Less than two weeks after the U.S. House of Representatives moved to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) by passing the Student Success Act (H.R. 5), the Senate followed suit by passing the Every Child Achieves Act (S. 1177) by a vote of 81 to 17.

This historic achievement comes seven years after No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was due for reauthorization. The bill was opposed by 14 Republicans who felt the bill did not go far enough to restore local control in education and three Democrats because of concerns over missing civil rights provisions.

The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-TN) issued the following statement after the bill passed the Senate:

“Last week, Newsweek Magazine called this the ‘law that everyone wants to fix’—and today the Senate’s shown that not only is there broad consensus on the need to fix this law—remarkably, there’s also broad consensus on how to fix it.”

HELP Committee Ranking Member Patty Murray (D-WA) was also pleased with the passage of the Every Child Achieves Act:

 “Today, the Senate cleared a major hurdle with this strong bipartisan vote to fix the badly broken No Child Left Behind law, but we still have important work to do as this bill moves to a conference and before it is signed into law.”

Throughout this process, the Senate considered 78 amendments, 66 of which were adopted. You can access the Committee for Education Funding’s complete list of the results for each amendment here.

Some of the more notable amendments that passed were:

  • An amendment by Sen. Edward Markey (D-MA) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) to establish a Student Privacy Policy Committee to conduct a study on the effectiveness of federal laws and enforcement mechanisms along with parental rights to student information (passed 89-0)
  • An amendment by Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) to modify the Title I funding formula (passed 59-39)
  • An amendment by Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) to require local education agencies to inform parents of any state or local education agency policy, procedure, or parental right regarding student participation in any mandated assessments for that school year (passed 97-0)
  • An amendment by Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) to provide for early college high school and dual or concurrent enrollment opportunities (passed by voice vote)
  • An amendment by Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) to require States to establish a limit on the aggregate amount of time spent on assessments (passed by voice vote)

Some of the noteworthy amendments that failed were:

  • An amendment by Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) to allow parents to opt their children out of federally mandated assessments (failed 32-64)
  • An amendment by Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) to end discrimination based on actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity in public schools (failed 52-45)
  • An amendment by Sen. Chris Murphy to increase subgroup accountability for underperforming groups (failed 43-54)
  • An amendment by Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) to reinstate grants to improve the mental health of children (failed 58-39)
  • An amendment by Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) to ensure that states measure and report on indicators of student access to critical educational resources and identify disparities in such resources (failed 46-50)
  • An amendment by Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) to allow federal funds for the education of disadvantaged children to follow low-income children to accredited public or private schools (failed 45-52)
  • An amendment by Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) to allow states to opt out of federal education regulations while continuing to received federal funds
  • An amendment by Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) to provide mandatory funding for universal pre-K education (failed 45-52)

While NASSP supported the bill, there are several aspects that must be improved during conference committee. NASSP along with the National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP) and the American Federation of School Administrators (AFSA) issued a joint statement on the passage of the Every Child Achieves Act.

Now that the House and Senate have both passed bills to reauthorize ESEA, a bipartisan group of representatives and senators will go to conference committee to try and resolve the major differences between the two bills. It is still unclear when the conference committee will occur and it could take several weeks—if not months—before a bill is produced that can pass both chambers while also receiving support from President Obama.

The NASSP advocacy staff will continue to follow the reauthorization of ESEA, so be sure to follow Amanda Karhuse (@akarhuse) and David Chodak (@dnchodak) on Twitter for updates.

Months after their bill to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was pulled from the floor due to a lack of votes, the House squeaked through final passage of the Student Success Act (H.R. 5) in a 218-213 vote on July 8. If enacted, the bill would replace the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act as the law governing elementary, middle, and high schools.

“For too long, Washington’s priorities have outweighed what parents, teachers, and local leaders know is best for their children,” said House Education and the Workforce Chairman John Kline (R-MN) in a press release about the bill’s passage. “Today, we took an important step in a bold, new direction. After years of working with education stakeholders and members of Congress, I’m pleased the House has advanced responsible reforms that would give the American people what they deserve: a commonsense law that will help every child in every school receive an excellent education.”

Before the final vote, the House considered a series of amendments, including one offered by Rep. Mark Walker (R-NC) to add the A Plus Act to the bill. NASSP strongly opposed this proposal, which would have consolidated a number of federal programs into a block grant and allowed states to direct the funding to any purpose under state law. Fortunately, the amendment was defeated in a 195-235 vote.

The House approved the following amendments before final passage:

  • An amendment by Rep. Matt Salmon (R-AZ) to allow parents to opt their students out of the testing requirements under the bill and exempt schools from including those students in their 95 percent participation requirement (approved 251-178)
  • An amendment by Rep. Todd Rokita (R-IN) to have the bill’s authorization expire in FY 2019 instead of FY 2021 (approved by voice vote)
  • An amendment by Rep. David Loebsack (D-IA) to authorize a competitive grant for the implementation and evaluation of technology-based learning practices, strategies, tools, or programs in rural schools (approved 218-213)
  • An amendment by Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) to allow states to withdraw from the Common Core State Standards Initiative (approved 373-57)
  • An amendment by Rep. Will Hurd (R-TX) to express the sense of Congress that students’ personally identifiable information is important to protect (approved 424-2)

House Education and the Workforce Committee Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-VA) offered a substitute amendment that would have totally replaced the text of H.R. 5 with his own proposal, but that amendment failed on a 187-244 vote. Democrats also offered a motion to recommit, which is a parliamentary maneuver to allow those opposed to the bill to further voice their concerns. That motion also was defeated by a vote of 185-244.

NASSP, in collaboration with the National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP) and the American Federation of School Administrators (AFSA), had formally opposed H.R. 5 when the bill was first considered in February. While we are pleased that the bill would eliminate adequate yearly progress and the 100 proficiency requirements in NCLB, remove the unworkable school turnaround models in the School Improvement Grants program, and cap the amount of Title II funds that may be used for class size reduction, we feel that the bad outweighs the good. In our letter to Chairman Kline, we expressed concern about the authorization levels in the bill for Title I; a proposal to make Title I portable; the lack of mandatory funding for professional development; and no additional resources for middle and high schools, literacy, or education technology.

All eyes now turn to the Senate, which began debate on its ESEA reauthorization bill, the Every Child Achieves Act (S. 1177), on July 7. The bill had been introduced as a bipartisan bill after a unanimous vote in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee on April 23.

Over the past three days, the Senate has considered a number of amendments with many more expected to be filed before final passage, which is expected early next week. In a big win for public schools, the Senate rejected, 45-52, an amendment offered by Senate HELP Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-TN) that would have authorized a $24 billion private school voucher program by eliminating numerous programs authorized under ESEA. The Senate also rejected the A Plus amendment offered by Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) by a vote of 44-54.

The NASSP advocacy staff will continue to follow the Senate debate this week, so be sure to follow Amanda Karhuse (@akarhuse) and David Chodak (@dnchodak) on Twitter for live updates.

The Republicans on the House and Senate Appropriations Committees continue to move forward with their goal of passing all 12 appropriations bills before the September 30 deadline, but not without a fight from the White House and Committee Democrats who have serious concerns with the proposed funding levels in the FY 2016 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education (L-HHS-ED) Appropriations bills. They believe that in order to provide robust funding for education, the sequester caps must be increased by striking a deal similar to the Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) agreement in 2013.

For the first time in six years, the House Appropriations Committee marked up the L-HHS-ED Appropriations bill, which was approved on a party-line vote of 30-21 on June 24. The bill would cut funding for the Department of Education by $2.8 billion while also eliminating 27 education programs, including the School Leadership Program, the Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Program, School Improvement State Grants, Investing in Innovation (i3), and Preschool Development Grants among others.

The bill does provide small increases for Title I, IDEA, Head Start, Impact Aid, and Charter School Grants to name a few. The Committee for Education Funding (CEF) created a full summary of the House L-HHS-ED bill, which can be accessed here.

The committee approved their bill a day after Shaun Donovan, Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) sent a letter to House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-KY) voicing strong opposition to the L-HHS-ED bill because of its underinvestment in health care, job training, public health, and education. Without bipartisan support and increased funding, it is quite possible that President Obama will veto the bill.

On June 25, the Senate Appropriations Committee considered the L-HHS-ED bill, which was reported out with a 16-14 party-line vote. The bill would cut the Department of Education’s budget by $1.7 billion in FY 2016 and would eliminate 10 education programs including Investing in Innovation (i3), Preschool Development Grants, and the Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Program among others. The bill does provide a $2 billion increase for the National Institute of Health (NIH) along with increases to IDEA State Grants, Charter School Grants, and Pell Grants. You can access CEF’s summary of the Senate L-HHS-ED bill here.

In response to the elimination of the School Leadership program, NASSP along with the National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP), the American Federation of School Administrators (AFSA), and New Leaders sent a letter to the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the House and Senate Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee.

We requested, at a minimum, level funding of $16.4 million in FY 2016 for the School Leadership Program while also urging the removal of the sequester caps in order to increase nondefense discretionary (NDD) spending. In addition, the Committee for Education Funding (CEF)—a coalition of 118 organizations including NASSP—sent a letter to the Appropriations Committees urging a removal of the sequester caps.

It is now up to House and Senate leadership if and when to bring up these spending bills for debate on their respective floors. Republicans have stated that they want all 12 Appropriations bills passed before the August recess, which means these bills must be brought up sometime in July. As the federal budget and appropriations process moves forward, NASSP will continue to advocate for an overall increase to education funding as well a restoration of key programs like the School Leadership Program, the Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Program, and the High School Graduation Initiative.

Senate Career and Technical Education Caucus

In Conjunction with

Alliance for Excellent Education

Association for Middle Level Education

National Association of Elementary School Principals

National Association of Secondary School Principals

National Forum to Accelerate Middle-Grades Reform

INVITE YOU TO

A SPECIAL BRIEFING


Career Exploration in the Middle Grades:

High Quality Programs to Help Students Build a Vision

for Their Future

 

Wednesday, June 24, 2015

12:00 PM – 1:30 PM

385 Russell Senate Office Building

 

Presenters Include

Moderator, Cathy Walrod

Principal

Hereford Middle School, Monkton, MD

Carole Kihm

Principal

Longfellow Middle School, Falls Church, VA

2014 Virginia Outstanding Middle School Principal of Year

Linda Lawrence

Principal

Westlane Middle School, Indianapolis IN

2014 Redesignated I Schools to Watch

Quentin Wilson

President and CEO

ALL Management Corporation

RSVP to: Michelle Cravez at mcravez@wpllc.net

 

Since the beginning of the 2014-2015 school year, tens of thousands of students across the country have opted out of federally mandated assessments. The opt-out movement has become a way for parents and students to protest the implementation of the Common Core State Standards as well as the overabundance of testing in schools.

One of the key provisions of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law requires school districts to maintain a 95 percent assessment participation rate. U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan recently told states they risk losing federal funds if they fall below 95 percent compliance. This could have major implications for low-income and rural school districts that rely heavily on federal funding to hire staff, upgrade schools, and incorporate new programs.

On May 15, 2015, Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and Tom Reed (R-NY) announced the introduction of The Enable More Parents to Opt-Out Without Endangering Resources Act (H.R. 2382), which would guarantee parents the right to opt out of assessments. The EMPOWER Act would prevent the federal government from punishing states that fall below the 95 percent compliance rate and would allow parents to opt their child out of an assessment for any reason. The National Education Association (NEA) has already endorsed the EMPOWER Act and Rep. Chris Gibson (R-NY) signed on as an original co-sponsor. As the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) reauthorization process moves forward, debates over opting out, as well as the proper role of assessments, are expected to continue and could potentially derail the entire process.

The high-stakes testing culture originated from the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) provision of NCLB that placed heavy emphasis on testing and labeled schools based on assessment performance. Each label was accompanied with a list of consequences that provided states with recommendations for improving the schools that failed to meet AYP. In many cases, these labels led to the firing of teachers and school administrators, school closings, or turnaround efforts led by charter school networks. In 2012, the U.S. Department of Education started granting states NCLB flexibility waivers in exchange for increased standards, improved accountability, and teacher improvement efforts. While many of the states that received waivers were no longer required to meet AYP requirements, testing in schools continued to increase as accountability and teacher evaluation initiatives progressed.

This April, JoAnn Bartoletti, executive director of the National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) wrote a letter to parents in response to the opt-out movement. In this letter, Executive Director Bartoletti acknowledges NCLB has created a culture of over testing and sympathizes with parents who have children taking monthly standardized tests. At the same time, she discusses the major implications reduced federal funding could have on state education budgets and tells parents opting out could ultimately reduce educational opportunities for their children.

In addition to advocating for reducing the reliance on assessments, NASSP will continue to support the implementation of the Common Core State Standards as well as next generation assessments that measure what students actually need to be college and career ready.

Tagged with:
 

As we reported in a blog post earlier this month, student data privacy continues to be a hot topic on Capitol Hill with a whopping five legislative proposals in circulation. While earlier bills focused on education technology companies and their use of student data, the new proposals would reauthorize the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and have a great impact on principals and how they run their schools.

House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline (R-MN) and Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-VA) released a discussion draft to totally rewrite FERPA in early April. The draft would grant parents the right to inspect and review their children’s education records and require educators to grant requests within 30 days. Educational agencies would be prohibited from releasing education records or personally identifiable information (PII) of students without written consent of their parents with few exceptions. Unidentifiable student data could be released for the purpose of education research, but the draft proposes a requirement that parents be notified of the studies and be given a reasonable amount of time to opt out. Educational agencies would be required to establish policies and procedures to protect the education records, and the draft proposes fines of $2,000 per student if there are violations. The draft would also prohibit marketing and advertising directly to students based on any information collected from education records.

NASSP and a number of other national education organizations submitted informal comments to Kline and Scott in which we outlined concerns with the discussion draft. We offered recommendations to support capacity building for educators at the state, district, and school levels; require parents to access and review their child’s education records only through their local school or district; clarify how educators should notify parents about new operator contracts; and ensure that schools, districts, and states do not have to disclose information that could open up their secure data systems to hackers.

On May 13, Sens. Edward Markey (D-MA) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT) reintroduced the Protecting Student Privacy Act (S. 1322), which had first been introduced in 2014. The bill would amend FERPA to ensure that educational agencies implement information security policies and procedures that protect PII included in education records and require any outside party with access to student data to have a comprehensive security program designed to protect PII.

The following day, Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) introduced the Student Privacy Protection Act (S. 1341), which would ensure that parents and students retain control of their education records. While the text is not yet available, a summary on his website says the bill would:

  • Reinstate protections originally outlined under FERPA by clarifying who can access student data and what information is accessible.
  • Require educational agencies to gain prior consent from students or parents and implement measures to ensure records remain private.
  • Extend FERPA’s protections to ensure records of homeschooled students are treated equally.
  • Prohibit educational agencies, schools, and the US Secretary of Education from including PII obtained from federal or state agencies through data matches in student data.

NASSP will continue to review all of the legislative proposals and meet with congressional staff to ensure they include the policy recommendations approved by our Board of Directors in February 2015.

 

As the use of digital technology rises in schools, so does the concern about the security of student data. Numerous state bills have been introduced and passed in the past few years, but now Congress is starting to examine a federal response and NASSP has been at the table for these discussions. Our objective is aligned to the position statement approved by the Board of Directors in February 2015: to ensure the protection of student privacy and appropriate use of student data to improve teaching and learning in the classroom.

On April 29, Reps. Luke Messer (R-IN) and Jared Polis (D-CO) introduced the Student Digital Privacy and Parental Rights Act (H.R. 2092), which mandates what education technology vendors can and cannot do with student data. The bill would require operators to disclose publicly and directly to K–12 schools the types of information being collected and how that information will be used. Operators would have to establish and maintain strong security procedures to prevent data breaches and notification policies in the event of a data breach. Operators would also be prohibited from allowing targeted advertising or selling a student’s information to a third party.

NASSP participated in a number of meetings and conference calls with staff for Reps. Polis and Messer as they drafted the bill and is pleased that they considered our input in the final version. We joined 10 other national education organizations in sending a letter of endorsement for H.R. 2092 because it “strikes a good balance between protecting student privacy and promoting personalized learning informed by data and powered by educational technology.” We are also pleased that the bill would not place an undue burden on schools, principals, or teachers and give them confidence about the digital tools used in the classroom.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) has also announced that he is working on draft legislation related to student data privacy. Similar to the Student Digital Privacy and Parental Rights Act, the bill would focus on the data collected by education technology vendors, but there will be some differences from the House bill. According to Politico, the bill will give parents more control over their child’s data, add early childhood education, and include “strong enforcement tools and robust regulatory language.”

Also of interest to school leaders, House Education and the Workforce Committee Chairman John Kline (R-MN) and Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-CA) released a discussion draft for reauthorization of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). NASSP and other national education organizations met with committee staff last week and will likely work together to draft comments on the proposal. At first glance, we are very concerned that the discussion draft is silent on the need to build educator capacity. NASSP recommends that states and districts should provide teachers and principals with specialized training on student data privacy issues that will help them comply with FERPA and other state laws or regulations.

Earlier this week, NASSP joined 17 other national organizations in releasing The Federal Role in Safeguarding Student Data. The document outlines three potential areas for federal action on this issue:

  1. Ensure that federal laws provide a strong foundation to protect student information in a constantly changing and increasingly digital school environment.
  2. Ensure that the federal government coordinates across agencies to provide clarity to those on the ground as to how privacy laws work together.
  3. Support state and local capacity to safeguard data.

NASSP will continue to work closely with our coalition of national education organizations as these proposals move forward. Be sure to visit the Principal’s Policy Blog for regular updates.

 

On April 16, President Obama signed the Medicare Access and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Reauthorization Act of 2015 into law. Included in this legislation is a two-year extension of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000. This law, which was enacted after rural communities were devastated by logging industry regulations, requires that 15 to 20 percent of the United States Forest Service’s county payments be used for specific purposes. These purposes include supporting or expanding rural schools, improving roads in rural communities, increasing public safety, or developing special projects on federal lands.

While Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced a bill that would extend the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act for three years, this two-year reauthorization will have a major impact on funding and development in rural communities across the country.

In addition to the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act, NASSP is also keeping a close eye on the Fiscal Year 2016 Appropriations process for the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Subcommittee. Specifically, NASSP will be monitoring funding levels for the Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP), which provides formula grants to small and low-income schools in rural areas through the Small, Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program and the Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program. This program remains in Title VI of the Every Child Achieves Act and would allow for dually eligible districts to choose which program they would like to apply for funding, which is not allowed under current law.

As ESEA reauthorization and the Appropriations process move forward, NASSP will continue monitoring resource distribution in rural communities.

Tagged with:
 

After two days of debate and consideration of nearly 90 amendments, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee approved its bill to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in a historic, 22-0, vote on April 16. The Every Child Achieves Act was the end result of weeks of bipartisan negotiations between Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Ranking Member Patty Murray (D-WA), and their leadership was evident throughout the cordial committee debate.

NASSP was pleased that the first amendment approved by committee would authorize a competitive grant for states and districts to audit their assessment systems, including the number of tests and the time spent on test-taking, in order to reduce redundant or unnecessary state and district assessments. The amendment was based on the SMART Act (S. 907) and introduced by Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) who also sponsored the bill.

Another amendment strongly supported by NASSP would authorize the Innovative Technology Expands Children’s Horizons (I-TECH) program to provide technology-specific professional development for teachers to compliment the acquisition of infrastructure and hardware in the classroom. Districts would be required to spend 50% of the grant funds on professional development related to digital learning. The amendment was based on the Enhancing Education Through Technology Act and introduced by Sen. Baldwin who also sponsored the bill.

Other amendments supported by NASSP that passed would reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary School Counseling program and require state, local and school report cards to include information on the number of students attaining career and technical education proficiencies.

NASSP also supported a number of amendments that were offered, but then withdrawn, pertaining to middle schools, high school redesign, the definition of profession-ready teachers and principals, and nondiscrimination of LGBT students. Our hope is that the sponsors of those amendments will be able to find Republican cosponsors and then offer them again on the Senate floor.

Controversial amendments, such as those pertaining to Title I portability and private school vouchers, were also withdrawn, but Senators Alexander and Tim Scott (R-SC) both indicated that they would introduce them on the Senate floor.

Alexander announced his hope that the full Senate would consider the Every Child Achieves Act before Memorial Day. The floor debate is expected to be much more contentious since there will be an open amendment process that allows Senators to offer any amendment related to K-12 education, which could cause some Democrats to oppose the bill in the end.

After weeks of negotiations between Senate HELP Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Ranking Member Patty Murray (D-WA), the committee released a bipartisan bill to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and set a date for the markup on April 14. The purpose of the Every Child Achieves Act is to “enable states and local communities to improve and support our nation’s public schools and ensure that every child has an opportunity to achieve.”

The following is a summary of Titles I and II of the bill:

Unlike No Child Left Behind, the latest iteration of ESEA, the bill does not provide a specific amount for Title I or any other programs in the bill but instead authorizes “to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2016 through 2021.”

NASSP is pleased to see that the bill eliminates the School Improvement Grants program and the turnaround models that all require the principal to be replaced as a condition for receiving federal funding. Instead the bill would authorize funding for schools to implement school intervention and support strategies, but it provides districts with flexibility in choosing those strategies.

In order to receive Title I funding, states must submit a plan that is developed in consultation with educators, including organizations representing teachers or principals, that provides an assurance that the state has adopted challenging academic content standards and aligned academic achievement standards in math, reading, science, and any other subjects as determined by the state. States must demonstrate that their standards are aligned with entrance requirements, without the need for academic remediation, for public higher education, relevant state career and technical education standards, and relevant early learning guidelines.

Consistent with current law, states would be required to annually assess all students in math and reading in grades 3-8 and at least once in high school. States would also be required to annually assess students in science not less than one time in grades 3-5, 6-9, and 10-12.

The bill would prohibit the Secretary of Education for requiring states to use specific standards or assessments or specify annual achievement goals, requirements for teacher or principal evaluation systems, or indicators of teacher or principal effectiveness.

States would be allowed to adopt alternate academic achievement standards for only students with the most cognitive disabilities (currently the 1% requirement under Title I regulations). They would also be required to adopt English language proficiency standards that are aligned with the state academic standards.

States would be required to develop a single, statewide accountability system that annually establishes state-designed goals for all students, which includes academic achievement or student growth and high school graduation rates. At the state’s discretion, it could include extended-year graduation rates in addition to the four-year cohort graduation rate. The plan would require states to identify schools in need of intervention and support, and then district would conduct a review of the schools and develop and implement appropriate intervention and support strategies.

Title II is structured similar to current law with a number of allowable uses at the state and local level to prepare, train, and recruit high-quality teachers, principals, and other school leaders. The bill would allow states to reserve not more than 3 percent for activities focused on the recruitment, preparation, placement, support, and retention of effective principals and other school leaders. States could also use the funds to support the design and implementation of teacher and principal evaluation and support systems that are based in part on evidence of student academic achievement or growth and must include multiple measures of educator performance.

School districts receiving Title II funds would be required to conduct a needs assessment to determine the schools with the most acute staffing needs. Funds could then be used to develop evaluation and support systems for teachers and principals; recruit, hire, and retain highly effective teachers and principals; train school leaders on how to accurately differentiate performance, provide useful feedback, and use evaluation results to inform decision making about professional development, improvement strategies, and personnel decisions; recruiting individuals from other fields to become teachers and principals; providing high-quality professional development for teachers and principals; support teacher and principal residency programs; and improving teacher and principal preparation programs. Unfortunately, the bill would still expand the allowable uses under Title II to include reducing class size, supporting school librarians, and providing liability insurance coverage for teachers.

The bill would continue to authorize competitive grants for programs of national significance, but 40 of the funds shall be reserved by the Department of Education for a competitive grant to improve the recruitment, preparation, placement, support, and retention of effective principals and high-need schools. The language is based on the School Principal Recruitment and Training Act, which NASSP strongly supports.

The bill also includes a new provision under Title II that mirrors the Literacy Education for All, Results for the Nation Act, which is another bill that NASSP helped developed. Districts receiving a grant under this section would be required to develop and implement comprehensive literacy instruction plan with specific requirements for early childhood, grades K-5, and grades 6-12.

Check back on the Principal’s Policy Blog for additional details, and follow @akarhuse on Twitter for live tweets during the committee markup on April 14.