Most state ESSA plans emphasized the district's role in school improvement over the state agency's role, a shift from No Child Left Behind.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2024: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In the reviewed state plans, LEAs were positioned as the lead actors in school turnaround, marking a notable change from the state-led approach under NCLB. → Dunn 2019

Evidence¶

Dunn 2019¶

Dunn, L., & Ambroso, E. (2019). Balancing act: State and district roles in school improvement under ESSA. San Francisco, CA: WestEd. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED602966

q2 · i? · qualitative · r2

Analysis of the 23 state ESSA plans found school improvement and turnaround "typically framed as a systemic issue with a large role for LEAs," with most plans emphasizing districts over SEAs, unlike under NCLB.

"In fact, most state plans emphasized the role of districts in school improvement over the role of the SEA. This is a notable change from school improvement under No Child Left Behind"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The SEA-as-resource-provider role was the most commonly emphasized approach, named in 10 of 23 state ESSA plans. — related
• An analysis of 23 state ESSA plans identified four main categories of SEA and LEA roles in school improvement: LEA Independence, SEA Oversight, SEA Resource, and SEA–LEA Collaboration. — related
• SEA staff describe their role as providing both support and accountability to LEAs, and describe struggling to balance the two. — related
• SEAs are leveraging ESSA requirements and increased flexibility to specify SEA and LEA roles and push evidence-based, locally contextualized improvement strategies. — related
• SEAs take on multiple, malleable roles in their work with LEAs, shifting based on identified needs, capacity, and context. — related
• SEAs differentiate support to districts based on the number of CSI/TSI-identified schools, district capacity, and district willingness to engage. — related
• The NCLB era's focus on targets and sanctions without educator capacity-building or component alignment was a key barrier to implementing new standards — related
• SEA administrators report shifting from compliance monitoring and grants management toward meaningful support and capacity-building for identified schools — related