May 2003 — Special Feature
Print this article | Email this articleClick here to receive your FREE subscription to T.H.E. Journal
Implementing the Complexities of NCLB
{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil MS Sans Serif;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 MS Sans Serif;}} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\ri6100\lang1033\f0\fs16
\par
\par \par Wisconsin's Approach to Overcoming the Law's Challenges and Closing the Achievement Gap
\par \par\par The technology component of the No Child Left Behind Act, Title II, Part D, "Enhancing Education Through Technology," made some significant changes to what states must do to receive technology money, as well as how that money is to be used within the state. States must submit an application to the U.S. Education Department (ED) that addresses each of the 15 requirements cited in the law. These requirements include such items as how a state will improve student achievement through the effective use of technology, how students and teachers will have increased access to technology, and how the state will ensure that teachers and principals are technologically literate.
\par \par\par If ED approves the state's application, the state can keep up to 5% of its allocation to carry out its activities, while the remaining 95% of a state's technology money is to be used to fund local school districts' subgrants. Fifty percent of the subgrant money is to be allocated to school districts that qualify for Title I money in the same proportion as they received their Title I money; this is an allocation, not a competitive grant. The other 50% of the subgrant money is awarded through a state-determined competitive process. In order to be eligible for a subgrant (either Title I-related or competitive) local districts must submit an application containing a new or updated technology plan that is consistent with the state plan and contains any additional information a state deems important. This article describes Wisconsin's approach to implementing the competitive portion of the subgrants described above.
\par \par\par Forward March!
\par \par\par Wisconsin's state motto is "Forward," which is pretty much the way we have been moving since taking on the challenge of implementing the complexities of NCLB. We were very fortunate that just prior to the enactment of the law, Wisconsin's state superintendent of schools, Elizabeth Burmaster, introduced the "New Wisconsin Promise." This program has priorities very similar to those of the federal education act, with its major goal being to close the achievement gap. Therefore, when NCLB was authorized, Burmaster appointed an internal coordinating committee made up of director-level midmanagers. These managers administered federal title programs to implement the new law, ensuring these funds were used to keep within the requirements of NLCB and the New Wisconsin Promise.
\par \par\par One of the committee's recommendations was to appoint a State Superintendent's Advisory Committee to administer the education technology funds available through NCLB's "Enhancing Education Through Technology" proposal. This committee was a logical outgrowth of a similar group that successfully advised on the previous federal technology grant program, the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund (TLCF).
