational agency determines, on a case-by-case individual basis, that academic assessments in another language or form would likely yield more accurate and reliable information on what such student knows and can do, the local educational agency may make a determination to assess such student in the appropriate language other than English for a period that does not exceed 2 additional consecutive years, provided that such student has not yet reached a level of English language proficiency sufficient to yield valid and reliable information on what such student knows and can do on tests (written in English) of reading or language arts;

(x) produce individual student interpretive, descriptive, and diagnostic reports, consistent with clause (iii), regarding achievement on such assessments that allow parents, teachers, principals, and other school leaders to understand and address the specific academic needs of students, and that are provided to parents, teachers, and school leaders, as soon as is practicable after the assessment is given, in an understandable and uniform format, and to the extent practicable, in a language that parents can understand;

(xi) enable results to be disaggregated within each State, local educational agency, and school by-

(I) each major racial and ethnic group;

(II) economically disadvantaged students as compared to students who are not economically disadvantaged;

(III) children with disabilities as compared to children without disabilities;

(IV) English proficiency status;

(V) gender; and

(VI) migrant status,

except that such disaggregation shall not be required in the case of a State, local educational agency, or a school in which the number of students in a subgroup is insufficient to yield statistically reliable information or the results would reveal personally identifiable information about an individual student;

(xii) enable itemized score analyses to be produced and reported, consistent with clause (iii), to local educational agencies and schools, so that parents, teachers, principals, other school leaders, and administrators can interpret and address the specific academic needs of students as indicated by the students' achievement on assessment items; and

(xiii) be developed, to the extent practicable, using the principles of universal design for learning.

(C) Exception for advanced mathematics in middle school

A State may exempt any 8th grade student from the assessment in mathematics described in subparagraph (B)(v)(I)(aa) if-

(i) such student takes the end-of-course assessment the State typically administers to meet the requirements of subparagraph (B)(v)(I)(bb) in mathematics;

(ii) such student's achievement on such end-of-course assessment is used for purposes of subsection (c)(4)(B)(i), in lieu of such student's achievement on the mathematics assessment required under subparagraph (B)(v)(I)(aa), and such student is counted as participating in the assessment for purposes of subsection (c)(4)(B)(vi); and

(iii) in high school, such student takes a mathematics assessment pursuant to subparagraph (B)(v)(I)(bb) that-

(I) is any end-of-course assessment or other assessment that is more advanced than the assessment taken by such student under clause (i) of this subparagraph; and

(II) shall be used to measure such student's academic achievement for purposes of subsection (c)(4)(B)(i).

(D) Alternate assessments for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities

(i) Alternate assessments aligned with alternate academic achievement standards

A State may provide for alternate assessments aligned with the challenging State academic standards and alternate academic achievement standards described in paragraph (1)(E) for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities, if the State-

(I) consistent with clause (ii), ensures that, for each subject, the total number of students assessed in such subject using the alternate assessments does not exceed 1 percent of the total number of all students in the State who are assessed in such subject;

(II) ensures that the parents of such students are clearly informed, as part of the process for developing the individualized education program (as defined in section 614(d)(1)(A) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1414(d)(1)(A)))-

(aa) that their child's academic achievement will be measured based on such alternate standards; and

(bb) how participation in such assessments may delay or otherwise affect the student from completing the requirements for a regular high school diploma;

(III) promotes, consistent with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.), the involvement and progress of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities in the general education curriculum;

(IV) describes in the State plan the steps the State has taken to incorporate universal design for learning, to the extent feasible, in alternate assessments;

(V) describes in the State plan that general and special education teachers, and other appropriate staff-

(aa) know how to administer the alternate assessments; and

(bb) make appropriate use of accommodations for students with disabilities on all assessments required under this paragraph;

(VI) develops, disseminates information on, and promotes the use of appropriate accommodations to increase the number of students with significant cognitive disabilities-

(aa) participating in academic instruction and assessments for the grade level in which the student is enrolled; and

(bb) who are tested based on challenging State academic standards for the grade level in which the student is enrolled; and

(VII) does not preclude a student with the most significant cognitive disabilities who takes an alternate assessment based on alternate academic achievement standards from attempting to complete the requirements for a regular high school diploma.

(ii) Special rules

(I) Responsibility under IDEA

Subject to the authority and requirements for the individualized education program team for a child with a disability under section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(VI)(bb) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1414(d)(1)(A)(i)(VI)(bb)), such team, consistent with the guidelines established by the State and required under section 612(a)(16)(C) of such Act (20 U.S.C. 1412(c)(16)(C)) and clause (i)(II) of this subparagraph, shall determine when a child with a significant cognitive disability shall participate in an alternate assessment aligned with the alternate academic achievement standards.

(II) Prohibition on local cap

Nothing in this subparagraph shall be construed to permit the Secretary or a State educational agency to impose on any local educational agency a cap on the percentage of students administered an alternate assessment under this subparagraph, except that a local educational agency exceeding the cap applied to the State under clause (i)(I) shall submit information to the State educational agency justifying the need to exceed such cap.

(III) State support

A State shall provide appropriate oversight, as determined by the State, of any local educational agency that is required to submit information to the State under subclause (II).

(IV) Waiver authority

This subparagraph shall be subject to the waiver authority under section 7861 of this title.

(E) State authority

If a State educational agency provides evidence, which is satisfactory to the Secretary, that neither the State educational agency nor any other State government official, agency, or entity has sufficient authority, under State law, to adopt challenging State academic standards, and academic assessments aligned with such standards, which will be applicable to all students enrolled in the State's public elementary schools and secondary schools, then the State educational agency may meet the requirements of this subsection by-

(i) adopting academic standards and academic assessments that meet the requirements of this subsection, on a statewide basis, and limiting their applicability to students served under this part; or

(ii) adopting and implementing policies that ensure that each local educational agency in the State that receives grants under this part will adopt academic content and student academic achievement standards, and academic assessments aligned with such standards, which-

(I) meet all of the criteria in this subsection and any regulations regarding such standards and assessments that the Secretary may publish; and

(II) are applicable to all students served by each such local educational agency.

(F) Language assessments

(i) In general

Each State plan shall identify the languages other than English that are present to a significant extent in the participating student population of the State and indicate the languages for which annual student academic assessments are not available and are needed.

(ii) Secretarial assistance

The State shall make every effort to develop such assessments and may request assistance from the Secretary if linguistically accessible academic assessment measures are needed. Upon request, the Secretary shall assist with the identification of appropriate academic assessment measures in the needed languages, but shall not mandate a specific academic assessment or mode of instruction.

(G) Assessments of English language proficiency

(i) In general

Each State plan shall demonstrate that local educational agencies in the State will provide for an annual assessment of English proficiency of all English learners in the schools served by the State educational agency.

(ii) Alignment

The assessments described in clause (i) shall be aligned with the State's English language proficiency standards described in paragraph (1)(F).

(H) Locally-selected assessment

(i) In general

Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to prohibit a local educational agency from administering a locally-selected assessment in lieu of the State-designed academic assessment under subclause (I)(bb) and subclause (II)(cc) of subparagraph (B)(v), if the local educational agency selects a nationally-recognized high school academic assessment that has been approved for use by the State as described in clause (iii) or (iv) of this subparagraph.

(ii) State technical criteria

To allow for State approval of nationally-recognized high school academic assessments that are available for local selection under clause (i), a State educational agency shall establish technical criteria to determine if any such assessment meets the requirements of clause (v).

(iii) State approval

If a State educational agency chooses to make a nationally-recognized high school assessment available for selection by a local educational agency under clause (i), which has not already been approved under this clause, such State educational agency shall-

(I) conduct a review of the assessment to determine if such assessment meets or exceeds the technical criteria established by the State educational agency under clause (ii);

(II) submit evidence in accordance with subsection (a)(4) that demonstrates such assessment meets the requirements of clause (v); and

(III) after fulfilling the requirements of subclauses (I) and (II), approve such assessment for selection and use by any local educational agency that requests to use such assessment under clause (i).

(iv) Local educational agency option

(I) Local educational agency

If a local educational agency chooses to submit a nationally-recognized high school academic assessment to the State educational agency, subject to the approval process described in subclause (I) and subclause (II) of clause (iii) to determine if such assessment fulfills the requirements of clause (v), the State educational agency may approve the use of such assessment consistent with clause (i).

(II) State educational agency

Upon such approval, the State educational agency shall approve the use of such assessment in any other local educational agency in the State that subsequently requests to use such assessment without repeating the process described in subclauses (I) and (II) of clause (iii).

(v) Requirements

To receive approval from the State educational agency under clause (iii), a locally-selected assessment shall-

(I) be aligned to the State's academic content standards under paragraph (1), address the depth and breadth of such standards, and be equivalent in its content coverage, difficulty, and quality to the State-designed assessments under this paragraph (and may be more rigorous in its content coverage and difficulty than such State-designed assessments);

(II) provide comparable, valid, and reliable data on academic achievement, as compared to the State-designed assessments, for all students and for each subgroup of students defined in subsection (c)(2), with results expressed in terms consistent with the State's academic achievement standards under paragraph (1), among all local educational agencies within the State;

(III) meet the requirements for the assessments under subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, including technical criteria, except the requirement under clause (i) of such subparagraph; and

(IV) provide unbiased, rational, and consistent differentiation between schools within the State to meet the requirements of subsection (c).

(vi) Parental notification

A local educational agency shall notify the parents of high school students served by the local educational agency-

(I) of its request to the State educational agency for approval to administer a locally-selected assessment; and

(II) upon approval, and at the beginning of each subsequent school year during which the locally selected assessment will be administered, that the local educational agency will be administering a different assessment than the State-designed assessments under subclause (I)(bb) and subclause (II)(cc) of subparagraph (B)(v).

(I) Deferral

A State may defer the commencement, or suspend the administration, but not cease the development, of the assessments described in this paragraph, for 1 year for each year for which the amount appropriated for grants under part B is less than $369,100,000.

(J) Adaptive assessments

(i) In general

Subject to clause (ii), a State retains the right to develop and administer computer adaptive assessments as the assessments described in this paragraph, provided the computer adaptive assessments meet the requirements of this paragraph, except that-

(I) subparagraph (B)(i) shall not be interpreted to require that all students taking the computer adaptive assessment be administered the same assessment items; and

(II) such assessment-

(aa) shall measure, at a minimum, each student's academic proficiency based on the challenging State academic standards for the student's grade level and growth toward such standards; and

(bb) may measure the student's level of academic proficiency and growth using items above or below the student's grade level, including for use as part of a State's accountability system under subsection (c).

(ii) Students with the most significant cognitive disabilities and English learners

In developing and administering computer adaptive assessments-

(I) as the assessments allowed under subparagraph (D), a State shall ensure that such computer adaptive assessments-

(aa) meet the requirements of this paragraph, including subparagraph (D), except such assessments shall not be required to meet the requirements of clause (i)(II); and

(bb) assess the student's academic achievement to measure, in the subject being assessed, whether the student is performing at the student's grade level; and

(II) as the assessments required under subparagraph (G), a State shall ensure that such computer adaptive assessments-

(aa) meet the requirements of this paragraph, including subparagraph (G), except such assessment shall not be required to meet the requirements of clause (i)(II); and

(bb) assess the student's language proficiency, which may include growth towards such proficiency, in order to measure the student's acquisition of English.

(K) Rule of construction on parent rights

Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as preempting a State or local law regarding the decision of a parent to not have the parent's child participate in the academic assessments under this paragraph.

(L) Limitation on assessment time

Subject to Federal or State requirements related to assessments, evaluations, and accommodations, each State may, at the sole discretion of such State, set a target limit on the aggregate amount of time devoted to the administration of assessments for each grade, expressed as a percentage of annual instructional hours.

(3) Exception for recently arrived English learners

(A) Assessments

With respect to recently arrived English learners who have been enrolled in a school in one of the 50 States in the United States or the District of Columbia for less than 12 months, a State may choose to-

(i) exclude-

(I) such an English learner from one administration of the reading or language arts assessment required under paragraph (2); and

(II) such an English learner's results on any of the assessments required under paragraph (2)(B)(v)(I) or (2)(G) for the first year of the English learner's enrollment in such a school for the purposes of the State-determined accountability system under subsection (c); or

(ii)(I) assess, and report the performance of, such an English learner on the reading or language arts and mathematics assessments required under paragraph (2)(B)(v)(I) in each year of the student's enrollment in such a school; and

(II) for the purposes of the State-determined accountability system-

(aa) for the first year of the student's enrollment in such a school, exclude the results on the assessments described in subclause (I);

(bb) include a measure of student growth on the assessments described in subclause (I) in the second year of the student's enrollment in such a school; and

(cc) include proficiency on the assessments described in subclause (I) in the third year of the student's enrollment in such a school, and each succeeding year of such enrollment.

(B) English learner subgroup

With respect to a student previously identified as an English learner and for not more than 4 years after the student ceases to be identified as an English learner, a State may include the results of the student's assessments under paragraph (2)(B)(v)(I) within the English learner subgroup of the subgroups of students (as defined in subsection (c)(2)(D)) for the purposes of the State-determined accountability system.

(c) Statewide accountability system

(1) In general

Each State plan shall describe a statewide accountability system that complies with the requirements of this subsection and subsection (d).

(2) Subgroup of students

In this subsection and subsection (d), the term "subgroup of students" means-

(A) economically disadvantaged students;

(B) students from major racial and ethnic groups;

(C) children with disabilities; and

(D) English learners.

(3) Minimum number of students

Each State shall describe-

(A) with respect to any provisions under this part that require disaggregation of information by each subgroup of students-

(i) the minimum number of students that the State determines are necessary to be included to carry out such requirements and how that number is statistically sound, which shall be the same State-determined number for all students and for each subgroup of students in the State;

(ii) how such minimum number of students was determined by the State, including how the State collaborated with teachers, principals, other school leaders, parents, and other stakeholders when determining such minimum number; and

(iii) how the State ensures that such minimum number is sufficient to not reveal any personally identifiable information.

(4) Description of system

The statewide accountability system described in paragraph (1) shall be based on the challenging State academic standards for reading or language arts and mathematics described in subsection (b)(1) to improve student academic achievement and school success. In designing such system to meet the requirements of this part, the State shall carry out the following:

(A) Establishment of long-term goals

Establish ambitious State-designed long-term goals, which shall include measurements of interim progress toward meeting such goals-

(i) for all students and separately for each subgroup of students in the State-

(I) for, at a minimum, improved-

(aa) academic achievement, as measured by proficiency on the annual assessments required under subsection (b)(2)(B)(v)(I); and

(bb) high school graduation rates, including-

(AA) the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate; and

(BB) at the State's discretion, the extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rate, except that the State shall set a more rigorous long-term goal for such graduation rate, as compared to the long-term goal set for the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate;

(II) for which the term set by the State for such goals is the same multi-year length of time for all students and for each subgroup of students in the State; and

(III) that, for subgroups of students who are behind on the measures described in items (aa) and (bb) of subclause (I), take into account the improvement necessary on such measures to make significant progress in closing statewide proficiency and graduation rate gaps; and

(ii) for English learners, for increases in the percentage of such students making progress in achieving English language proficiency, as defined by the State and measured by the assessments described in subsection (b)(2)(G), within a State-determined timeline.

(B) Indicators

Except for the indicator described in clause (iv), annually measure, for all students and separately for each subgroup of students, the following indicators:

(i) For all public schools in the State, based on the long-term goals established under subparagraph (A), academic achievement-

(I) as measured by proficiency on the annual assessments required under subsection (b)(2)(B)(v)(I); and

(II) at the State's discretion, for each public high school in the State, student growth, as measured by such annual assessments.

(ii) For public elementary schools and secondary schools that are not high schools in the State-

(I) a measure of student growth, if determined appropriate by the State; or

(II) another valid and reliable statewide academic indicator that allows for meaningful differentiation in school performance.

(iii) For public high schools in the State, and based on State-designed long term goals established under subparagraph (A)-

(I) the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate; and

(II) at the State's discretion, the extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rate.

(iv) For public schools in the State, progress in achieving English language proficiency, as defined by the State and measured by the assessments described in subsection (b)(2)(G), within a State-determined timeline for all English learners-

(I) in each of the grades 3 through 8; and

(II) in the grade for which such English learners are otherwise assessed under subsection (b)(2)(B)(v)(I) during the grade 9 through grade 12 period, with such progress being measured against the results of the assessments described in subsection (b)(2)(G) taken in the previous grade.

(v)(I) For all public schools in the State, not less than one indicator of school quality or student success that-

(aa) allows for meaningful differentiation in school performance;

(bb) is valid, reliable, comparable, and statewide (with the same indicator or indicators used for each grade span, as such term is determined by the State); and

(cc) may include one or more of the measures described in subclause (II).

(II) For purposes of subclause (I), the State may include measures of-

(III) student engagement;

(IV) educator engagement;

(V) student access to and completion of advanced coursework;

(VI) postsecondary readiness;

(VII) school climate and safety; and

(VIII) any other indicator the State chooses that meets the requirements of this clause.

(C) Annual meaningful differentiation

Establish a system of meaningfully differentiating, on an annual basis, all public schools in the State, which shall-

(i) be based on all indicators in the State's accountability system under subparagraph (B), for all students and for each of subgroup of students, consistent with the requirements of such subparagraph;

(ii) with respect to the indicators described in clauses (i) through (iv) of subparagraph (B) afford-

(I) substantial weight to each such indicator; and

(II) in the aggregate, much greater weight than is afforded to the indicator or indicators utilized by the State and described in subparagraph (B)(v), in the aggregate; and

(iii) include differentiation of any such school in which any subgroup of students is consistently underperforming, as determined by the State, based on all indicators under subparagraph (B) and the system established under this subparagraph.

(D) Identification of schools

Based on the system of meaningful differentiation described in subparagraph (C), establish a State-determined methodology to identify-

(i) beginning with school year 2017-2018, and at least once every three school years thereafter, one statewide category of schools for comprehensive support and improvement, as described in subsection (d)(1), which shall include-

(I) not less than the lowest-performing 5 percent of all schools receiving funds under this part in the State;

(II) all public high schools in the State failing to graduate one third or more of their students; and

(III) public schools in the State described under subsection (d)(3)(A)(i)(II); and

(ii) at the discretion of the State, additional statewide categories of schools.

(E) Annual measurement of achievement

(i) Annually measure the achievement of not less than 95 percent of all students, and 95 percent of all students in each subgroup of students, who are enrolled in public schools on the assessments described under subsection (b)(2)(v)(I).

(ii) For the purpose of measuring, calculating, and reporting on the indicator described in subparagraph (B)(i), include in the denominator the greater of-

(I) 95 percent of all such students, or 95 percent of all such students in the subgroup, as the case may be; or

(II) the number of students participating in the assessments.

(iii) Provide a clear and understandable explanation of how the State will factor the requirement of clause (i) of this subparagraph into the statewide accountability system.

(F) Partial attendance

(i) In the case of a student who has not attended the same school within a local educational agency for at least half of a school year, the performance of such student on the indicators described in clauses (i), (ii), (iv), and (v) of subparagraph (B)-

(I) may not be used in the system of meaningful differentiation of all public schools as described in subparagraph (C) for such school year; and

(II) shall be used for the purpose of reporting on the State and local educational agency report cards under subsection (h) for such school year.

(ii) In the case of a high school student who has not attended the same school within a local educational agency for at least half of a school year and has exited high school without a regular high school diploma and without transferring to another high school that grants a regular high school diploma during such school year, the local educational agency shall, in order to calculate the graduation rate pursuant to subparagraph (B)(iii), assign such student to the high school-

(I) at which such student was enrolled for the greatest proportion of school days while enrolled in grades 9 through 12; or

(II) in which the student was most recently enrolled.

(5) Accountability for charter schools

The accountability provisions under this chapter shall be overseen for charter schools in accordance with State charter school law.

(d) School support and improvement activities

(1) Comprehensive support and improvement

(A) In general

Each State educational agency receiving funds under this part shall notify each local educational agency in the State of any school served by the local educational agency that is identified for comprehensive support and improvement under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i).

(B) Local educational agency action

Upon receiving such information from the State, the local educational agency shall, for each school identified by the State and in partnership with stakeholders (including principals and other school leaders, teachers, and parents), locally develop and implement a comprehensive support and improvement plan for the school to improve student outcomes, that-

(i) is informed by all indicators described in subsection (c)(4)(B), including student performance against State-determined long-term goals;

(ii) includes evidence-based interventions;

(iii) is based on a school-level needs assessment;

(iv) identifies resource inequities, which may include a review of local educational agency and school-level budgeting, to be addressed through implementation of such comprehensive support and improvement plan;

(v) is approved by the school, local educational agency, and State educational agency; and

(vi) upon approval and implementation, is monitored and periodically reviewed by the State educational agency.

(C) State educational agency discretion

With respect to any high school in the State identified under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i)(II), the State educational agency may-

(i) permit differentiated improvement activities that utilize evidence-based interventions in the case of such a school that predominantly serves students-

(I) returning to education after having exited secondary school without a regular high school diploma; or

(II) who, based on their grade or age, are significantly off track to accumulate sufficient academic credits to meet high school graduation requirements, as established by the State; and

(ii) in the case of such a school that has a total enrollment of less than 100 students, permit the local educational agency to forego implementation of improvement activities required under this paragraph.

(D) Public school choice

(i) In general

A local educational agency may provide all students enrolled in a school identified by the State for comprehensive support and improvement under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i) with the option to transfer to another public school served by the local educational agency, unless such an option is prohibited by State law.

(ii) Priority

In providing students the option to transfer to another public school, the local educational agency shall give priority to the lowest-achieving children from low-income families, as determined by the local educational agency for the purposes of allocating funds to schools under section 6313(a)(3) of this title.

(iii) Treatment

A student who uses the option to transfer to another public school shall be enrolled in classes and other activities in the public school to which the student transfers in the same manner as all other students at the public school.

(iv) Special rule

A local educational agency shall permit a student who transfers to another public school under this paragraph to remain in that school until the student has completed the highest grade in that school.

(v) Funding for transportation

A local educational agency may spend an amount equal to not more than 5 percent of its allocation under subpart 2 of this part to pay for the provision of transportation for students who transfer under this paragraph to the public schools to which the students transfer.

(2) Targeted support and improvement

(A) In general

Each State educational agency receiving funds under this part shall, using the meaningful differentiation of schools described in subsection (c)(4)(C)-

(i) notify each local educational agency in the State of any school served by the local educational agency in which any subgroup of students is consistently underperforming, as described in subsection (c)(4)(C)(iii); and

(ii) ensure such local educational agency provides notification to such school with respect to which subgroup or subgroups of students in such school are consistently underperforming as described in subsection (c)(4)(C)(iii).

(B) Targeted support and improvement plan

Each school receiving a notification described in this paragraph, in partnership with stakeholders (including principals and other school leaders, teachers and parents), shall develop and implement a school-level targeted support and improvement plan to improve student outcomes based on the indicators in the statewide accountability system established under subsection (c)(4), for each subgroup of students that was the subject of notification that-

(i) is informed by all indicators described in subsection (c)(4)(B), including student performance against long-term goals;

(ii) includes evidence-based interventions;

(iii) is approved by the local educational agency prior to implementation of such plan;

(iv) is monitored, upon submission and implementation, by the local educational agency; and

(v) results in additional action following unsuccessful implementation of such plan after a number of years determined by the local educational agency.

(C) Additional targeted support

A plan described in subparagraph (B) that is developed and implemented in any school receiving a notification under this paragraph from the local educational agency in which any subgroup of students, on its own, would lead to identification under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i)(I) using the State's methodology under subsection (c)(4)(D) shall also identify resource inequities (which may include a review of local educational agency and school level budgeting), to be addressed through implementation of such plan.

(D) Special rule

The State educational agency, based on the State's differentiation of schools under subsection (c)(4)(C) for school year 2017-2018, shall notify local educational agencies of any schools served by the local educational agency in which any subgroup of students, on its own, would lead to identification under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i)(I) using the State's methodology under subsection (c)(4)(D), after which notification of such schools under this paragraph shall result from differentiation of schools pursuant to subsection (c)(4)(C)(iii).

(3) Continued support for school and local educational agency improvement

To ensure continued progress to improve student academic achievement and school success in the State, the State educational agency-

(A) shall-

(i) establish statewide exit criteria for-

(I) schools identified by the State for comprehensive support and improvement under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i), which, if not satisfied within a State-determined number of years (not to exceed four years), shall result in more rigorous State-determined action, such as the implementation of interventions (which may include addressing school-level operations); and

(II) schools described in paragraph (2)(C), which, if not satisfied within a State-determined number of years, shall, in the case of such schools receiving assistance under this part, result in identification of the school by the State for comprehensive support and improvement under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i)(III);

(ii) periodically review resource allocation to support school improvement in each local educational agency in the State serving-

(I) a significant number of schools identified for comprehensive support and improvement under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i); and

(II) a significant number of schools implementing targeted support and improvement plans under paragraph (2); and

(iii) provide technical assistance to each local educational agency in the State serving a significant number of-

(I) schools implementing comprehensive support and improvement plans under paragraph (1); or

(II) schools implementing targeted support and improvement plans under paragraph (2); and

(B) may-

(i) take action to initiate additional improvement in any local educational agency with-

(I) a significant number of schools that are consistently identified by the State for comprehensive support and improvement under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i) and not meeting exit criteria established by the State under subparagraph (A)(i)(I); or

(II) a significant number of schools implementing targeted support and improvement plans under paragraph (2); and

(ii) consistent with State law, establish alternative evidence-based State determined strategies that can be used by local educational agencies to assist a school identified for comprehensive support and improvement under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i).

(4) Rule of construction for collective bargaining

Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to alter or otherwise affect the rights, remedies, and procedures afforded to school or local educational agency employees under Federal, State, or local laws (including applicable regulations or court orders) or under the terms of collective bargaining agreements, memoranda of understanding, or other agreements between such employers and their employees.

(e) Prohibition

(1) In general

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to authorize or permit the Secretary-

(A) when promulgating any rule or regulation, to promulgate any rule or regulation on the development or implementation of the statewide accountability system established under this section that would-

(i) add new requirements that are inconsistent with or outside the scope of this part;

(ii) add new criteria that are inconsistent with or outside the scope of this part; or

(iii) be in excess of statutory authority granted to the Secretary;

(B) as a condition of approval of the State plan, or revisions or amendments to, the State plan, or approval of a waiver request submitted under section 7861 of this title, to-

(i) require a State to add any requirements that are inconsistent with or outside the scope of this part;

(ii) require a State to add or delete one or more specific elements of the challenging State academic standards; or

(iii) prescribe-

(I) numeric long-term goals or measurements of interim progress that States establish for all students, for any subgroups of students, and for English learners with respect to English language proficiency, under this part, including-

(aa) the length of terms set by States in designing such goals; or

(bb) the progress expected from any subgroups of students in meeting such goals;

(II) specific academic assessments or assessment items that States or local educational agencies use to meet the requirements of subsection (b)(2) or otherwise use to measure student academic achievement or student growth under this part;

(III) indicators that States use within the State accountability system under this section, including any requirement to measure student growth, or, if a State chooses to measure student growth, the specific metrics used to measure such growth under this part;

(IV) the weight of any measure or indicator used to identify or meaningfully differentiate schools, under this part;

(V) the specific methodology used by States to meaningfully differentiate or identify schools under this part;

(VI) any specific school support and improvement strategies or activities that State or local educational agencies establish and implement to intervene in, support, and improve schools and improve student outcomes under this part;

(VII) exit criteria established by States under subsection (d)(3)(A)(i);

(VIII) provided that the State meets the requirements in subsection (c)(3), a minimum number of students established by a State under such subsection;

(IX) any aspect or parameter of a teacher, principal, or other school leader evaluation system within a State or local educational agency;

(X) indicators or specific measures of teacher, principal, or other school leader effectiveness or quality; or

(XI) the way in which the State factors the requirement under subsection (c)(4)(E)(i) into the statewide accountability system under this section; or

(C) to issue new non-regulatory guidance that-

(i) in seeking to provide explanation of requirements under this section for State or local educational agencies, either in response to requests for information or in anticipation of such requests, provides a strictly limited or exhaustive list to illustrate successful implementation of provisions under this section; or

(ii) purports to be legally binding; or

(D) to require data collection under this part beyond data derived from existing Federal, State, and local reporting requirements.

(2) Defining terms

In carrying out this part, the Secretary shall not, through regulation or as a condition of approval of the State plan or revisions or amendments to the State plan, promulgate a definition of any term used in this part, or otherwise prescribe any specification for any such term, that is inconsistent with or outside the scope of this part or is in violation of paragraph (1).

(f) Existing State law

Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter any State law or regulation granting parents authority over schools that repeatedly failed to make adequate yearly progress under this part, as in effect on the day before December 10, 2015.

(g) Other plan provisions

(1) Descriptions

Each State plan shall describe-

(A) how the State will provide assistance to local educational agencies and individual elementary schools choosing to use funds under this part to support early childhood education programs;

(B) how low-income and minority children enrolled in schools assisted under this part are not served at disproportionate rates by ineffective, out-of-field, or inexperienced teachers, and the measures the State educational agency will use to evaluate and publicly report the progress of the State educational agency with respect to such description (except that nothing in this subparagraph shall be construed as requiring a State to develop or implement a teacher, principal, or other school leader evaluation system);

(C) how the State educational agency will support local educational agencies receiving assistance under this part to improve school conditions for student learning, including through reducing-

(i) incidences of bullying and harassment;

(ii) the overuse of discipline practices that remove students from the classroom; and

(iii) the use of aversive behavioral interventions that compromise student health and safety;

(D) how the State will support local educational agencies receiving assistance under this part in meeting the needs of students at all levels of schooling (particularly students in the middle grades and high school), including how the State will work with such local educational agencies to provide effective transitions of students to middle grades and high school to decrease the risk of students dropping out;

(E) the steps a State educational agency will take to ensure collaboration with the State agency responsible for administering the State plans under parts B and E of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 621 et seq. and 670 et seq.) to ensure the educational stability of children in foster care, including assurances that-

(i) any such child enrolls or remains in such child's school of origin, unless a determination is made that it is not in such child's best interest to attend the school of origin, which decision shall be based on all factors relating to the child's best interest, including consideration of the appropriateness of the current educational setting and the proximity to the school in which the child is enrolled at the time of placement;

(ii) when a determination is made that it is not in such child's best interest to remain in the school of origin, the child is immediately enrolled in a new school, even if the child is unable to produce records normally required for enrollment;

(iii) the enrolling school shall immediately contact the school last attended by any such child to obtain relevant academic and other records; and

(iv) the State educational agency will designate an employee to serve as a point of contact for child welfare agencies and to oversee implementation of the State agency responsibilities required under this subparagraph, and such point of contact shall not be the State's Coordinator for Education of Homeless Children and Youths under section 722(d)(3) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11432(d)(3));

(F) how the State educational agency will provide support to local educational agencies in the identification, enrollment, attendance, and school stability of homeless children and youths; and

(G) such other factors the State educational agency determines appropriate to provide students an opportunity to achieve the knowledge and skills described in the challenging State academic standards.

(2) Assurances

Each State plan shall contain assurances that-

(A) the State will make public any methods or criteria the State is using to measure teacher, principal, or other school leader effectiveness for the purpose of meeting the requirements described in paragraph (1)(B);

(B) the State educational agency will notify local educational agencies, Indian tribes and tribal organizations, schools, teachers, parents, and the public of the challenging State academic standards, academic assessments, and State accountability system, developed under this section;

(C) the State educational agency will assist each local educational agency and school affected by the State plan to meet the requirements of this part;

(D) the State will participate in the biennial State academic assessments in reading and mathematics in grades 4 and 8 of the National Assessment of Educational Progress carried out under section 303(b)(3) of the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act (20 U.S.C. 9622(b)(3)) if the Secretary pays the costs of administering such assessments;

(E) the State educational agency will modify or eliminate State fiscal and accounting barriers so that schools can easily consolidate funds from other Federal, State, and local sources to improve educational opportunities and reduce unnecessary fiscal and accounting requirements;

(F) the State educational agency will support the collection and dissemination to local educational agencies and schools of effective parent and family engagement strategies, including those included in the parent and family engagement policy under section 6318 of this title;

(G) the State educational agency will provide the least restrictive and burdensome regulations for local educational agencies and individual schools participating in a program assisted under this part;

(H) the State educational agency will ensure that local educational agencies, in developing and implementing programs under this part, will, to the extent feasible, work in consultation with outside intermediary organizations (such as educational service agencies), or individuals, that have practical expertise in the development or use of evidence-based strategies and programs to improve teaching, learning, and schools;

(I) the State educational agency has appropriate procedures and safeguards in place to ensure the validity of the assessment process;

(J) the State educational agency will ensure that all teachers and paraprofessionals working in a program supported with funds under this part meet applicable State certification and licensure requirements, including any requirements for certification obtained through alternative routes to certification;

(K) the State educational agency will coordinate activities funded under this part with other Federal activities as appropriate;

(L) the State educational agency has involved the committee of practitioners established under section 6573(b) of this title in developing the plan and monitoring its implementation;

(M) the State has professional standards for paraprofessionals working in a program supported with funds under this part, including qualifications that were in place on the day before December 10, 2015; and

(N) the State educational agency will provide the information described in clauses (ii), (iii), and (vii) of subsection (h)(1)(C) to the public in an easily accessible and user-friendly manner that can be cross-tabulated by, at a minimum, each major racial and ethnic group, gender, English proficiency status, and children with or without disabilities, which-

(i) may be accomplished by including such information on the annual State report card described subsection (h)(1)(C); and

(ii) shall be presented in a manner that-

(I) is first anonymized and does not reveal personally identifiable information about an individual student;

(II) does not include a number of students in any subgroup of students that is insufficient to yield statistically reliable information or that would reveal personally identifiable information about an individual student; and

(III) is consistent with the requirements of section 1232g of this title (commonly known as the "Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974").

(3) Rules of construction

Nothing in paragraph (2)(N) shall be construed to-

(A) require groups of students obtained by any entity that cross-tabulates the information provided under such paragraph to be considered subgroups of students, as defined in subsection (c)(2), for the purposes of the State accountability system under subsection (c); or

(B) require or prohibit States or local educational agencies from publicly reporting data in a cross-tabulated manner, in order to meet the requirements of paragraph (2)(N).

(4) Technical assistance

Upon request by a State educational agency, the Secretary shall provide technical assistance to such agency to-

(A) meet the requirements of paragraph (2)(N); or

(B) in the case of a State educational agency choosing, at its sole discretion, to disaggregate data described in clauses (ii) and (iii)(II) of subsection (h)(1)(C) for Asian and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander students using the same race response categories as the decennial census of the population, assist such State educational agency in such disaggregation and in using such data to improve academic outcomes for such students.

(h) Reports

(1) Annual State report card

(A) In general

A State that receives assistance under this part shall prepare and disseminate widely to the public an annual State report card for the State as a whole that meets the requirements of this paragraph.

(B) Implementation

The State report card required under this paragraph shall be-

(i) concise;

(ii) presented in an understandable and uniform format that is developed in consultation with parents and, to the extent practicable, in a language that parents can understand; and

(iii) widely accessible to the public, which shall include making available on a single webpage of the State educational agency's website, the State report card, all local educational agency report cards for each local educational agency in the State required under paragraph (2), and the annual report to the Secretary under paragraph (5).

(C) Minimum requirements

Each State report card required under this subsection shall include the following information:

(i) A clear and concise description of the State's accountability system under subsection (c), including-

(I) the minimum number of students that the State determines are necessary to be included in each of the subgroups of students, as defined in subsection (c)(2), for use in the accountability system;

(II) the long-term goals and measurements of interim progress for all students and for each of the subgroups of students, as defined in subsection (c)(2);

(III) the indicators described in subsection (c)(4)(B) used to meaningfully differentiate all public schools in the State;

(IV) the State's system for meaningfully differentiating all public schools in the State, including-

(aa) the specific weight of the indicators described in subsection (c)(4)(B) in such differentiation;

(bb) the methodology by which the State differentiates all such schools;

(cc) the methodology by which the State differentiates a school as consistently underperforming for any subgroup of students described in section (c)(4)(C)(iii), including the time period used by the State to determine consistent underperformance; and

(dd) the methodology by which the State identifies a school for comprehensive support and improvement as required under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i);

(V) the number and names of all public schools in the State identified by the State for comprehensive support and improvement under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i) or implementing targeted support and improvement plans under subsection (d)(2); and

(VI) the exit criteria established by the State as required under clause (i) of subsection (d)(3)(A), including the length of years established under clause (i)(II) of such subsection.

(ii) For all students and disaggregated by each subgroup of students described in subsection (b)(2)(B)(xi), homeless status, status as a child in foster care, and status as a student with a parent who is a member of the Armed Forces (as defined in section 101(a)(4) of title 10), information on student achievement on the academic assessments described in subsection (b)(2) at each level of achievement, as determined by the State under subsection (b)(1).

(iii) For all students and disaggregated by each of the subgroups of students, as defined in subsection (c)(2), and for purposes of subclause (II) of this clause, homeless status and status as a child in foster care-

(I) information on the performance on the other academic indicator under subsection (c)(4)(B)(ii) for public elementary schools and secondary schools that are not high schools, used by the State in the State accountability system; and

(II) high school graduation rates, including four-year adjusted cohort graduation rates and, at the State's discretion, extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rates.

(iv) Information on the number and percentage of English learners achieving English language proficiency.

(v) For all students and disaggregated by each of the subgroups of students, as defined in subsection (c)(2), information on the performance on the other indicator or indicators of school quality or student success under subsection (c)(4)(B)(v) used by the State in the State accountability system.

(vi) Information on the progress of all students and each subgroup of students, as defined in subsection (c)(2), toward meeting the State-designed long term goals under subsection (c)(4)(A), including the progress of all students and each such subgroup of students against the State measurements of interim progress established under such subsection.

(vii) For all students and disaggregated by each subgroup of students described in subsection (b)(2)(B)(xi), the percentage of students assessed and not assessed.

(viii) Information submitted by the State educational agency and each local educational agency in the State, in accordance with data collection conducted pursuant to section 3413(c)(1) of this title, on-

(I) measures of school quality, climate, and safety, including rates of in-school suspensions, out-of-school suspensions, expulsions, school-related arrests, referrals to law enforcement, chronic absenteeism (including both excused and unexcused absences), incidences of violence, including bullying and harassment; and

(II) the number and percentage of students enrolled in-

(aa) preschool programs; and

(bb) accelerated coursework to earn postsecondary credit while still in high school, such as Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses and examinations, and dual or concurrent enrollment programs.

(ix) The professional qualifications of teachers in the State, including information (that shall be presented in the aggregate and disaggregated by high-poverty compared to low-poverty schools) on the number and percentage of-

(I) inexperienced teachers, principals, and other school leaders;

(II) teachers teaching with emergency or provisional credentials; and

(III) teachers who are not teaching in the subject or field for which the teacher is certified or licensed.

(x) The per-pupil expenditures of Federal, State, and local funds, including actual personnel expenditures and actual nonpersonnel expenditures of Federal, State, and local funds, disaggregated by source of funds, for each local educational agency and each school in the State for the preceding fiscal year.

(xi) The number and percentages of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities who take an alternate assessment under subsection (b)(2)(D), by grade and subject.

(xii) Results on the State academic assessments in reading and mathematics in grades 4 and 8 of the National Assessment of Educational Progress carried out under section 303(b)(3) of the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act (20 U.S.C. 9622(b)(3)), compared to the national average of such results.

(xiii) Where available, for each high school in the State, and beginning with the report card prepared under this paragraph for 2017, the cohort rate (in the aggregate, and disaggregated for each subgroup of students defined in subsection (c)(2)), at which students who graduate from the high school enroll, for the first academic year that begins after the students' graduation-

(I) in programs of public postsecondary education in the State; and

(II) if data are available and to the extent practicable, in programs of private postsecondary education in the State or programs of postsecondary education outside the State.

(xiv) Any additional information that the State believes will best provide parents, students, and other members of the public with information regarding the progress of each of the State's public elementary schools and secondary schools, which may include the number and percentage of students meeting State determined levels of performance for core indicators, as defined by section 113(b)(3)(A) of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2323(b)(3)(A)), and reported by States only in a manner consistent with section 113(b)(3)(C) of such Act (20 U.S.C. 2323(b)(3)(C)).

(D) Rules of construction

Nothing in subparagraph (C)(viii) shall be construed as requiring-

(i) reporting of any data that are not collected in accordance with section 3413(c)(1) of this title; or

(ii) disaggregation of any data other than as required under subsection (b)(2)(B)(xi).

(2) Annual local educational agency report cards

(A) Preparation and dissemination

A local educational agency that receives assistance under this part shall prepare and disseminate an annual local educational agency report card that includes information on such agency as a whole and each school served by the agency.

(B) Implementation

Each local educational agency report card shall be-

(i) concise;

(ii) presented in an understandable and uniform format, and to the extent practicable, in a language that parents can understand; and

(iii) accessible to the public, which shall include-

(I) placing such report card on the website of the local educational agency; and

(II) in any case in which a local educational agency does not operate a website, providing the information to the public in another manner determined by the local educational agency.

(C) Minimum requirements

The State educational agency shall ensure that each local educational agency collects appropriate data and includes in the local educational agency's annual report the information described in paragraph (1)(C), disaggregated in the same manner as required under such paragraph, except for clause (xii) of such paragraph, as applied to the local educational agency and each school served by the local educational agency, including-

(i) in the case of a local educational agency, information that shows how students served by the local educational agency achieved on the academic assessments described in subsection (b)(2) compared to students in the State as a whole;

(ii) in the case of a school, information that shows how the school's students' achievement on the academic assessments described in subsection (b)(2) compared to students served by the local educational agency and the State as a whole; and

(iii) any other information that the local educational agency determines is appropriate and will best provide parents, students, and other members of the public with information regarding the progress of each public school served by the local educational agency, whether or not such information is included in the annual State report card.

(D) Additional information

In the case of a local educational agency that issues a report card for all students, the local educational agency may include the information under this section as part of such report.

(3) Preexisting report cards

A State educational agency or local educational agency may use public report cards on the performance of students, schools, local educational agencies, or the State, that were in effect prior to December 10, 2015, for the purpose of this subsection, so long as any such report card is modified, as may be needed, to contain the information required by this subsection, and protects the privacy of individual students.

(4) Cost reduction

Each State educational agency and local educational agency receiving assistance under this part shall, wherever possible, take steps to reduce data collection costs and duplication of effort by obtaining the information required under this subsection through existing data collection efforts.

(5) Annual State report to the Secretary

Each State educational agency receiving assistance under this part shall report annually to the Secretary, and make widely available within the State-

(A) information on the achievement of students on the academic assessments required by subsection (b)(2), including the disaggregated results for the subgroups of students as defined in subsection (c)(2);

(B) information on the acquisition of English proficiency by English learners;

(C) the number and names of each public school in the State-

(i) identified for comprehensive support and improvement under subsection (c)(4)(D)(i); and

(ii) implementing targeted support and improvement plans under subsection (d)(2); and

(D) information on the professional qualifications of teachers in the State, including information on the number and the percentage of the following teachers:

(i) Inexperienced teachers.

(ii) Teachers teaching with emergency or provisional credentials.

(iii) Teachers who are not teaching in the subject or field for which the teacher is certified or licensed.

(6) Report to Congress

The Secretary shall transmit annually to the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate a report that provides national and State-level data on the information collected under paragraph (5). Such report shall be submitted through electronic means only.

(i) Privacy

(1) In general

Information collected or disseminated under this section (including any information collected for or included in the reports described in subsection (h)) shall be collected and disseminated in a manner that protects the privacy of individuals consistent with section 1232g of this title (commonly known as the "Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974") and this chapter.

(2) Sufficiency

The reports described in subsection (h) shall only include data that are sufficient to yield statistically reliable information.

(3) Disaggregation

Disaggregation under this section shall not be required if such disaggregation will reveal personally identifiable information about any student, teacher, principal, or other school leader, or will provide data that are insufficient to yield statistically reliable information.

(j) Voluntary partnerships

A State retains the right to enter into a voluntary partnership with another State to develop and implement the challenging State academic standards and assessments required under this section, except that the Secretary shall not attempt to influence, incentivize, or coerce State-

(1) adoption of the Common Core State Standards developed under the Common Core State Standards Initiative or any other academic standards common to a significant number of States, or assessments tied to such standards; or

(2) participation in such partnerships.

(k) Special rule with respect to Bureau-funded schools

In determining the assessments to be used by each school operated or funded by the Bureau of Indian Education receiving funds under this part, the following shall apply until the requirements of section 7824(c) of this title have been met:

(1) Each such school that is accredited by the State in which it is operating shall use the assessments and other academic indicators the State has developed and implemented to meet the requirements of this section, or such other appropriate assessment and academic indicators as approved by the Secretary of the Interior.

(2) Each such school that is accredited by a regional accrediting organization (in consultation with and with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, and consistent with assessments and academic indicators adopted by other schools in the same State or region) shall adopt an appropriate assessment and other academic indicators that meet the requirements of this section.

(3) Each such school that is accredited by a tribal accrediting agency or tribal division of education shall use an assessment and other academic indicators developed by such agency or division, except that the Secretary of the Interior shall ensure that such assessment and academic indicators meet the requirements of this section.

(l) Construction

Nothing in this part shall be construed to prescribe the use of the academic assessments described in this part for student promotion or graduation purposes.

( Pub. L. 89-10, title I, §1111, as added Pub. L. 107-110, title I, §101, Jan. 8, 2002, 115 Stat. 1444; amended Pub. L. 107-279, title IV, §404(d)(1), Nov. 5, 2002, 116 Stat. 1985; Pub. L. 108-446, title III, §305(g)(1), Dec. 3, 2004, 118 Stat. 2805; Pub. L. 109-270, §2(f)(1), Aug. 12, 2006, 120 Stat. 747; Pub. L. 114-95, title I, §1005, Dec. 10, 2015, 129 Stat. 1820; Pub. L. 115-224, title III, §302(1), July 31, 2018, 132 Stat. 1623; Pub. L. 116-92, div. A, title V, §579, Dec. 20, 2019, 133 Stat. 1407 .)

References in Text

The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006, referred to in subsec. (a)(1)(B), is Pub. L. 88-210, Dec. 18, 1963, 77 Stat. 403, as amended generally by Pub. L. 109-270, §1(b), Aug. 12, 2006, 120 Stat. 683, which is classified generally to chapter 44 (§2301 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2301 of this title and Tables.

The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, referred to in subsec. (a)(1)(B), is Pub. L. 113-128, July 22, 2014, 128 Stat. 1425, which enacted chapter 32 (§3101 et seq.) of Title 29, Labor, repealed chapter 30 (§2801 et seq.) of Title 29 and chapter 73 (§9201 et seq.) of this title, and made amendments to numerous other sections and notes in the Code. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 3101 of Title 29 and Tables.

The Head Start Act, referred to in subsec. (a)(1)(B), is subchapter B (§635 et seq.) of chapter 8 of subtitle A of title VI of Pub. L. 97-35, Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 499, which is classified generally to subchapter II (§9831 et seq.) of chapter 105 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 9801 of Title 42 and Tables.

The Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990, referred to in subsec. (a)(1)(B), is subchapter C (§658A et seq.) of chapter 8 of subtitle A of title VI of Pub. L. 97-35, as added by Pub. L. 101-508, title V, §5082(2), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388-236, which is classified generally to subchapter II-B (§9857 et seq.) of chapter 105 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 9857(a) of Title 42 and Tables.

Public Law 93-112, referred to in subsec. (b)(1)(E)(i)(V), is Pub. L. 93-112, Sept. 26, 1973, 87 Stat. 355, known as the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which is classified generally to chapter 16 (§701 et seq.) of Title 29, Labor. July 22, 2014, refers to the date of enactment of title IV (§401 et seq.) of Pub. L. 113-128, 128 Stat. 1631, which amended numerous sections in the Act. For complete classification of Pub. L. 93-112 to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 701 of Title 29 and Tables. For complete classification of title IV of Pub. L. 113-128 to the Code, see Tables.

The Social Security Act, referred to in subsec. (g)(1)(E), is act Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, 49 Stat. 620. Parts B and E of title IV of the Act are classified generally to parts B (§620 et seq.) and E (§670 et seq.), respectively, of subchapter IV of chapter 7 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 1305 of Title 42 and Tables.

Prior Provisions

A prior section 6311, Pub. L. 89-10, title I, §1111, as added Pub. L. 103-382, title I, §101, Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3523 ; amended Pub. L. 104-134, title I, §101(d) [title VII, §703(b)(1)], Apr. 26, 1996, 110 Stat. 1321-211, 1321-254; renumbered title I, Pub. L. 104-140, §1(a), May 2, 1996, 110 Stat. 1327; Pub. L. 106-554, §1(a)(4) [div. B, title XVI, §1603], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-328, related to State plans, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 107-110.

A prior section 1111 of Pub. L. 89-10 was classified to section 2768 of this title, prior to the general amendment of Pub. L. 89-10 by Pub. L. 103-382.

Amendments

2019-Subsec. (h)(1)(C)(ii). Pub. L. 116-92 struck out "on active duty (as defined in section 101(d)(5) of such title)" after "section 101(a)(4) of title 10)".

2018-Subsec. (h)(1)(C)(xiv). Pub. L. 115-224 substituted "meeting State determined levels of performance for core indicators, as defined by section 113(b)(3)(A) of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2323(b)(3)(A)), and reported by States only in a manner consistent with section 113(b)(3)(C) of such Act (20 U.S.C. 2323(b)(3)(C))" for "attaining career and technical proficiencies (as defined by section 113(b) of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2323(b)) and reported by States only in a manner consistent with section 113(c) of such Act (20 U.S.C. 2323(c))".

2015- Pub. L. 114-95 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section related to State plan to adopt challenging academic standards to be applied to all schools and children in the State and penalties for failure to meet deadlines enacted in 1994 and 2001.

2006-Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 109-270 substituted "Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006" for "Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998".

2004-Subsec. (b)(2)(I)(ii). Pub. L. 108-446 substituted "section 612(a)(16)(A)" for "section 612(a)(17)(A)".

2002-Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 107-279 substituted "section 9622(b)(2) of this title" for "section 9010(b)(2) of this title".

Change of Name

Committee on Education and the Workforce of House of Representatives changed to Committee on Education and Labor of House of Representatives by House Resolution No. 6, One Hundred Sixteenth Congress, Jan. 9, 2019.

Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115-224 effective July 1, 2019, see section 4 of Pub. L. 115-224, set out as a note under section 2301 of this title.

Effective Date of 2015 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 114-95 effective Dec. 10, 2015, with separate effective dates for subsecs. (b)(2), (c), and (d) and with special rules for implementation of interventions at certain schools and local educational agencies, see section 5 of Pub. L. 114-95, set out as a note under section 6301 of this title.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(a) Filing for grants (1) In general For any State desiring to receive a grant under this part, the State educational agency shall file with the Secretary a plan that is- (A) developed by the State educational agency with timely and meaningful consultation with the Governor, members of the State

# data[].attributes.body
Florida Statute 1003.4282 – Requirements for a standard high school diploma

Source:  statutory (state)

Summary:  Students must pass the grade 10 English Language Arts assessment or earn a concordant score (ACT,SAT) and pass the statewide Algebra 1 end of course assessment or earn a comparative score (PSAT/NMSQT, SAT, ACT) to earn a standard high school diploma.  In addition, students enrolled in Geometry, Biology, and United States History must complete the end of course assessment associated with each course and their performance must constitute 30 percent of the student’s final course grade (FLA. STAT. § 1003.4282).
Reference
FLA. STAT. § 1003.4282

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Florida Statutes

The 2019 Florida Statutes

F.S. 1003.4282

1003.4282  Requirements for a standard high school diploma. -

(1)  TWENTY-FOUR CREDITS REQUIRED.-

(a)  Beginning with students entering grade 9 in the 2013-2014 school year, receipt of a standard high school diploma requires successful completion of 24 credits, an International Baccalaureate curriculum, or an Advanced International Certificate of Education curriculum.

(2)  NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.-The school district must notify students and parents, in writing, of the requirements for a standard high school diploma, available designations, and the eligibility requirements for state scholarship programs and postsecondary admissions. The Department of Education shall directly and through the school districts notify registered private schools of public high school course credit and assessment requirements. Each private school must make this information available to students and their parents so they are aware of public high school graduation requirements.

(3)  STANDARD HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA; COURSE AND ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS.-

(a)  Four credits in English Language Arts (ELA). -The four credits must be in ELA I, II, III, and IV. A student must pass the statewide, standardized grade 10 Reading assessment or, when implemented, the grade 10 ELA assessment, or earn a concordant score, in order to earn a standard high school diploma.

(b)  Four credits in mathematics.-

1.  A student must earn one credit in Algebra I and one credit in Geometry. A student's performance on the statewide, standardized Algebra I end-of-course (EOC) assessment constitutes 30 percent of the student's final course grade. A student must pass the statewide, standardized Algebra I EOC assessment, or earn a comparative score, in order to earn a standard high school diploma. A student's performance on the statewide, standardized Geometry EOC assessment constitutes 30 percent of the student's final course grade.

2.  A student who earns an industry certification for which there is a statewide college credit articulation agreement approved by the State Board of Education may substitute the certification for one mathematics credit. Substitution may occur for up to two mathematics credits, except for Algebra I and Geometry. A student may earn two mathematics credits by successfully completing Algebra I through two full-year courses. A certified school counselor or the principal's designee must advise the student that admission to a state university may require the student to earn 3 additional mathematics credits that are at least as rigorous as Algebra I.

3.  A student who earns a computer science credit may substitute the credit for up to one credit of the mathematics requirement, with the exception of Algebra I and Geometry, if the commissioner identifies the computer science credit as being equivalent in rigor to the mathematics credit. An identified computer science credit may not be used to substitute for both a mathematics and a science credit. A student who earns an industry certification in 3D rapid prototype printing may satisfy up to two credits of the mathematics requirement, with the exception of Algebra I, if the commissioner identifies the certification as being equivalent in rigor to the mathematics credit or credits.

(c)  Three credits in science. -

1.  Two of the three required credits must have a laboratory component. A student must earn one credit in Biology I and two credits in equally rigorous courses. The statewide, standardized Biology I EOC assessment constitutes 30 percent of the student's final course grade.

2.  A student who earns an industry certification for which there is a statewide college credit articulation agreement approved by the State Board of Education may substitute the certification for one science credit, except for Biology I.

3.  A student who earns a computer science credit may substitute the credit for up to one credit of the science requirement, with the exception of Biology I, if the commissioner identifies the computer science credit as being equivalent in rigor to the science credit. An identified computer science credit may not be used to substitute for both a mathematics and a science credit.

(d)  Three credits in social studies. -A student must earn one credit in United States History; one credit in World History; one-half credit in economics; and one-half credit in United States Government. The United States History EOC assessment constitutes 30 percent of the student's final course grade.

(e)  One credit in fine or performing arts, speech and debate, or practical arts. -The practical arts course must incorporate artistic content and techniques of creativity, interpretation, and imagination. Eligible practical arts courses are identified in the Course Code Directory.

(f)  One credit in physical education. -Physical education must include the integration of health. Participation in an interscholastic sport at the junior varsity or varsity level for two full seasons shall satisfy the one-credit requirement in physical education. A district school board may not require that the one credit in physical education be taken during the 9th grade year. Completion of one semester with a grade of "C" or better in a marching band class, in a physical activity class that requires participation in marching band activities as an extracurricular activity, or in a dance class shall satisfy one-half credit in physical education or one-half credit in performing arts. This credit may not be used to satisfy the personal fitness requirement or the requirement for adaptive physical education under an individual education plan (IEP) or 504 plan. Completion of 2 years in a Reserve Officer Training Corps (R.O.T.C.) class, a significant component of which is drills, shall satisfy the one-credit requirement in physical education and the one-credit requirement in performing arts. This credit may not be used to satisfy the personal fitness requirement or the requirement for adaptive physical education under an IEP or 504 plan.

(g)  Eight credits in electives. -School districts must develop and offer coordinated electives so that a student may develop knowledge and skills in his or her area of interest, such as electives with a STEM or liberal arts focus. Such electives must include opportunities for students to earn college credit, including industry-certified career education programs or series of career-themed courses that result in industry certification or articulate into the award of college credit, or career education courses for which there is a statewide or local articulation agreement and which lead to college credit. Beginning with the 2019-2020 school year, all school districts must offer a financial literacy course consisting of at least one-half credit as an elective.

(4)  ONLINE COURSE REQUIREMENT.-At least one course within the 24 credits required under this section must be completed through online learning.

For purposes of this subsection, a school district may not require a student to take the online or blended learning course outside the school day or in addition to a student's courses for a given semester. This subsection does not apply to a student who has an individual education plan under s. 1003.57 which indicates that an online or blended learning course would be inappropriate or to an out-of-state transfer student who is enrolled in a Florida high school and has 1 academic year or less remaining in high school.

(5)  GRADE FORGIVENESS POLICY.-Each district school board shall adopt policies designed to assist students in meeting graduation requirements including grade forgiveness policies. Forgiveness policies for required courses shall be limited to replacing a grade of "D" or "F" with a grade of "C" or higher earned subsequently in the same or comparable course. Forgiveness policies for elective courses shall be limited to replacing a grade of "D" or "F" with a grade of "C" or higher earned subsequently in another course. The only exception to these forgiveness policies shall be made for a student in the middle grades who takes any high school course for high school credit and earns a grade of "C," "D," or "F". In such case, the district forgiveness policy must allow the replacement of the grade with a grade of "C" or higher earned subsequently in the same or comparable course. In all cases of grade forgiveness, only the new grade shall be used in the calculation of the student's grade point average. Any course grade not replaced according to a district school board forgiveness policy shall be included in the calculation of the cumulative grade point average required for graduation.

(6)  AWARD OF A STANDARD HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA.-

(b)  An adult student in an adult general education program as provided under s. 1004.93 shall be awarded a standard high school diploma if the student meets the requirements of this section or s. 1002.3105(5), except that:

1.  One elective credit may be substituted for the one-credit requirement in fine or performing arts, speech and debate, or practical arts.

2.  The requirement that two of the science credits include a laboratory component may be waived by the district school board.

3.  The one credit in physical education may be substituted with an elective credit.

(c)  A student who earns the required 24 credits, or the required 18 credits under s. 1002.3105(5), but fails to pass the assessments required under s. 1008.22(3) or achieve a 2.0 GPA shall be awarded a certificate of completion in a form prescribed by the State Board of Education. However, a student who is otherwise entitled to a certificate of completion may elect to remain in high school either as a full-time student or a part-time student for up to 1 additional year and receive special instruction designed to remedy his or her identified deficiencies.

(7)  UNIFORM TRANSFER OF HIGH SCHOOL CREDITS.-Beginning with the 2012-2013 school year, if a student transfers to a Florida public high school from out of country, out of state, a private school, or a home education program and the student's transcript shows a credit in Algebra I, the student must pass the statewide, standardized Algebra I EOC assessment in order to earn a standard high school diploma unless the student earned a comparative score, passed a statewide assessment in Algebra I administered by the transferring entity, or passed the statewide mathematics assessment the transferring entity uses to satisfy the requirements of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), 20 U.S.C. ss. 6301 et seq. If a student's transcript shows a credit in high school reading or English Language Arts II or III, in order to earn a standard high school diploma, the student must take and pass the statewide, standardized grade 10 Reading assessment or, when implemented, the grade 10 ELA assessment, or earn a concordant score. If a transfer student's transcript shows a final course grade and course credit in Algebra I, Geometry, Biology I, or United States History, the transferring course final grade and credit shall be honored without the student taking the requisite statewide, standardized EOC assessment and without the assessment results constituting 30 percent of the student's final course grade.

(8)  CAREER EDUCATION COURSES THAT SATISFY HIGH SCHOOL CREDIT REQUIREMENTS.-

(a)  Participation in career education courses engages students in their high school education, increases academic achievement, enhances employability, and increases postsecondary success. The department shall develop, for approval by the State Board of Education, multiple, additional career education courses or a series of courses that meet the requirements set forth in s. 1003.493(2), (4), and (5) and this subsection and allow students to earn credit in both the career education course and courses required for high school graduation under this section and s. 1003.4281.

1.  The state board must determine at least biennially if sufficient academic standards are covered to warrant the award of academic credit, including satisfaction of assessment requirements under this section.

2.  Career education courses must:

a.  Include workforce and digital literacy skills.

b.  Integrate required course content with practical applications and designated rigorous coursework that results in one or more industry certifications or clearly articulated credit or advanced standing in a 2-year or 4-year certificate or degree program, which may include high school junior and senior year work-related internships or apprenticeships. The department shall negotiate state licenses for material and testing for industry certifications.

The instructional methodology used in these courses must comprise authentic projects, problems, and activities for contextual academic learning and emphasize workplace skills identified under s. 445.06.

3.  A student who earns credit upon completion of an apprenticeship or preapprenticeship program registered with the Department of Education under chapter 446 may use such credit to satisfy the high school graduation credit requirements in paragraph (3)(e) or paragraph (3)(g). The state board shall approve and identify in the Course Code Directory the apprenticeship and preapprenticeship programs from which earned credit may be used pursuant to this subparagraph.

(c)  Regional consortium service organizations established pursuant to s. 1001.451 shall work with school districts, local workforce boards, postsecondary institutions, and local business and industry leaders to create career education courses that meet the requirements set forth in s. 1003.493(2), (4), and (5) and this subsection that students can take to earn required high school course credits. The regional consortium shall submit course recommendations to the department, on behalf of the consortium member districts, for state board approval. A strong emphasis should be placed on online coursework, digital literacy, and workforce literacy as defined in s. 1004.02(26). For purposes of providing students the opportunity to earn industry certifications, consortiums must secure the necessary site licenses and testing contracts for use by member districts.

(9)  COHORT TRANSITION TO NEW GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS.-The requirements of this section, in addition to applying to students entering grade 9 in the 2013-2014 school year and thereafter, shall also apply to students entering grade 9 before the 2013-2014 school year, except as otherwise provided in this subsection.

(e)  Policy adopted in rule by the district school board may require for any cohort of students that performance on a statewide, standardized EOC assessment constitute 30 percent of a student's final course grade.

(f)  This subsection is repealed July 1, 2020.

(10)  STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES.-Beginning with students entering grade 9 in the 2014-2015 school year, this subsection applies to a student with a disability.

(c)  A student with a disability who meets the standard high school diploma requirements in this section may defer the receipt of a standard high school diploma if the student:

1.  Has an individual education plan that prescribes special education, transition planning, transition services, or related services through age 21; and

2.  Is enrolled in accelerated college credit instruction pursuant to s. 1007.27, industry certification courses that lead to college credit, a collegiate high school program, courses necessary to satisfy the Scholar designation requirements, or a structured work-study, internship, or preapprenticeship program.

(d)  A student with a disability who receives a certificate of completion and has an individual education plan that prescribes special education, transition planning, transition services, or related services through 21 years of age may continue to receive the specified instruction and services.

(e)  Any waiver of the statewide, standardized assessment requirements by the individual education plan team, pursuant to s. 1008.22(3)(c), must be approved by the parent and is subject to verification for appropriateness by an independent reviewer selected by the parent as provided for in s. 1003.572.

The State Board of Education shall adopt rules under ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54 to implement this subsection, including rules that establish the minimum requirements for students described in this subsection to earn a standard high school diploma. The State Board of Education shall adopt emergency rules pursuant to ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54.

(11)  CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION GRADUATION PATHWAY OPTION.-Beginning with the 2019-2020 school year, a student is eligible to complete an alternative pathway to earning a standard high school diploma through the Career and Technical Education (CTE) pathway option. Receipt of a standard high school diploma awarded through the CTE pathway option requires the student's successful completion of at least 18 credits. A student completing the CTE pathway option must earn at least a cumulative grade point average (GPA) of 2.0 on a 4.0 scale.

(a)  In order for a student to satisfy the requirements of the CTE pathway option, he or she must meet the GPA requirement and:

1.  Meet the requirements in paragraphs (3)(a) through (d);

2.  Complete two credits in career and technical education. The courses must result in a program completion and an industry certification; and

3.  Complete two credits in work-based learning programs. A student may substitute up to two credits of electives, including one-half credit in financial literacy, for work-based learning program courses to fulfill this requirement.

(12)  RULES.-The State Board of Education shall adopt rules to implement this section.

History. - s. 17, ch. 2013-27; s. 40, ch. 2014-39; ss. 33, 34, ch. 2014-184; s. 108, ch. 2015-2; s. 4, ch. 2015-6; s. 13, ch. 2016-237; s. 33, ch. 2017-116; s. 102, ch. 2018-110; s. 1, ch. 2018-154; s. 14, ch. 2019-119.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Florida Statutes The 2019 Florida Statutes F.S. 1003.4282 1003.4282  Requirements for a standard high school diploma. - (1)  TWENTY-FOUR CREDITS REQUIRED.- (a)  Beginning with students entering grade 9 in the 2013-2014 school year, receipt of a standard high school diploma requires successful completion of 24 credits, an International Baccalaureate curriculum, or an Advanced International Certificate of Education curriculum.

# data[].attributes.body
Florida Statute 1008.22 - Student assessment program for public schools

Source:  statutory (state)

Summary:  The primary purpose of the student assessment program in Florida public schools is to provide data from student achievement and learning gains to students, parents, and school and district staff.  This data should be used to improve instruction and guide learning objectives.  This data also drives decision making regarding school accountability, recognition, and improvement, and identify student readiness for promotion or graduation from high school (FLA. STAT. § 1008.22).
Reference
FLA. STAT. § 1008.22

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Florida Statutes

The 2023 Florida Statutes

F.S. 1008.22

1008.22  Student assessment program for public schools. -

(1)  PURPOSE.-The primary purpose of the student assessment program is to provide student academic achievement and learning gains data to students, parents, teachers, school administrators, and school district staff. This data is to be used by districts to improve instruction; by students, parents, and teachers to guide learning objectives; by education researchers to assess national and international education comparison data; and by the public to assess the cost benefit of the expenditure of taxpayer dollars. The program must be designed to:

(a)  Assess the achievement level and learning gains of each student in English Language Arts and mathematics and the achievement level in all other subjects assessed.

(b)  Provide data for making decisions regarding school accountability, recognition, and improvement of operations and management, including schools operating for the purpose of providing educational services to youth in Department of Juvenile Justice programs.

(c)  Identify the educational strengths and needs of students and the readiness of students to be promoted to the next grade level or to graduate from high school.

(d)  Assess how well educational goals and curricular standards are met at the school, district, state, national, and international levels.

(e)  Provide information to aid in the evaluation and development of educational programs and policies.

(f)  When available, provide instructional personnel with information on student achievement of standards and benchmarks in order to improve instruction.

(2)  NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION COMPARISONS.-Florida school districts shall participate in the administration of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or similar national or international assessments, both for the national sample and for any state-by-state comparison programs that may be initiated, as directed by the commissioner. The assessments must be conducted using the data collection procedures, student surveys, educator surveys, and other instruments included in the National Assessment of Educational Progress or similar national or international assessments being administered in Florida. The administration of such assessments shall be in addition to and separate from the administration of the statewide, standardized assessments.

(3)  STATEWIDE, STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT PROGRAM.-The Commissioner of Education shall design and implement a statewide, standardized assessment program aligned to the core curricular content established in the state academic standards. The commissioner also must develop or select and implement a common battery of assessment tools that will be used in all juvenile justice education programs in the state. These tools must accurately measure the core curricular content established in the state academic standards. Participation in the assessment program is mandatory for all school districts and all students attending public schools, including adult students seeking a standard high school diploma under s. 1003.4282 and students in Department of Juvenile Justice education programs, except as otherwise provided by law. If a student does not participate in the assessment program, the school district must notify the student's parent and provide the parent with information regarding the implications of such nonparticipation. The statewide, standardized assessment program shall be designed and implemented as follows:

(a)  Statewide, standardized comprehensive assessments. -

1.  The statewide, standardized English Language Arts (ELA) assessments shall be administered to students in grades 3 through 10. Retake opportunities for the grade 10 ELA assessment must be provided. Reading passages and writing prompts for ELA assessments shall incorporate grade-level core curricula content from social studies. The statewide, standardized Mathematics assessments shall be administered annually in grades 3 through 8. The statewide, standardized Science assessment shall be administered annually at least once at the elementary and middle grades levels. In order to earn a standard high school diploma, a student who has not earned a passing score on the grade 10 ELA assessment must earn a passing score on the assessment retake or earn a concordant score as authorized under subsection (9).

2.  Beginning with the 2022-2023 school year, the end-of-year comprehensive progress monitoring assessment administered pursuant to s. 1008.25(9)(b)2. is the statewide, standardized ELA assessment for students in grades 3 through 10 and the statewide, standardized Mathematics assessment for students in grades 3 through 8.

(b)  End-of-course (EOC) assessments. -EOC assessments must be statewide, standardized, and developed or approved by the Department of Education as follows:

1.  EOC assessments for Algebra I, Geometry, Biology I, United States History, and Civics shall be administered to students enrolled in such courses as specified in the course code directory.

2.  Students enrolled in a course, as specified in the course code directory, with an associated statewide, standardized EOC assessment must take the EOC assessment for such course and may not take the corresponding subject or grade-level statewide, standardized assessment pursuant to paragraph (a). Sections 1003.4156 and 1003.4282 govern the use of statewide, standardized EOC assessment results for students.

3.  The commissioner may select one or more nationally developed comprehensive examinations, which may include examinations for a College Board Advanced Placement course, International Baccalaureate course, or Advanced International Certificate of Education course, or industry-approved examinations to earn national industry certifications identified in the CAPE Industry Certification Funding List, for use as EOC assessments under this paragraph if the commissioner determines that the content knowledge and skills assessed by the examinations meet or exceed the grade-level expectations for the core curricular content established for the course in the state academic standards. Use of any such examination as an EOC assessment must be approved by the state board in rule.

4.  Contingent upon funding provided in the General Appropriations Act, including the appropriation of funds received through federal grants, the commissioner may establish an implementation schedule for the development and administration of additional statewide, standardized EOC assessments that must be approved by the state board in rule. If approved by the state board, student performance on such assessments constitutes 30 percent of a student's final course grade.

5.  All statewide, standardized EOC assessments must be administered online except as otherwise provided in paragraph (d).

6.  A student enrolled in an Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), or Advanced International Certificate of Education (AICE) course who takes the respective AP, IB, or AICE assessment and earns the minimum score necessary to earn college credit, as identified in s. 1007.27(2), meets the requirements of this paragraph and does not have to take the EOC assessment for the corresponding course.

(c)  Nationally recognized high school assessments. -Each school district shall, by the 2023-2024 school year and subject to appropriation, select either the SAT, ACT, or Classic Learning Test for districtwide administration to each public school student in grade 11, including students attending public high schools, alternative schools, and Department of Juvenile Justice education programs.

(d)  Students with disabilities; Florida Alternate Assessment. -

1.  Each district school board must provide instruction to prepare students with disabilities in the core content knowledge and skills necessary for successful grade-to-grade progression and high school graduation.

2.  A student with a disability, as defined in s. 1007.02, for whom the individual education plan (IEP) team determines that the statewide, standardized assessments under this section cannot accurately measure the student's abilities, taking into consideration all allowable accommodations, shall have assessment results waived for the purpose of receiving a course grade and a standard high school diploma. Such waiver shall be designated on the student's transcript. The statement of waiver shall be limited to a statement that performance on an assessment was waived for the purpose of receiving a course grade or a standard high school diploma, as applicable.

3.  The State Board of Education shall adopt rules, based upon recommendations of the commissioner, for the provision of assessment accommodations for students with disabilities and for students who have limited English proficiency.

a.  Accommodations that negate the validity of a statewide, standardized assessment are not allowed during the administration of the assessment. However, instructional accommodations are allowed in the classroom if identified in a student's IEP. Students using instructional accommodations in the classroom that are not allowed on a statewide, standardized assessment may have assessment results waived if the IEP team determines that the assessment cannot accurately measure the student's abilities.

b.  If a student is provided with instructional accommodations in the classroom that are not allowed as accommodations for statewide, standardized assessments, the district must inform the parent in writing and provide the parent with information regarding the impact on the student's ability to meet expected performance levels. A parent must provide signed consent for a student to receive classroom instructional accommodations that would not be available or permitted on a statewide, standardized assessment and acknowledge in writing that he or she understands the implications of such instructional accommodations.

c.  If a student's IEP states that online administration of a statewide, standardized assessment will significantly impair the student's ability to perform, the assessment shall be administered in hard copy.

4.  For students with significant cognitive disabilities, the Department of Education shall provide for implementation of the Florida Alternate Assessment to accurately measure the core curricular content established in the state academic standards.

(e)  Assessment scores and achievement levels. -

1.  All statewide, standardized EOC assessments and ELA, Mathematics, and Science assessments shall use scaled scores and achievement levels. Achievement levels shall range from 1 through 5, with level 1 being the lowest achievement level, level 5 being the highest achievement level, and level 3 indicating grade-level performance on an assessment.

2.  The state board shall designate by rule a passing score, indicating grade-level performance, for each statewide, standardized assessment.

3.  If the commissioner seeks to revise a statewide, standardized assessment and the revisions require the state board to modify performance level scores, including the passing score, the commissioner shall provide a copy of the proposed scores and implementation plan to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives at least 45 days before submission to the state board for review. Until the state board adopts the modifications by rule, the commissioner shall use calculations for scoring the assessment that adjust student scores on the revised assessment for statistical equivalence to student scores on the former assessment. The state board shall adopt by rule the passing score for the revised assessment that is statistically equivalent to the passing score on the discontinued assessment for a student who is required to attain a passing score on the discontinued assessment. The commissioner may, with approval of the state board, discontinue administration of the former assessment upon the graduation, based on normal student progression, of students participating in the final regular administration of the former assessment. If the commissioner revises a statewide, standardized assessment and the revisions require the state board to modify the passing score, only students taking the assessment for the first time after the rule is adopted are affected.

(f)  Prohibited activities. -A district school board shall prohibit each public school from suspending a regular program of curricula for purposes of administering practice assessments or engaging in other assessment-preparation activities for a statewide, standardized assessment. However, a district school board may authorize a public school to engage in the following assessment-preparation activities:

1.  Distributing to students sample assessment books and answer keys published by the Department of Education.

2.  Providing individualized instruction in assessment-taking strategies, without suspending the school's regular program of curricula, for a student who scores Level 1 or Level 2 on a prior administration of an assessment.

3.  Providing individualized instruction in the content knowledge and skills assessed, without suspending the school's regular program of curricula, for a student who scores Level 1 or Level 2 on a prior administration of an assessment or a student who, through a diagnostic assessment administered by the school district, is identified as having a deficiency in the content knowledge and skills assessed.

4.  Administering a practice assessment or engaging in other assessment-preparation activities that are determined necessary to familiarize students with the organization of the assessment, the format of assessment items, and the assessment directions or that are otherwise necessary for the valid and reliable administration of the assessment, as set forth in rules adopted by the State Board of Education with specific reference to this paragraph.

(g)  Contracts for assessments. -The commissioner shall provide for the assessments to be developed or obtained, as appropriate, through contracts and project agreements with private vendors, public vendors, public agencies, postsecondary educational institutions, or school districts. The commissioner may enter into contracts for the continued administration of the assessments authorized and funded by the Legislature. Contracts may be initiated in 1 fiscal year and continue into the next fiscal year and may be paid from the appropriations of either or both fiscal years. The commissioner may negotiate for the sale or lease of tests, scoring protocols, test scoring services, and related materials developed pursuant to law.

(4)  SCHOOL PARTICIPATION IN THE STATEWIDE, STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT PROGRAM.-Each public school shall participate in the statewide, standardized assessment program in accordance with the assessment and reporting schedules and the minimum and recommended technology requirements published by the Commissioner of Education. District school boards shall not establish school calendars that conflict with or jeopardize implementation of the assessment program. All district school boards shall report assessment results using the state management information system. Performance data shall be analyzed and reported to parents, the community, and the state. Student performance data shall be used by districts in developing objectives for the school improvement plan, evaluating instructional personnel and administrative personnel, assigning staff, allocating resources, acquiring instructional materials and technology, implementing performance-based budgeting, and promoting and assigning students to educational programs. The analysis of student performance data must also identify strengths and needs in the educational program and trends over time. The analysis must be used in conjunction with the budgetary planning processes developed pursuant to s. 1008.385 and the development of remediation programs.

(5)  REQUIRED ANALYSES.-The commissioner shall provide, at a minimum, statewide, standardized assessment data analysis showing student achievement levels and learning gains by teacher, school, and school district.

(6)  LOCAL ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE ON STATE STANDARDS.-Measurement of student performance is the responsibility of school districts except in those subjects and grade levels measured under the statewide, standardized assessment program described in this section and the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system under s. 1008.25(9). When available, instructional personnel must be provided with information on student achievement of standards and benchmarks in order to improve instruction.

(7)  ASSESSMENT SCHEDULES AND REPORTING OF RESULTS.-

(a)  The Commissioner of Education shall establish schedules for the administration of statewide, standardized assessments and the reporting of student assessment results. The commissioner shall consider the observance of religious and school holidays when developing the schedules. The assessment and reporting schedules must provide the earliest possible reporting of student assessment results to the school districts. Assessment results for the statewide, standardized ELA and Mathematics assessments and all statewide, standardized EOC assessments must be made available no later than June 30, except for results for the grade 3 statewide, standardized ELA assessment, which must be made available no later than May 31. Beginning with the 2023-2024 school year, assessment results for the statewide, standardized ELA and Mathematics assessments must be available no later than May 31. School districts shall administer statewide, standardized assessments in accordance with the schedule established by the commissioner.

(b)  By January of each year, the commissioner shall publish on the department's website a uniform calendar that includes the assessment and reporting schedules for, at a minimum, the next 2 school years. The uniform calendar must be provided to school districts in an electronic format that allows each school district and public school to populate the calendar with, at minimum, the following information for reporting the district assessment schedules under paragraph (d):

1.  Whether the assessment is a district-required assessment or a state-required assessment.

2.  The specific date or dates that each assessment will be administered, including administrations of the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system under s. 1008.25(9)(b).

3.  The time allotted to administer each assessment.

4.  Whether the assessment is a computer-based assessment or a paper-based assessment.

5.  The grade level or subject area associated with the assessment.

6.  The date that the assessment results are expected to be available to teachers and parents.

7.  The type of assessment, the purpose of the assessment, and the use of the assessment results.

8.  A glossary of assessment terminology.

9.  Estimates of average time for administering state-required and district-required assessments, by grade level.

(c)  The spring administration of the statewide, standardized assessments in paragraphs (3)(a) and (b), excluding assessment retakes, must be in accordance with the following schedule:

1.  The grade 3 statewide, standardized ELA assessment and the writing portion of the statewide, standardized ELA assessment must be administered no earlier than April 1 each year within an assessment window not to exceed 2 weeks.

2.  With the exception of assessments identified in subparagraph 1., any statewide, standardized assessment that is delivered in a paper-based format must be administered no earlier than May 1 each year within an assessment window not to exceed 2 weeks.

3.  With the exception of assessments identified in subparagraphs 1. and 2., any statewide, standardized assessment must be administered within a 4-week assessment window that opens no earlier than May 1 each year.

(d)  Each school district shall establish schedules for the administration of any statewide, standardized assessments and district-required assessments and approve the schedules as an agenda item at a district school board meeting. Each school district shall publish the testing schedules on its website using the uniform calendar, including all information required under paragraph (b), and submit the schedules to the Department of Education by October 1 of each year. Each public school shall publish schedules for statewide, standardized assessments and district-required assessments on its website using the uniform calendar, including all information required under paragraph (b). The uniform calendar must be included in the parent guide required by s. 1002.23(5).

(e)  A school district may not schedule more than 5 percent of a student's total school hours in a school year to administer statewide, standardized assessments; the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system under s. 1008.25(9)(b)2.; and district-required local assessments. The district must secure written consent from a student's parent before administering district-required local assessments that, after applicable statewide, standardized assessments and coordinated screening and progress monitoring are scheduled, exceed the 5 percent test administration limit for that student under this paragraph. The 5 percent test administration limit for a student under this paragraph may be exceeded as needed to provide test accommodations that are required by an IEP or are appropriate for an English language learner who is currently receiving services in a program operated in accordance with an approved English language learner district plan pursuant to s. 1003.56. Notwithstanding this paragraph, a student may choose within a school year to take an examination or assessment adopted by State Board of Education rule pursuant to this section and ss. 1007.27, 1008.30, and 1008.44.

(f)  A statewide, standardized EOC assessment must be used as the final cumulative examination for its associated course. No additional final assessment may be administered in a course with a statewide, standardized EOC assessment. A district-required local assessment may be used as the final cumulative examination for its associated course in accordance with the school district's policy.

(g)  A school district must provide a student's performance results on district-required local assessments to the student's teachers and parent within 1 week after administering such assessments, unless the superintendent determines in writing that extenuating circumstances exist and reports the extenuating circumstances to the district school board. Results must be made available through a web-based portal as part of the school district's student information system and in a printed format upon request by a student's parent.

(h)  The results of statewide, standardized assessment in ELA and mathematics, science, and social studies, including assessment retakes, shall be reported in an easy-to-read and understandable format and delivered in time to provide useful, actionable information to students, parents, and each student's current teacher of record and teacher of record for the subsequent school year; however, in any case, the district shall provide the results pursuant to this paragraph within 1 week after receiving the results from the department. A report of student assessment results must, at a minimum, contain:

1.  A clear explanation of the student's performance on the applicable statewide, standardized assessments.

2.  Information identifying the student's areas of strength and areas in need of improvement.

3.  Specific actions that may be taken, and the available resources that may be used, by the student's parent to assist his or her child based on the student's areas of strength and areas in need of improvement.

4.  Longitudinal information, if available, on the student's progress in each subject area based on previous statewide, standardized assessment data.

5.  Comparative information showing the student's score compared to other students in the school district, in the state, or, if available, in other states.

6.  Predictive information, if available, showing the linkage between the scores attained by the student on the statewide, standardized assessments and the scores he or she may potentially attain on nationally recognized college entrance examinations.

The information included under this paragraph relating to results from the statewide, standardized ELA assessments for grades 3 through 10 and Mathematics assessments for grades 3 through 8 must be included in individual student reports under s. 1008.25(9)(c).

(i)  The State Board of Education shall adopt rules for the development of the uniform calendar that, at minimum, define terms that must be used in the calendar to describe various assessments, including the terms "progress monitoring," "summative assessment," "formative assessment," and "interim assessment."

(8)  PUBLICATION OF ASSESSMENTS.-To promote transparency in the statewide assessment program, in any procurement for the statewide, standardized assessment in ELA, mathematics, science, and social studies, the Department of Education shall solicit cost proposals for publication of the state assessments on its website in accordance with this subsection.

(a)  The department shall publish each assessment administered under paragraph (3)(a) and subparagraph (3)(b)1., excluding assessment retakes, at least once on a triennial basis pursuant to a schedule determined by the Commissioner of Education. Each assessment, when published, must have been administered during the most recent school year and be in a format that facilitates the sharing of assessment items.

(b)  The initial publication of assessments must occur no later than June 30, 2024, subject to appropriation, and must include, at a minimum, the grade 3 ELA and mathematics assessments, the grade 10 ELA assessment, and the Algebra I EOC assessment.

(c)  The department must provide materials on its website to help the public interpret assessment information published pursuant to this subsection.

(9)  CONCORDANT SCORES.-The Commissioner of Education must identify scores on the SAT and ACT that if achieved satisfy the graduation requirement that a student pass the grade 10 ELA assessment. The commissioner may identify concordant scores on assessments other than the SAT and ACT. If the content or scoring procedures change for the grade 10 ELA assessment, new concordant scores must be determined. If new concordant scores are not timely adopted, the last-adopted concordant scores remain in effect until such time as new scores are adopted. The state board shall adopt concordant scores in rule.

(10)  COMPARATIVE SCORES FOR END-OF-COURSE (EOC) ASSESSMENT.-The Commissioner of Education must identify one or more comparative scores for the Algebra I EOC assessment. If the content or scoring procedures change for the EOC assessment, new comparative scores must be determined. If new comparative scores are not timely adopted, the last-adopted comparative scores remain in effect until such time as new scores are adopted. The state board shall adopt comparative scores in rule.

(11)  CHILD OF A MILITARY FAMILY RESIDING OUTSIDE THIS STATE.-In addition to the flexibility in assessment administration under s. 1008.213, a child of a military family residing outside this state is eligible for flexibility in assessment administration in accordance with this subsection when participating in the statewide, standardized comprehensive assessment in paragraph (3)(a); the statewide, standardized end-of-course assessment in paragraph (3)(b); or an alternate assessment in paragraph (3)(d).

(a)  Definition. -For the purposes of this subsection, the term "child of a military family residing outside this state eligible for flexibility in assessment administration" means a Florida Virtual School full-time student of a military family residing outside this state who is prevented by his or her parent's or guardian's out-of-state military duty station's location from participating in a Florida-based Florida Virtual School secure and proctored exam.

(b)  Flexibility in assessment administration option. -The flexibility in assessment administration under this subsection must allow a Florida Virtual School full-time student from a military family currently stationed outside this state to participate in statewide, standardized assessments administered securely by a licensed, certified instructor or an education services officer test administrator at his or her family's current military duty station. To be eligible for this flexibility, the student's parent or guardian must meet the requirements of s. 1008.213 and the student must be determined eligible by the Department of Education.

(12)  CHILD WITH MEDICAL COMPLEXITY.-In addition to the exemption option provided for under s. 1008.212, effective July 1, 2014, a child with a medical complexity may be exempt from participating in statewide, standardized assessments, including the Florida Alternate Assessment (FAA), pursuant to the provisions of this subsection.

(a)  Definition of child with medical complexity. -A child with a medical complexity means a child who, based upon medical documentation from a physician licensed under chapter 458 or chapter 459 is medically fragile and needs intensive care due to a condition such as congenital or acquired multisystem disease; has a severe neurological or cognitive disorder with marked functional impairment; or is technology dependent for activities of daily living; and lacks the capacity to take or perform on an assessment.

(b)  Exemption options. -If the parent consents in writing, and the IEP team determines that the child should not be assessed based upon medical documentation that the child meets the definition of a child with medical complexity, then the parent may choose one of the following three assessment exemption options.

1.  One-year exemption approved by the district school superintendent. If the superintendent is provided written documentation of parental consent and appropriate medical documentation to support the IEP team's determination that the child is a child with medical complexity, then the superintendent may approve a one-year exemption from all statewide, standardized assessments, including the FAA. The superintendent shall report annually to the district school board and the Commissioner of Education the number of students who are identified as a child with medical complexity who are not participating in the assessment program.

2.  One- to three-year exemption approved by the Commissioner of Education. If the commissioner is provided written documentation of parental consent; district school superintendent approval; the IEP team's determination that the child is a child with medical complexity based upon appropriate medical documentation; and all medical documentation, then the commissioner may exempt the child from all statewide, standardized assessments, including the FAA, for up to 3 years. The State Board of Education shall adopt rules to administer this subparagraph which must expedite the process by which exemptions are reviewed and approved and which demonstrate the utmost compassion and consideration for meeting the parent's and child's needs.

3.  Permanent exemption approved by the Commissioner of Education. If the commissioner is provided written documentation of parental consent; district school superintendent approval of a permanent exemption; the IEP team's determination that the child is a child with medical complexity based upon appropriate medical documentation and that a permanent exemption is appropriate; and all medical documentation, then the commissioner may approve a permanent exemption from all statewide, standardized assessments, including the FAA. The State Board of Education shall adopt rules to administer this subparagraph which must expedite the process by which exemptions are reviewed and approved and which demonstrate the utmost compassion and consideration for meeting the parent's and child's needs.

(c)  Reporting requirements. -The Commissioner of Education shall annually report to the Legislature data, by district, related to the implementation of this subsection at the same time as results are reported regarding student performance on statewide, standardized assessments.

(13)  REPORTS.-The Department of Education shall annually provide a report to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives which shall include the following:

(a)  Longitudinal performance of students in reading and mathematics.

(b)  Longitudinal performance of students by grade level in reading and mathematics.

(c)  Longitudinal performance regarding efforts to close the achievement gap.

(d)  Other student performance data based on national norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests, if available; national assessments, such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress; and international assessments.

(e)  Any plan or intent to establish or implement new statewide, standardized assessments.

(14)  INDEPENDENT REVIEW.-By January 31, 2025, the Commissioner of Education shall provide recommendations to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives based on an independent review of the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system under s. 1008.25(9). At a minimum, the review and recommendations must address:

(a)  The feasibility and validity of using results from either the first or second administration of progress monitoring, or both, in lieu of using the comprehensive, end-of-year progress monitoring assessment for purposes of demonstrating a passing score, promotion to grade 4, meeting graduation requirements, and calculating school grades in accordance with s. 1008.34.

(b)  Options for further reducing the statewide, standardized assessment footprint while maintaining valid and reliable data for purposes of school accountability and providing school and student supports, including the use of computer-adaptive assessments, consistent with the requirements of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 20 U.S.C. ss. 6301 et seq. and its implementing regulations.

(c)  The feasibility and validity of remotely administering statewide, standardized assessments and the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system.

(d)  Accelerating student progression based on results from the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system, as academically and developmentally appropriate.

(e)  The incorporation of content from ELA instructional materials adopted by the Commissioner of Education pursuant to s. 1006.34 in test items within the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system under s. 1008.25(9).

(f)  The impact of the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system on student learning growth data as measured by the formula approved under s. 1012.34(7).

This subsection is repealed July 1, 2025.

(15)  RULES.-The State Board of Education shall adopt rules to implement this section.

History. - s. 368, ch. 2002-387; s. 7, ch. 2003-8; s. 2, ch. 2003-413; s. 49, ch. 2004-41; s. 3, ch. 2004-42; s. 5, ch. 2004-271; s. 40, ch. 2006-74; s. 174, ch. 2007-5; s. 7, ch. 2008-142; s. 18, ch. 2008-235; s. 99, ch. 2009-21; s. 8, ch. 2010-22; s. 4, ch. 2010-48; s. 3, ch. 2011-1; s. 20, ch. 2011-37; s. 8, ch. 2011-137; s. 25, ch. 2011-175; s. 22, ch. 2012-191; s. 5, ch. 2012-194; s. 33, ch. 2013-27; s. 55, ch. 2013-35; s. 4, ch. 2013-185; ss. 9, 12, ch. 2014-23; s. 71, ch. 2014-39; s. 115, ch. 2015-2; s. 7, ch. 2015-6; s. 95, ch. 2016-10; s. 35, ch. 2017-116; s. 28, ch. 2018-6; s. 14, ch. 2018-150; s. 9, ch. 2021-157; s. 12, ch. 2022-16; s. 21, ch. 2023-39; s. 2, ch. 2023-73; s. 27, ch. 2023-108.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Florida Statutes The 2023 Florida Statutes F.S. 1008.22 1008.22  Student assessment program for public schools. - (1)  PURPOSE.-The primary purpose of the student assessment program is to provide student academic achievement and learning gains data to students, parents, teachers, school administrators, and school district staff.

# data[].attributes.body
Dixie District Schools Student Progression Plan

Source:  administrative (local)

Summary:  The Dixie District Schools Student Progression plan provides policies in accordance with state mandated assessments.  These three topics relate to assessments:  1. Students will not receive credit for courses that require a state mandated end of course exam until the results of the exam are assessed.  2. Students that score at level 1 on the Florida State Assessment (FSA) in Reading, must be enrolled in an intensive reading course the following year.  3. To be awarded a standard high school diploma students must pass the grade 10 FSA ELA and the Algebra 1 EOC or earn a concordant or comparative score in addition to the credit and GPA requirements. (Dixie District Schools, 2020).
Reference
Dixie District Schools. (2020). Student Progression Plan, Grades 9-12, § 4. Retrieved from http://www.dixie.k12.fl.us/SM%20Documents/Student%20Progression%20Plan/Student%20Progression%20Plan.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
The American School Counselor Association (ASCA) issues standards of ethics that all school counselors should abide by. Under section A, Responsibility to Students, subsection 13, Evaluation, Assessment, and Interpretation, item f school counselors are charged with explaining the nature, purpose, and potential implications, of student assessments in language that parents and students can understand
(ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors, 2016). This is important for the topic of state-mandated testing because the implications for placement in courses and graduation options rely on these tests so students and families must be aware of this.
Reference
American School Counselor Association. (2016). ASCA Ethical Standards for School Counselors. Retrieved from https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/Ethics/EthicalStandards2016.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
The Florida Department of Education's Graduation Requirements for Florida's Statewide Assessments (2019) provides a clear and concise document listing all of the required assessments for high school graduation as well as information regarding passing scores. Another helpful feature of this document is that the types of acceptable tests along with the concordant and comparative scores are listed as well. Currently the classes of 2020 and 2021 are under different requirements than the 2022 and 2023 cohorts so this document really helps keeping who is under which requirements straight which can be complicated.
Reference
Florida Department of Education. (2019). Graduation requirements for Florida's statewide assessments. Retrieved from http://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/7764/urlt/GradRequireFSA.pdf

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide 13:  Best Practices for Compliance

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide 13:  Best Practices for Compliance

# data[].attributes.body
1.  Understood.org explains ESSA in easy to understand terms:

https://www.understood.org/en/school-learning/your-childs-rights/basics-about-childs-rights/every-student-succeeds-act-essa-what-you-need-to-know
2.  U.S. Department of Education Fact Sheet summarizes the policies for state mandated testing under ESSA:

https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/essaassessmentfactsheet1207.pdf
3.  UnderstandingESSA.org outlines key changes in the more innovative testing approach sought by departments of education:
https://understandingessa.org/education-groups-call-for-key-changes-to-innovative-assessment-program-in-comments-to-doe/
4.  U.S. Department of Education Fact Sheet for the Testing Action Plan
https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-testing-action-plan
5.  Florida Standards Assessments practice tests:
https://fsassessments.org/students-and-families/practice-tests/
6.  Florida Standards Assessment FAQs for students and families
https://fsassessments.org/students-and-families/faqs/