Administrators LEAD & MANAGE MY SCHOOL
Decision Letter on Request to Amend New Jersey Accountability Plan

June 17, 2004

Honorable William L. Librera
Commissioner of Education
New Jersey Department of Education
100 River View Plaza
P.O. Box 500
Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0500

Dear Commissioner Librera:

I am writing in response to New Jersey's request to amend its state accountability plan under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). Following our discussions with your staff, those changes that are aligned with NCLB are now included in an amended state accountability plan that New Jersey submitted to the Department on June 10, 2004. A list of the changes is enclosed with this letter. I am pleased to fully approve New Jersey's amended plan, which we will post on the Department’s website.

If, over time, New Jersey makes changes to the accountability plan that has been approved, New Jersey must submit information about those changes to the Department for review and approval, as required by section 1111(f)(2) of Title I. Approval of New Jersey's accountability plan is not also an approval of New Jersey's standards and assessment system. As New Jersey makes changes in its standards and assessments to meet requirements under NCLB, New Jersey must submit information about those changes to the Department for peer review through the standards and assessment process.

Please also be aware that approval of New Jersey’s accountability plan for Title I, including the amendments approved above, does not indicate that the plan complies with Federal civil rights requirements, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

I hope that you have found the accountability plan amendment process effective for implementing a state accountability system that best serves the needs of New Jersey's students and schools and that will lead to improving the academic achievement of all students. As evidenced by the diversity among state accountability plans and state consolidated applications, States have great flexibility in the design of their systems and implementation of particular NCLB provisions. If, as you implement your accountability plan, you find additional elements of your plan that you believe should be refined or amended for next school year to best serve the needs of your students and schools, I encourage you to explore all the areas of flexibility available to your State.

In addition to the flexibility available to States in the design and implementation of their accountability plans, I also encourage you and your districts to utilize the additional flexibility available for the administration and operation of NCLB programs. NCLB continued the flexibility available to States and districts under the 1994 reauthorization of the ESEA, including the ability to consolidate state and local administrative funds (sections 9201 and 9203), to operate schoolwide programs (section 1114), and to participate in the Education Flexibility Partnership Program ("Ed-Flex"). Additionally, NCLB created several new flexibility options for States and districts for the operation of federal programs. These new flexibility provisions include the State Flexibility Authority (sections 6141 through 6144), the Local Flexibility Demonstration program (sections 6151 through 6156), Transferability (sections 6121 through 6123), and the Rural Education Achievement program (sections 6201 through 6234). These flexibilities truly offer States and districts the ability to target federal resources to their unique and individual needs.

I am confident that New Jersey will continue to advance its efforts to hold schools and school districts accountable for the achievement of all students. I wish you well in your school improvement efforts. If I can be of any additional assistance to New Jersey in its efforts to implement other aspects of NCLB, please do not hesitate to call.

Sincerely,

Raymond Simon
Assistant Secretary
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education

Enclosure

cc: Governor James E. McGreevey


Enclosure

Amendments to the New Jersey Accountability Plan

These statements are summaries of the amendments. For complete details, please refer to the New Jersey Accountability plan on the Department's website: http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/stateplans03/index.html

Participation Rate (Element 3.2)

Revision: New Jersey has established 40 as the minimum group size to use when calculating the participation rate of a school and its subgroups.

Minimum Group Size (Element 5.5)

Revision: New Jersey has established 35 as the minimum group size for special education students in its AYP decisions.

Assessment and Accountability for LEP students (Element 5.4)

Revision: New Jersey will include the flexibility that the Secretary’s letter of February 20, 2004 provides relative to limited English proficient students for assessment and accountability purposes.

Alternate assessments (Element 5.5)

Revision: New Jersey will implement the final regulation in the Federal Register issued December 9, 2003, concerning the 1.0% cap. Specifically, New Jersey will ensure that the number of proficient and advanced scores based on the alternate achievement standards does not exceed 1.0% of all students in the grades assessed at the State and LEA levels.

Rewards, sanctions and interventions for districts (Element 1.6 and 2.2)

Revision: New Jersey will prioritize its instructional intervention efforts to districts based on the extent to which a district did not make AYP.

Technical amendments.

New Jersey updated its language for a number of elements in the accountability plan to provide more information for its own educators. Updates were made in the following elements: student assignment to a school (Element 1.1), report cards (Element 1.5), determining AYP (Element 3.2), reporting (Element 5.6), other academic indicators rate (Element 7.1-7.3), and AYP reliability and validity (Element 9.1).

Table of Contents Decision Letters on State Accountability Plans


 
Print this page Printable view Send this page Share this page
Last Modified: 09/15/2004