Comparing ESEA Reauthorization Proposals
Special Grants and Programs
School Finance
Teachers
School Improvement
Accountability
Standards and Assessments
Current Law
Senate (Harkin-Enzi) Bill
House (Kline) Bills
States must adopt reading, math, and science standards, and they do not have to be “college- and career-ready” standards. States must test reading and math annually in grades 3-8 and once in high school. States must test science once in grades 3-5, 6-8, and 9-12.
States must adopt reading, math, and science standards aligned to college and career readiness. No accountability to ensure these standards actually mean college- and career-ready. States not required to adopt the Common Core State Standards. States granted flexibility to give one or multiple tests per year, but annual testing in math and reading and grade-span testing in science remains.
States must adopt standards for reading and math only, and they do not have to be “college- and career-ready” standards. The Secretary of Education is prohibited from promoting the Common Core or any specific set of standards. NCLB testing regimen kept in place for reading and math, but states no longer have to test in science.
Schools and districts must make adequate yearly progress (AYP) towards performance targets, with the goal of achieving 100% proficiency in math and reading by 2014. Achievement targets must be set for various racial and ethnic subgroups, low-income students, students with disabilities, and English language learners.
AYP is canned, but not replaced with alternative performance targets for students or subgroups. States are allowed to design their own accountability systems in place of AYP, with some guidelines. States still required to disaggregate data by NCLB subgroups. Schools and districts required to produce an annual accountability report card that includes NAEP data. States must intervene to turnaround the bottom 10% of schools, including all SIG schools. 5% are “Persistently Low-Achieving” schools, identified by low achievement, growth, or grad rates. They choose a reform strategy from a menu of options, including a statedesigned one (which needs federal approval). 5% are “Achievement Gap” schools, identified by largest gaps between student subgroups or low performance, but no turnaround strategies required by law. Students attending PLA schools can transfer to other schools.
AYP is canned, but not replaced with alternative performance targets for students or subgroups. States are allowed to design their own accountability systems in place of AYP. States still required to disaggregate data by NCLB subgroups. Schools and districts required to produce an annual accountability report card that includes NAEP data.
All teachers required to be “highly qualified” by 2005-2006. Highly qualified teachers must have a Bachelor’s degree, full state certification or licensure, and subject matter competence. Low-income and minority children cannot be taught at higher rates than other children by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers.
“Highly qualified” teacher requirement remains, and is still the default for ensuring teachers are distributed equitably in Title I and non-Title I schools. A new competitive grant program would encourage states to adopt teacher and principal evaluations that use multiple measures, including student test data and classroom observation. In these states, new effectiveness measures could be used to verify the best teachers are distributed equitably in Title I and non-Title I schools. To receive TIF grants, states must have these evaluations.
Eliminates “highly qualified” teacher provision. School districts must create a teacher evaluation system that weights student achievement heavily, has more than two performance levels, and factors into personnel decisions. States with existing systems already can keep them. Districts adopt a plan to address disparities in distribution of effective teachers. States can spend no more than 10% of federal teacher quality funds on class size reduction.
States must set aside the equivalent of 20% of Title I funds to use for transportation, school choice, and tutoring for schools that do not make AYP at least two consecutive years. Schools receiving Title I funds can use them for schoolwide purposes if the Title I-eligible population exceeds 40% of enrollment.
20% set aside is eliminated. The comparability loophole is closed. Districts would have to show that state and local per-pupil funding in Title I schools is no less than in non-Title I schools – including teacher salaries. Title II formula changed to remove hold harmless provision that guaranteed states at least their 2001-level of funding.
20% set aside is eliminated and replaced with 3% set aside for school choice and tutoring programs. Allows any school receiving Title I funds to use them for school-wide services. Eliminates Title I “maintenance of effort,” which would allow state & local governments to cut education budgets below 90% of the previous year’s budget. Title II formula changed to remove hold harmless provision and de-emphasize student poverty in favor of total student population. Moves funding for migrant education, neglected and delinquent students, English language learners, rural students, and Indian education to Title I, Part A for low-income students, so money could be moved from one area to another. States can set aside 3% of Title I funds to establish, expand, and evaluate teacher and school leadership academies. Consolidates several grant programs, including 21st Century Community Learning Centers and Safe and Drug Free Schools. Ten percent of the money in this formula grant must be reserved for outof-school services, such as tutoring or after-school programs.
Sanctions begin for schools after two consecutive years of missing AYP. Schools that miss AYP for five consecutive years enter “restructuring,” which requires choosing a school reform strategy from a prescribed menu of options, including “other.”
Consolidates 82 programs into 40. Pathways to College, a competitive grant program, established for low-achieving middle and high schools. Recruitment and training of principals for school turnarounds is supported with a new grant program. Also establishes Teacher and Principal Academies, which are evaluated and funded based on graduates’ results in improving student performance. Re-establishes Educational Technology State Grants. Authorizes – and institutionalizes – Race to the Top, Investing in Innovation, and Promise Neighborhoods grant programs.
States not required to intervene in any percentage of schools or a specific subset of low-performing schools. School Improvement Grants eliminated. No federally-mandated school improvement strategies, but states must set aside 7% of Title I funds to improve struggling schools. Does not supersede state laws allowing parents to exercise authority over failing schools, such as a “parent trigger” law.
Obama Administration Waivers States must adopt and demonstrate that they have college- and career-ready standards in reading and math. Science standards remain in place from NCLB. Standards must be common to a number of states (i.e. Common Core State Standards) or be approved by the state university system to ensure they align with college and career readiness. NCLB testing schedule remains, but states must develop college- and careerready reading and math assessments. AYP is canned and states can develop their own systems for measuring accountability, with some guidelines. States maintain achievement targets for subgroups, but can design their own or reduce in half the percentage of students not proficient in six years, instead of 100% proficiency by 2014. States still required to disaggregate data by NCLB subgroups. States must intervene to turnaround the bottom 15% of schools, including all SIG schools, in a way that aligns with certain “turnaround principles.” SIG recipients and other “priority” schools in the bottom 5% must adopt one of four prescribed school improvement strategies. These schools have low achievement and grad rates. The next 10% of schools – “focus” schools – must also adopt a reform strategy, based on the turnaround principles and the schools’ needs. These schools have large achievement gaps or struggling subgroups. Eliminates “highly qualified teacher” improvement plans. States must create teacher evaluation systems that consider multiple measures of effectiveness including student growth, incorporate at least three performance levels, and are used for personnel decisions. The process is state-led, but allows for local variation as long as state guidelines are met. Teacher effectiveness measures can be used to verify teachers are distributed equitably in Title I and non-Title I schools or measures from current law could be used. 20% set aside is eliminated. States can combine these funds with other specific Title I program funds to target high-needs areas and implement school improvement strategies.
States can apply for an optional waiver to use 21st Center Community Learning Center funding for activities provided during the school day (extended learning time).
Sources: http://www.edweek.org/media/17eseachart-c1.pdf; http://edmoney.newamerica.net/blogposts/2012/house_esea_bill_would_lift_title_i_spending_requirements-62794; http://www.quickanded.com/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2012/01/ESEA-Good-Bad-Chart-with-House1.jpg; http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2012/02/so_tomorrow_the_house_educatio.html; http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k12/2012/02/_democrats_offered_just_two.html
School Finance
Teachers
School Improvement
Accountability
Standards and Assessments
Current Law
Senate (Harkin-Enzi) Bill
House (Kline) Bills
States must adopt reading, math, and science standards, and they do not have to be “college- and career-ready” standards. States must test reading and math annually in grades 3-8 and once in high school. States must test science once in grades 3-5, 6-8, and 9-12.
States must adopt reading, math, and science standards aligned to college and career readiness. No accountability to ensure these standards actually mean college- and career-ready. States not required to adopt the Common Core State Standards. States granted flexibility to give one or multiple tests per year, but annual testing in math and reading and grade-span testing in science remains.
States must adopt standards for reading and math only, and they do not have to be “college- and career-ready” standards. The Secretary of Education is prohibited from promoting the Common Core or any specific set of standards. NCLB testing regimen kept in place for reading and math, but states no longer have to test in science.
Schools and districts must make adequate yearly progress (AYP) towards performance targets, with the goal of achieving 100% proficiency in math and reading by 2014. Achievement targets must be set for various racial and ethnic subgroups, low-income students, students with disabilities, and English language learners.
AYP is canned, but not replaced with alternative performance targets for students or subgroups. States are allowed to design their own accountability systems in place of AYP, with some guidelines. States still required to disaggregate data by NCLB subgroups. Schools and districts required to produce an annual accountability report card that includes NAEP data. States must intervene to turnaround the bottom 10% of schools, including all SIG schools. 5% are “Persistently Low-Achieving” schools, identified by low achievement, growth, or grad rates. They choose a reform strategy from a menu of options, including a statedesigned one (which needs federal approval). 5% are “Achievement Gap” schools, identified by largest gaps between student subgroups or low performance, but no turnaround strategies required by law. Students attending PLA schools can transfer to other schools.
AYP is canned, but not replaced with alternative performance targets for students or subgroups. States are allowed to design their own accountability systems in place of AYP. States still required to disaggregate data by NCLB subgroups. Schools and districts required to produce an annual accountability report card that includes NAEP data.
All teachers required to be “highly qualified” by 2005-2006. Highly qualified teachers must have a Bachelor’s degree, full state certification or licensure, and subject matter competence. Low-income and minority children cannot be taught at higher rates than other children by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers.
“Highly qualified” teacher requirement remains, and is still the default for ensuring teachers are distributed equitably in Title I and non-Title I schools. A new competitive grant program would encourage states to adopt teacher and principal evaluations that use multiple measures, including student test data and classroom observation. In these states, new effectiveness measures could be used to verify the best teachers are distributed equitably in Title I and non-Title I schools. To receive TIF grants, states must have these evaluations.
Eliminates “highly qualified” teacher provision. School districts must create a teacher evaluation system that weights student achievement heavily, has more than two performance levels, and factors into personnel decisions. States with existing systems already can keep them. Districts adopt a plan to address disparities in distribution of effective teachers. States can spend no more than 10% of federal teacher quality funds on class size reduction.
States must set aside the equivalent of 20% of Title I funds to use for transportation, school choice, and tutoring for schools that do not make AYP at least two consecutive years. Schools receiving Title I funds can use them for schoolwide purposes if the Title I-eligible population exceeds 40% of enrollment.
20% set aside is eliminated. The comparability loophole is closed. Districts would have to show that state and local per-pupil funding in Title I schools is no less than in non-Title I schools – including teacher salaries. Title II formula changed to remove hold harmless provision that guaranteed states at least their 2001-level of funding.
20% set aside is eliminated and replaced with 3% set aside for school choice and tutoring programs. Allows any school receiving Title I funds to use them for school-wide services. Eliminates Title I “maintenance of effort,” which would allow state & local governments to cut education budgets below 90% of the previous year’s budget. Title II formula changed to remove hold harmless provision and de-emphasize student poverty in favor of total student population. Moves funding for migrant education, neglected and delinquent students, English language learners, rural students, and Indian education to Title I, Part A for low-income students, so money could be moved from one area to another. States can set aside 3% of Title I funds to establish, expand, and evaluate teacher and school leadership academies. Consolidates several grant programs, including 21st Century Community Learning Centers and Safe and Drug Free Schools. Ten percent of the money in this formula grant must be reserved for outof-school services, such as tutoring or after-school programs.
Sanctions begin for schools after two consecutive years of missing AYP. Schools that miss AYP for five consecutive years enter “restructuring,” which requires choosing a school reform strategy from a prescribed menu of options, including “other.”
Consolidates 82 programs into 40. Pathways to College, a competitive grant program, established for low-achieving middle and high schools. Recruitment and training of principals for school turnarounds is supported with a new grant program. Also establishes Teacher and Principal Academies, which are evaluated and funded based on graduates’ results in improving student performance. Re-establishes Educational Technology State Grants. Authorizes – and institutionalizes – Race to the Top, Investing in Innovation, and Promise Neighborhoods grant programs.
States not required to intervene in any percentage of schools or a specific subset of low-performing schools. School Improvement Grants eliminated. No federally-mandated school improvement strategies, but states must set aside 7% of Title I funds to improve struggling schools. Does not supersede state laws allowing parents to exercise authority over failing schools, such as a “parent trigger” law.
Obama Administration Waivers States must adopt and demonstrate that they have college- and career-ready standards in reading and math. Science standards remain in place from NCLB. Standards must be common to a number of states (i.e. Common Core State Standards) or be approved by the state university system to ensure they align with college and career readiness. NCLB testing schedule remains, but states must develop college- and careerready reading and math assessments. AYP is canned and states can develop their own systems for measuring accountability, with some guidelines. States maintain achievement targets for subgroups, but can design their own or reduce in half the percentage of students not proficient in six years, instead of 100% proficiency by 2014. States still required to disaggregate data by NCLB subgroups. States must intervene to turnaround the bottom 15% of schools, including all SIG schools, in a way that aligns with certain “turnaround principles.” SIG recipients and other “priority” schools in the bottom 5% must adopt one of four prescribed school improvement strategies. These schools have low achievement and grad rates. The next 10% of schools – “focus” schools – must also adopt a reform strategy, based on the turnaround principles and the schools’ needs. These schools have large achievement gaps or struggling subgroups. Eliminates “highly qualified teacher” improvement plans. States must create teacher evaluation systems that consider multiple measures of effectiveness including student growth, incorporate at least three performance levels, and are used for personnel decisions. The process is state-led, but allows for local variation as long as state guidelines are met. Teacher effectiveness measures can be used to verify teachers are distributed equitably in Title I and non-Title I schools or measures from current law could be used. 20% set aside is eliminated. States can combine these funds with other specific Title I program funds to target high-needs areas and implement school improvement strategies.
States can apply for an optional waiver to use 21st Center Community Learning Center funding for activities provided during the school day (extended learning time).
Sources: http://www.edweek.org/media/17eseachart-c1.pdf; http://edmoney.newamerica.net/blogposts/2012/house_esea_bill_would_lift_title_i_spending_requirements-62794; http://www.quickanded.com/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2012/01/ESEA-Good-Bad-Chart-with-House1.jpg; http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2012/02/so_tomorrow_the_house_educatio.html; http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k12/2012/02/_democrats_offered_just_two.html
