EXCERPT FROM: New America Foundation
By Laura Bornfreund
Both the House and Senate are currently considering proposals to reauthorize No Child Left Behind, the 2001 iteration of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. It is unlikely that either of these will actually become law; the Senate education committee’s comprehensive bill and the House education committee’s package of five bills have little in common and, in the House’s case, no bipartisan support, leaving few opportunities for compromise. It’s worth taking a close look at the proposals on the table, however, to get a feel for how each Congressional delegation is thinking about education policy. The bills take different paths in several areas, and below we highlight five: early learning, federal funding, school improvement, teacher and leader quality, and the future of Race to the Top and the Obama administration’s other education reform grant programs.
1. Early learning. Neither proposal includes early learning at the level of policy detail we’d like to see, but the Senate bill comes closer. The Senate proposal would, for example, expand the use of Title II (teacher and leader quality) dollars, allowing school districts to use that funding for joint professional development with elementary school teachers and early learning program staff, and to reduce class size in pre-K through third grade classrooms. The Senate bill would also include early learning as one of the priority areas for future Race to the Top competitions. The House bills do not include these provisions and make almost no mention at all of early learning.
2. Federal funding. The House proposal would provide states and school districts with significantly more flexibility in how they use federal education dollars. School districts would be able to redirect funds from Title I, Part A (support for disadvantaged students), the Education Jobs Fund, School Improvement Grants, and English Language Acquisition grants to other programs. For example, districts could use federal money currently designated for low-income children to fund technological innovation or programs for rural students. The House proposal would also do away with the Maintenance of Effort provision that requires states and local school districts to maintain a certain level of funding to be eligible for federal funds under Title I. The elimination of this requirement could lead to more inequities in public education as low-income school districts cut costs in a difficult economic environment.