Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Overview of Title I-A Academic Accountability Provisions
Updated January 31, 2018
Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Overview of
Title I-A Academic Accountability Provisions
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was
state’s system of public higher education and relevant state
comprehensively reauthorized by the Every Student
career and technical education standards.
Succeeds Act (ESSA; P.L. 114-95) on December 10, 2015.
The ESSA made numerous changes to the standards,
The state is permitted to adopt alternate academic
assessments, and academic accountability requirements that
achievement standards for students with the most
pertain to Title I-A of the ESEA. The new accountability
significant cognitive disabilities provided, among other
requirements replaced or modified those enacted under the
requirements, that the standards are aligned with the
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB; P.L. 107-110).
challenging state content standards required for other
students. The state is also required to demonstrate that it has
Title I-A of the ESEA authorizes aid to local educational
adopted English language proficiency standards that are
agencies (LEAs) for the education of disadvantaged
derived from the domains of speaking, listening, reading,
children. Title I-A grants provide supplementary
and writing; address the different proficiency levels of
educational and related services to low-achieving and other
English learners; and are aligned with the challenging state
students attending elementary and secondary schools with
academic standards.
relatively high concentrations of students from low-income
families. As a condition of receiving Title I-A funds, states,
The ESEA explicitly states that a state is not required to
LEAs, and public schools must comply with numerous
submit the challenging state academic standards, alternative
requirements related to standards, assessments, and
academic standards, or English proficiency standards to the
academic accountability systems.
Secretary for review or approval. The Secretary also does
not have the authority “to mandate, direct, control, coerce,
State Plan
or exercise any direction or supervision over any of the
Each state educational agency (SEA) is required to submit a
challenging State academic standards adopted or
state plan delineating its academic accountability system,
implemented by a State.”
among other state plan requirements, for approval by the
U.S. Department of Education (ED) in order to receive Title
Assessments
I-A funds. This plan must be developed by the SEA with
Each state plan must demonstrate that the SEA, in
“timely and meaningful consultation” with other education
consultation with LEAs, has implemented assessments in
stakeholders, including governors, state boards of
mathematics, RLA, and science. The mathematics and RLA
education, members of the state legislature, school staff,
assessments must be administered in each of grades 3-8 and
and parents. The plan must be peer-reviewed through a
once during high school. The science assessment must be
process established by the Secretary of Education
administered once in grades 3-5, grades 6-9, and grades 10-
(hereinafter referred to as the Secretary) and then approved
12. Thus, each state must administer 17 assessments each
by the Secretary. The state plan will remain in effect for the
school year, but no individual student will take more than 3
duration of the state’s participation in Title I-A and must be
of these assessments in a given school year. The
periodically reviewed and revised as necessary by the SEA
assessments must be aligned with the state academic
to reflect any changes in the state’s strategies or programs
standards.
under Title I-A. As part of this plan, SEAs are required to
provide information on their standards, assessments, and
A state may implement alternate assessments aligned with
academic accountability systems. SEAs were required to
alternate academic achievement standards for students with
submit their state plans by April 3, 2017, or September 18,
the most significant cognitive disabilities. However, for
2017.
each subject tested, no more than 1% of all students tested
may take the alternate assessment. Each state plan must also
Standards
demonstrate that the LEAs in the state will administer an
Each state receiving Title I-A funds is required to provide
annual assessment of English proficiency for all English
an assurance in its state plan that it has adopted challenging
learners that is aligned with the state’s English language
academic content standards and aligned academic
proficiency standards.
achievement standards (hereinafter referred to as academic
standards) in reading or language arts (RLA), mathematics,
Accountability System
and science (and any other subject selected by the state).
Prior to the enactment of the ESSA, under the provisions of
The achievement standards must include at least three
NCLB the ESEA required SEAs to develop accountability
levels of achievement. In addition, states are required to
systems that included a focus on schools and LEAs making
demonstrate that these academic standards are aligned with
adequate yearly progress (AYP) each year, based on several
entrance requirements for credit-bearing coursework in the
specified measures that included performance goals based
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Overview of Title I-A Academic Accountability Provisions
on requirements specified in law. Failure to make AYP for
engagement, postsecondary readiness,
two consecutive years or more resulted in a specified
school climate).
system of outcome accountability requirements being
Based on these indicators, the SEA must establish a system
applied to a school or LEA, regardless of whether the
for annually “meaningfully differentiating” all public
school or LEA failed to meet AYP for one group of
schools that gives substantial weight to each indicator but in
students or multiple groups of students.
the aggregate provides greater weight to the first four
indicators than to the measure of school quality or student
Under the ESEA as amended by the ESSA, SEAs have
success indicator(s). The system must also identify any
greater latitude than under NCLB in creating their academic
school in which any subgroup of students is “consistently
accountability systems while maintaining the law’s focus
underperforming,” as determined by the state. The results of
on subgroup accountability. For accountability purposes,
this process are used to help determine which schools need
the ESEA continues to require separate accountability
additional support to improve student achievement.
determinations to be made for four subgroups of students:
(1) economically disadvantaged students, (2) students from
SEAs are required to identify for comprehensive support
major racial/ethnic groups, (3) children with disabilities,
and improvement (1) at least the lowest-performing 5% of
and (4) English learners. More specifically, SEAs have
all schools receiving Title I-A funds, (2) all public high
greater latitude in establishing systems for performance
schools failing to graduate 67% or more of their students,
goals, measures of progress, and consequences to be
(3) schools required to implement additional targeted
applied to schools for low performance.
support (see below) that have not improved in a state-
determined number of years, and (4) additional statewide
In its state plan, each SEA is required to describe its
categories of schools, at the state’s discretion. The LEAs in
accountability system. The system must include state
which schools are identified for comprehensive support and
established long-term goals (and measures of interim
improvement are required to work with stakeholders to
progress) for all students and separately for each subgroup
develop a school improvement plan that, among other
of students for academic achievement as measured by
requirements, must include evidence-based interventions,
proficiency on the state RLA and mathematics assessments
be based on a school-level needs assessment, and identify
and high school graduation rates. In addition, the goals for
resource inequities. An LEA may also offer students
subgroups of students who are behind on any of these
enrolled in a school identified for comprehensive support
measures must take into account the improvement needed
the option to transfer to another public school in the LEA. If
to close statewide achievement gaps. Also, the system must
a school does not improve within a state-determined
include long-term goals (and measures of interim progress)
number of years (no more than four years), the school must
for increases in the percentage of English learners making
be subject to more rigorous state-determined actions.
progress in achieving English proficiency, as defined by the
state.
States are required to identify for targeted support and
improvement any school in which a subgroup of students is
The state must then use a set of indicators that are based, in
consistently underperforming. Each of these schools is
part, on the long-term goals established by the state to
required to develop and implement a plan to improve
evaluate public schools. These indicators must include
student outcomes that includes evidence-based
interventions. For a school in which one or more subgroups
1. public school student performance on the
is performing at a level that if reflective of an entire
RLA and mathematics assessments as
school’s performance would result in its identification for
measured by student proficiency, and for
comprehensive support, the school must be identified for
high schools may also include a measure
additional targeted support and improvement activities,
of student growth on such assessments;
which must include an identification of resource inequities.
2. for public elementary and secondary
If a school identified for additional targeted support does
schools that are not high schools, the state
not improve within a state-determined number of years, the
must use a measure of student growth or
state is required to identify the school for comprehensive
another indicator that allows for
support and improvement.
“meaningful differentiation” in school
performance;
In its state plan, the SEA must also provide an explanation
3. for public high schools, the state must use
of how the state will factor into its accountability system
graduation rates;
the requirement that 95% of all students and each subgroup
of students participate in the required assessments.
4. for all public schools in the state, progress
in achieving English language proficiency
must also be used as an indicator; and
Rebecca R. Skinner, Specialist in Education Policy
5. for all public schools in the state, at least
IF10556
one indicator of school quality or student
success (e.g., measure of student
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Elementary and Secondary Education Act: Overview of Title I-A Academic Accountability Provisions
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10556 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED