Search

The growth of homeschooling from a somewhat fringe movement during the 1970s and 1980s to a more widespread and socially accepted approach in recent decades has provided a strong foundation of flexible learning models. When Florida's school choice expansion, House Bill 1, was introduced in January 2023, one of its goals was to allow more homeschoolers to participate in the education savings account (ESA) program. But many homeschoolers and homeschool advocacy groups balked at the proposal. Having worked hard to achieve independence, they were loath to be linked to government funding. Even if the program were optional, they feared that associated regulations would eventually extend to traditional homeschoolers. In the end, the bill passed with new language that satisfied traditional homeschoolers by creating a new option for parents to educate their children at home. As states continue to enact and expand education savings accounts, Colleen Hroncich argues that it is crucial that policymakers craft bills in a way that maximizes freedom and minimizes roadblocks.

This brief from the Region 2 Comprehensive Center, in consultation with the New York State Education Department, presents seven state case studies that illustrate the implementation of performance-based assessments. It contributes to the growing research on performance-based assessment, highlighting specific state-level policies that include performance-based assessments as part of a more robust assessment system.

While COVID-19 caused unimaginable disruptions to public education, we saw remarkable examples of innovation and commitment to supporting high school student success. In our New England landscape of learning research, we learned that the boundaries of what it means to "reinvent" high school stretched, and in some systems, the momentum for change accelerated. Students and teachers learned to work in new ways and reached new understandings about each other. Now, building off these lessons and in partnership with the Center for Public Research and Leadership (CPRL), we are engaged in an in-depth look at the American Rescue Plan (ARP), post-pandemic recovery in New England high schools. Our research is designed to reveal whether and how federal dollars are being directed toward supporting a better adolescent experience, how high schools are innovating and adapting to advance equity, and what kinds of choices students are making about their futures after high school. The results from this investigation will equip school and system leaders, state policymakers, and advocates--in New England and beyond--to better understand and support pandemic-era innovations that connect to what students and families need and want from high school.

The second of three "bright spot" briefs examines how states are leveraging ARP funds to improve SEL for all students through collaboration among schools, families, and communities. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP) provided a $122 billion historic federal investment in K-12 education to help states and districts safely reopen schools and address students' academic, social, and emotional learning in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. CASEL has recommended three priority areas for social and emotional learning (SEL) investment that can assist states and districts in optimizing ARP for student success: (1) Promote social and emotional learning (SEL) for students; (2) Align SEL efforts across schools, families, and communities; and (3) Support adult SEL competencies and capacity building. This "Bright Spots" brief highlights policy innovations around Priority Area 2--aligning SEL efforts across schools, families, and communities--through state investments in evidence-based SEL to support academic recovery and social and emotional well-being, the need for which was made abundantly clear by the COVID-19 pandemic. A brief for Priority Area 1 was published in December 2022 and an additional brief for Priority Area 3 is forthcoming. [For the Priority Area 1 brief, see ED626379.]

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), most recently comprehensively amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA; P.L. 114-95), is the primary source of federal aid to support elementary and secondary education. The Title I-A program is the largest grant program authorized under the ESEA and was funded at $17.5 billion for FY2022. It is designed to provide supplementary educational and related services to low-achieving and other students attending elementary and secondary schools with relatively high concentrations of students from low-income families. Under current law, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) determines Title I-A allocations to local educational agencies (LEAs) based on four separate funding formulas: Basic Grants, Concentration Grants, Targeted Grants, and Education Finance Incentive Grants (EFIG). State grants are the total of the allocations for all LEAs in the state under all four formulas. The four Title I-A formulas have somewhat distinct allocation patterns, providing varying shares of allocated funds to different types of LEAs and states. Thus, for some states, certain formulas are more favorable than others. This report provides FY2022 state grant amounts under each of the four formulas used to determine Title I-A grants. Overall, California received the largest FY2022 Title I-A grant amount ($2.1 billion, or 11.98% of total Title I-A grants to states). Vermont received the smallest FY2022 Title I-A grant amount ($40.1 million, or 0.23% of total Title I-A grants to states).

The new world of work demands not only academic knowledge and skills but also transferable skills such as communications, creativity, and collaboration--skills that are rarely captured formally. Meeting that demand will require a new approach to the high school diploma. The opportunity is ripe to redesign credentials to enable competency-based pathways and learning. The transcript for the next generation ("next gen") of learning and work will better represent what individuals have actually learned, what they know, and what they can do. It's time to explore how all learners (adults and youth) could record and communicate their learning from a variety of powerful learning experiences using the next generation of credentials. The goal of this report is to deepen state policy makers' understanding of the changes needed to facilitate meaningful next gen credentials and advance state policy to support those changes. This includes building support to modernize education, opening pathways for learning and reskilling, and providing value for lifelong learning to both individuals and employers. Students, families, employers, and organizations focused on education and employment, as well as nations around the globe, are exploring how to ensure students receive a world-class education that builds knowledge and skills needed for the future. New models of credentialing knowledge, skills, and qualifications are emerging to help achieve this goal. [Funding was provided by the Stand Together Trust.]

The community schools strategy transforms a school into a place where educators, local community members, families, and students work together to strengthen conditions for student learning and healthy development. As partners, they organize in- and out-of-school resources, supports, and opportunities so that young people thrive. A growing number of states are investing in community schools as a strategy to address long-standing social inequities that have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on a review of state American Rescue Plan Act plans, as well as state legislative and state education agency websites and other online resources, this report describes community school initiatives in eight states. The report highlights three potential approaches to state support for community schools: (1) ongoing support through school funding formulas; (2) competitive grant funding; and (3) capacity-building supports (such as certification processes).

There is a growing call to reconsider current approaches to national and state assessment system policies and practices. State and local education agency leaders, educators, community leaders, and advocates have voiced concerns that current state assessment systems--defined primarily by end-of-year multiple-choice tests--are unable to meet contemporary needs for information that supports teaching and learning. More than 20 states are involved in efforts to transform one or more aspects of their assessment systems; however, the process of securing federal assistance and approval to make transitions to substantially improved systems poses numerous challenges. This report synthesizes policy analyses and findings from legal and research analyses, as well as consultations with national, state, and local leaders, to (1) outline the history of federal testing guidance and state responses that have shaped the current context, (2) describe strategies states and districts are pursuing to evolve their assessment programs into high-quality systems that both signal and support better teaching and learning processes for all students, and (3) identify key ways that the federal government could support assessment reforms that enable thoughtful assessment of meaningful skills in ways that also better support teaching and learning. [This report was written in collaboration with Michael DiNapoli, Tara Kini, Tiffany Miller, and Julie Woods. For the Policy Brief, see ED630213.]

Innovation in education is vital for responding to emerging challenges, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, and for building progress on longstanding challenges in schools. The infusion of substantial, highly flexible pots of federal relief dollars created an opportunity to pilot new programs and initiatives. Many states and districts opted to invest resources in traditional K-12 expenses, such as increasing staff capacity or updating facilities. However, states are also using the funds to spark new initiatives that otherwise may not have been possible and can be replicated across the country. This Policy Guide presents six strategies along with state examples to assist in planning, designing, implementing, and sustaining innovative services and programs. In addition to these strategies, other researchers have developed models for change that put forward other unique approaches, such as allowing for locally driven variation, providing human capital support for ongoing technical assistance and tolerating small-scale risk. The end goal of using these approaches is to design innovative policies that endure and improve long-term student outcomes.

Data governance is a core obligation for leaders and staff across any agency that collects, stores or uses individuals' data. It ensures that individuals' personal information is protected, and can support the continuous improvement of data quality and use, particularly when it includes well-defined processes, structure and responsibilities. Effective data governance can promote trust among those who administer the data systems, those who use them and those whose private information the data systems collect. This Policy Brief stems from a Thinkers Meeting hosted by Education Commission of the States that gathered experts in data governance to discuss how state leaders can avoid common pitfalls that undermine data governance policies. The group developed six principles that can aid any state leader in establishing effective governance of data systems.

In this brief, authors Jess Carson and Sarah Boege describe changes in the early childhood education and care landscape of Grafton and Sullivan Counties in New Hampshire and Orange and Windsor Counties in Vermont, collectively known as the Upper Valley. The authors find that the Upper Valley lost 25 regulated child care providers serving children under age 5 between 2017 and 2021. However, with closure rates twice as high among family-based providers than among center-based providers and some new providers opening, the net number of slots has remained relatively stable (5,169 slots in 2021). The overall effect has been to consolidate available care into fewer, larger settings across the region. Three-quarters of Upper Valley providers open in 2017 were still open in 2021, reflecting greater stability than in non-Upper Valley portions of New Hampshire (71 percent) or Vermont (65 percent). However, the authors caution that early childhood educator workforce shortages limit the ability of child care providers to remain fully operational. They conclude by noting that workforce-supporting policy proposals differ in intensity across states, building on a stronger foundation of investments in Vermont than in New Hampshire. [This brief is part of the "Early Childhood in the Upper Valley Series."]

In this brief, the authors illustrate New Hampshire and Vermont's different responses to supporting the early childhood education and care sector during the COVID-19 pandemic and examine the limited publicly available data on pandemic relief funds through the lens of the interstate Upper Valley region. While data limitations preclude the authors from identifying which child care pandemic relief programs worked best and for whom, the authors find spatial and program type differences in relief receipt. Using data from interviews with early childhood educators in the Upper Valley, the authors identify the role that temporary relief funds have played in keeping the sector afloat during the pandemic. While relief funds served the role of "keeping the doors open" for many providers, these short-term funds are unable to address the deep-seated challenges of the sector's unsustainable economic model, a challenge that predated the pandemic and has worsened since. The authors conclude by identifying important policy steps to support the sector in New Hampshire, Vermont, and beyond. [This brief is part of the "Early Childhood in the Upper Valley Series." For the prior brief in this series, "Why Interstate Child Care Scholarship Policy Choices Matter in the Upper Valley: "You Can Only Charge the Families so Much." National Issue Brief #167," see ED629671.]

In this brief, the authors explore how state-level decisions in New Hampshire and Vermont manifest in the early childhood education and care sector, through the lens of the interstate Upper Valley region. They demonstrate the significant differences in the reach and adequacy of child care financial assistance programs ("child care scholarships") across state lines, with Vermont's program setting family income eligibility thresholds higher and delivering higher-value reimbursements to child care providers than New Hampshire's program. While scholarships are key for widening low-income families' access to high quality care, they are not a panacea. Not all eligible families participate in child care scholarship programs. Those who do may still be required to pay substantial cost shares. Similarly, not all providers accept scholarships as payment, due to low reimbursement rates and administrative burdens. The authors identify key policy opportunities to strengthen scholarships' impact, including expanding family eligibility, increasing reimbursement rates to providers, and encouraging providers to participate in scholarship programs. [This brief is part of the "Early Childhood in the Upper Valley Series." For the prior brief in this series, "Changing Child Care Supply in New Hampshire and Vermont's Upper Valley. National Issue Brief #166," see ED629709.]

Research has demonstrated the wide-ranging and positive benefits from high-quality publicly-funded prekindergarten education. Yet, access for families with young children remains uneven, with significant gaps across geography, income, race, and ethnicity. Over the last few decades, many states have worked to broaden access to prekindergarten education (pre-K), but only three states--Oklahoma, Florida, and Vermont--have implemented statewide universal pre-K programs (UPK). In this report, the authors consider the three case studies of state universal pre-K programs--Oklahoma, Florida, and Vermont. In doing so, they outline the development, structure, and implementation of each state's UPK program and analyze the relative accessibility, quality, funding, and impacts of their programs. In analyzing these case studies, the authors consider how they can be instructive for other states as they seek to expand and improve pre-K policies and programs, in particular, for policymakers in New York State as they continue to work to expand access to pre-K and move the state towards more universal access.

Next generation accountability systems can empower states, districts, communities, and schools with timely, relevant information and provide the capacity to analyze and continuously improve instruction and learning. After 21 years of the current accountability framework in federal and state policy in the United States, there is growing recognition that it is not working for students, families, and communities to improve teaching and learning, nor preparing them for the future. This issue brief explores how policymakers can approach rethinking, redesigning, and rearchitecting next generation accountability systems.

Nearly 1 in 5 U.S. students attend rural schools. Researchers report that at least half of public schools are rural in 12 states (i.e., Montana, South Dakota, Vermont, North Dakota, Maine, Alaska, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Mississippi) (Showalter et al., 2019). Providing quality education to all rural students is a daunting task and needs the support of policy and research. In 2018, the Center for Public Education (CPE) of the National School Boards Association published "Out of the Loop: Rural Schools Are Largely Left out of Research and Policy Discussions, Exacerbating Poverty, Inequity, and Isolation" (ED608842), a comprehensive report on U.S. rural K-12 public education. Today, the data and research presented in the report are about five years old. However, the facts, together with the suggested policies and practices about rural education, are still valid and accurate. After a two-year pandemic, issues related to funding, teacher recruitment and retention, and serving disadvantaged students have become more severe in rural school districts. This five-part series is a data-driven study to inform policymakers, school leaders, educators, and parents. The primary research goal was to examine educational equity for rural students. In Part 3, this report focuses on the student achievement gap and teacher shortages in rural areas. It first looks at the diversity of rural students on the Nation's Report Card and examines whether there is any regional, demographic, or geographical pattern of student academic performance in fourth and eighth grade reading and math. Based on the findings, it also discusses five unique learning opportunities that rural students often miss and encourage education leaders to consider providing more policy and practice support in those fields. [For "Educational Equity for Rural Students: Out of the Pandemic, but Still Out of the Loop. A Five-Part Series. Part 2: An Urgent Need to Fix the Digital Divide," see ED628332.]

Nearly 1 in 5 U.S. students attend rural schools. Researchers report that at least half of public schools are rural in 12 states (i.e., Montana, South Dakota, Vermont, North Dakota, Maine, Alaska, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Mississippi) (Showalter et al., 2019). Providing quality education to all rural students is a daunting task and needs the support of policy and research. In 2018, the Center for Public Education (CPE) of the National School Boards Association published "Out of the Loop: Rural Schools Are Largely Left out of Research and Policy Discussions, Exacerbating Poverty, Inequity, and Isolation" (ED608842), a comprehensive report on U.S. rural K-12 public education. Today, the data and research presented in the report are about five years old. However, the facts, together with the suggested policies and practices about rural education, are still valid and accurate. After a two-year pandemic, issues related to funding, teacher recruitment and retention, and serving disadvantaged students have become more severe in rural school districts. This five-part series is a data-driven study to inform policymakers, school leaders, educators, and parents. The primary research goal was to examine educational equity for rural students. In Part 2, the report addresses how the persistent digital divide--often referred to as the homework gap--causes underserved rural students to face more challenges and disadvantages (NSBA, 2020). The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the urgency of building equal access to internet services in rural areas. To fix the digital divide, we suggest that policymakers look at data about internet accessibility and affordability in rural areas and prioritize specific strategies to close the homework gap caused by the inadequate broadband access of rural students. [For "Educational Equity for Rural Students: Out of the Pandemic, but Still Out of the Loop. A Five-Part Series. Part 1: Growing Diversity of Rural Students," see ED628330.]

Nearly 1 in 5 U.S. students attend rural schools. Researchers report that at least half of public schools are rural in 12 states (i.e., Montana, South Dakota, Vermont, North Dakota, Maine, Alaska, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Mississippi) (Showalter et al., 2019). Providing quality education to all rural students is a daunting task and needs the support of policy and research. In 2018, the Center for Public Education (CPE) of the National School Boards Association published "Out of the Loop: Rural Schools Are Largely Left out of Research and Policy Discussions, Exacerbating Poverty, Inequity, and Isolation" (ED608842), a comprehensive report on U.S. rural K-12 public education. Today, the data and research presented in the report are about five years old. However, the facts, together with the suggested policies and practices about rural education, are still valid and accurate. After a two-year pandemic, issues related to funding, teacher recruitment and retention, and serving disadvantaged students have become more severe in rural school districts. This five-part series is a data-driven study to inform policymakers, school leaders, educators, and parents. The primary research goal was to examine educational equity for rural students. In Part 1, the report discusses enrollment changes in rural schools and the growing diversity of rural students. Overlooking the broad diversity of rural students can lead to oversimplifying issues in rural schools. To illustrate the diversity of rural students, it not only presents data about the demographic changes of rural students, but also report isolation levels, poverty concentration, regional differences in poverty, and other challenges.

The vast majority of funds for pre-K through grade 12 public schools in the United States -- nearly $800 billion or over 90% -- come from state and local funding sources. States, not school districts, are obligated to ensure that all students have access to the resources they need to succeed. States can take steps to reduce disparities between districts based on their property wealth. This brief outlines three broad ways that states can allocate state and local revenue more equitably, as well as examples from states that have enacted these policies. The three policy approaches are as follows: (1) Accurately calculating and incorporating measures of local wealth into funding formulas; (2) Allocating additional funding to less wealthy districts; and (3) Exerting state control over property tax policy.

Salaries are one of the most powerful policy levers states and school districts can use to attract qualified, effective, and diverse teachers. What role do states play in supporting strategic use of salaries? This report examines the state teacher compensation policies that influence districts' potential strategic use of teacher pay. It analyzes three types of state policies that aim to attain three purposes: (1) Differentiated pay: To attract teachers to traditionally hard-to-staff subjects or schools; (2) Performance pay: To reward high-performing teachers; and (3) Pay for prior work: To compensate teacher candidates for prior experience relevant to teaching. With the influx of federal Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds, some states have designed new or expanded already existing initiatives aimed to attract or retain teachers to hard-to-staff positions. The analysis in this report includes these state strategies, while acknowledging that they might only remain in place temporarily while ESSER funds remain available. [For the the second report in this three-part series, "State of the States 2021: Teacher Preparation Policy," see ED611532.]

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), most recently comprehensively amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA; P.L. 114-95), is the primary source of federal aid to support elementary and secondary education. The Title I-A program is the largest grant program authorized under the ESEA and was funded at $16.5 billion for FY2021. It is designed to provide supplementary educational and related services to low-achieving and other students attending elementary and secondary schools with relatively high concentrations of students from lowincome families. Under current law, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) determines Title I-A grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) based on four separate funding formulas: Basic Grants, Concentration Grants, Targeted Grants, and Education Finance Incentive Grants (EFIG). State grants are the total of the allocations for all LEAs in the state under all four formulas. The four Title I-A formulas have somewhat distinct allocation patterns, providing varying shares of allocated funds to different types of LEAs and states. Thus, for some states, certain formulas are more favorable than others. This report provides FY2021 state grant amounts under each of the four formulas used to determine Title I-A grants. Overall, California received the largest FY2021 Title I-A grant amount ($2.0 billion, or 12.48% of total Title I-A grants). Vermont received the smallest FY2021 Title I-A grant amount ($37.5 million, or 0.23% of total Title I-A grants).

This technical supplement to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Employment and Training (E&T) evaluation final reports presents details of the technical approach used for creating analysis variables and estimating impacts of treatment group services on outcomes, including employment, earnings, and SNAP participation. It also describes the statistical approach used to measure participants' receipt of services and the costs grantees incurred when planning the pilots and providing services. The supplement begins with an overview of the evaluation design and data sources. Next, it discusses imputation procedures used when constructing the analysis data files (Chapter II). It then explains the construction of analysis weights (Chapter III), followed by the approaches used to estimate statistics measuring individuals' participation in services and activities (Chapter IV). The supplement then describes the approach used to estimate impacts for all individuals enrolled in the pilot and for subgroups of individuals (Chapter V). Finally, it discusses the approach used to measure and analyze pilots' planning and implementation costs and estimating the pilot benefits relative to their costs (Chapter VI). This supplement describes the technical approach used to produce findings presented in the 10 pilot-specific final evaluation reports and cross-pilot summary report. [Title cover varies: "Expanding Opportunities & Reducing Barriers to Work: Final Report Technical Supplement. (Evaluation of USDA, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Employment and Training Pilots)." For the Final Summary Report, see ED620374.]

The Agricultural Act of 2014 authorized $200 million for the development, implementation, and evaluation of pilot projects to test innovative strategies to reduce dependency on and increase employment among Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants. California, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Mississippi, Vermont, Virginia and Washington received grants in March 2015 and began implementing their pilots between January and April 2016. All grantees concluded pilot services by April 2019. The final summary report presents employment, earnings, SNAP participation, and other outcome findings that cover a 36-month period for individuals enrolled in the pilots by December 2017. It also presents findings from the implementation evaluation and cost-benefit analysis. The report summarizes findings from the 10 pilot-specific final reports. Key findings include: (1) Earnings increased in three pilots and employment increased in five pilots for the treatment group compared to the control group; (2) An increase in employment did not mean that earnings increased; (3) Pilots generally did not decrease SNAP participation or improve food security; and (4) The cost of pilot services outweighed benefits in most pilots. [Cover title varies: "Expanding Opportunities & Reducing Barriers to Work: Final Summary Report. (Evaluation of USDA, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Employment and Training Pilots)." Staff from the following organizations assisted with this study: MDRC; Insight Policy Research; Decision Information Resources; and Food and Nutrition Service's Office of Employment and Training (OET). For the summary of the Final Summary Report, see ED620373. For the Final Report Technical Supplement, see ED620381. For the Interim Summary Report, see ED620376.]

To best train and support school leaders in their evolving roles, they require high-quality preparation and in-service pipelines that both address the changing demands on their positions and acknowledge the cascading effects that well-prepared leaders have on both student outcomes and in school culture and retention. Including school leaders in the policymaking process will help guide state leaders on the most effective approaches for their states and needs. To that end, this Policy Brief explores school leader representation on state and local boards of education and on statewide task forces and commissions. The brief also presents an overview of the school leadership pipeline and examples of recent legislative action in 13 states that supports development along the continuum.

A primary focus for the Vermont Agency of Education (AOE) has been on increasing student literacy. This focus, coupled with the passage of Act 28 in 2021, which provides funding and technical assistance to improve literacy outcomes, prompted the AOE to request support related to literacy from the Region 1 Comprehensive Center (R1CC). Specifically, the AOE wanted to better understand the degree to which Vermont certified teachers, who attended Vermont educator preparation programs (EPPs) were prepared to use evidence-based literacy instructional practices. This project reviewed 20 course syllabi from a sample of six Vermont EPPs. These EPPs support 60% of educators recommended for certification in early childhood, early childhood special education, and elementary pathways. The syllabi were reviewed using two Innovation Configuration (ICs) maps from the Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability, and Reform (CEEDAR) Center. The review found that many of the EPPs offered reading and writing courses whose syllabi contained evidence of the 10 essential components identified by the IC maps. The results from the syllabi review and discussions with the EPPs following the review provide early insights into the degree to which Vermont EPPs are teaching preservice educators to use evidence-based practice in literacy instruction in their future classrooms.

Despite the relative increase in early care and education (ECE) investment over recent decades, access to infant and toddler care continues to be a hurdle for countless families across the nation. While access is a multifaceted issue, main contributors include a lack of available slots and the high cost of providing care to infants and toddlers. Federal programs intended to increase access to high-quality care (e.g., Child Care and Development Fund [CCDF] subsidy) have strict eligibility requirements and only reach a fraction of eligible families. As a result, families of infants and toddlers may be forced to choose from a limited array of ECE options or leave the workforce to care for their child. Simultaneously, insufficient compensation, demanding conditions, and minimal supports contribute to challenges with ECE workforce recruitment and retention. These factors suggest a need for effective policies and practices to help families find and use affordable care that meets the needs of their infants and toddlers. This document highlights various strategies that states have used to strengthen the infant and toddler workforce and system of care. While each strategy is described individually, some are combined with other strategies in practice. Strategies described in this resource address the following topic areas: (1) Supply of infant toddler care; (2) Workforce standards and professional support; and (3) Compensation.

In summer 2020, the Center on Reinventing Public Education (CRPE), with support from the Barr Foundation, began observing and learning from students, parents, and educators in New England high schools as they navigated the uncertainty of the pandemic. The authors wanted to see what challenges and opportunities they faced, the ways in which they adapted to disruptions, and the new strategies and capacities that took hold. After more than a year of disruption, the boundaries of what it means to "reinvent" high school stretched, and in some systems, the momentum for change accelerated. Students and teachers learned to work in new ways and reached new understandings about each other. When COVID wanes, schools will encounter a host of new and complex demands as they make sense of the pandemic's challenges and opportunities, including addressing unfinished learning, spending a tidal wave of federal funding, and navigating continued calls for racial and social justice amid a national culture war. The path forward raises a host of critical questions: (1) Will school systems leverage momentum from the pandemic to remake high school? If so, what adaptations and innovations will they embrace? And which students will benefit from these shifts?; (2) How do school system leaders, educators, families, and students redefine success in high school? To what extent and how are these aspirations reflected in the adaptations and innovations that school systems embrace?; and (3) What opportunities and obstacles do school system leaders, educators, families, and students confront as they seek to chart a new course to high school? How can they avoid the pitfalls that threaten to stall progress, especially for the most marginalized students? As the pandemic endures, and as we emerge from it, CRPE will continue to investigate whether and how the trends described lead to a more equitable, student-centered high school experience. In this effort, Think Forward New England explores not only what shifts emerge postpandemic but also why, for whom, and with what effect.

This brief highlights key findings from the implementation of the TechHire and Strengthening Working Families Initiative (SWFI) programs and offers considerations for practitioners. The programs provided training for high-tech jobs as well as support services to people with barriers to training and employment. Presented especially for a practitioner audience and derived from a rigorous evaluation, including visits to TechHire and SWFI programs, interviews with staff members, and a review of program participation data, the brief describes staff members' experiences of facilitators and challenges related to recruiting for these types of training programs and delivering a range of services, including technical skills training, case management, support services, child care assistance, and job placement and other post-training services. The brief offers considerations for practitioners involved in planning or implementing similar programs.

Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont and Education Commissioner Charlene Russell-Tucker announced the expansion of the northeastern reciprocity agreement to include certified educators throughout the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and beyond. As of April 21, 2022, "educators in Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia who hold an 'active, valid certificate' may apply and obtain a Connecticut certificate after verification by the State Department of Education," according to a press release. To help further inform the Connecticut State Department of Education's (CSDE) recommendation that the State Board of Education adopt the enhanced reciprocity policy, the Region 2 Comprehensive Center (R2CC) developed the "Teacher Certification Reciprocity Tool," which compares certification requirements among the identified states and territories. The tool also significantly reduces the time required for CSDE analysts to approve out-of-state candidates for certification.

As the country continues to transition into a new normal because of the the COVID-19 pandemic, it is critical that schools and educators adopt a "whole child" approach to education, incorporating teaching methods that account for the ways that children grow and learn in their relationships, identity, emotional understanding, and overall wellbeing. Whole child education helps students prepare for the challenges and opportunities of today and the future by addressing students' comprehensive needs through the shared responsibility of students, families, schools, and communities. This report lays out the tenets of whole child education, the current state of whole child education, and policy considerations.

States have recognized the impact of high-quality early childhood education (ECE) on a child's later college and career readiness and success in life. Yet disparities in program access, quality, and resource allocation continue to deprive many young children and their families of adequate support. By investigating and applying state boards' authority and their impact in collaborating with legislatures and governors, more states can develop effective policies to strengthen the ECE system and ensure equitable access to high-quality learning for young children. This policy update reflects information gathered from news reports and state board meeting agendas and minutes that chronicle state policy activity in 2023 affecting children's access to education from birth to third grade. While not a comprehensive review of state actions last year, this report does provide a snapshot of trending issues and approaches.

The Agricultural Act of 2014 authorized $200 million for the development, implementation, and evaluation of up to 10 pilot projects to test innovative strategies to reduce dependency on and increase employment among Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants. The 10 States that received grants were California, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Mississippi, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington and began implementing their pilots between January and April 2016. All grantees concluded pilot services by April 2019. The Interim Summary Report presents short-term outcome findings that cover each individual for 12 months after enrollment in the pilots for individuals who enrolled by December 2017. The report also includes findings on the implementation evaluation and cost analysis. The report summarizes findings drawn from interim evaluation reports prepared for each of the 10 pilots. The final evaluation reports will present longer-term (36-month) outcomes that may offer more conclusive evidence about the effectiveness of pilot services. This brief document describes the methods and findings of the Interim Summary Report. [For the full report, see ED620376.]

The Agricultural Act of 2014 authorized $200 million for the development, implementation, and evaluation of pilot projects to test innovative strategies to reduce dependency on and increase employment among Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants. California, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Mississippi, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington received grants in March 2015 and began implementing their pilots between January and April 2016. All grantees concluded pilot services by April 2019. The interim summary report presents short-term outcome findings for the 12 month period after pilot enrollment for individuals who enrolled by December 2017. This report summarizes findings from the 10 pilot-specific interim reports. Key findings include: (1) The 10 pilots implemented diverse service models and served various target groups; (2) Grantees faced steep implementation challenges such as hiring staff and developing partnerships; (3) Both pilot engagement and exit rates were high during the 12 month follow-up period; and (4) The pilots had few impacts on employment and did not decrease SNAP participation during the fourth quarter. [Staff from the following organizations assisted with this study: Insight Policy Research; Koné Consulting; Decision Information Resources; Food and Nutrition Service's Office of Policy Support (OPS); and FNS Office of Employment and Training (OET). For the summary of the Interim Summary Report, see ED620375. For the Interim Report Technical Supplement, see ED620378.]