Senate ESEA Draft: Review of Approved Amendments, Part II
On April 16, 2015, the Senate education committee approved the Alexander-Murray draft of the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), a 601-page document entitled, The Every Child Achieves Act of 2015.
The draft approval was accompanied by 29 amendments, which can be found on this Senate ed page.
I reviewed the entire original 601-page Alexander-Murray draft in a series of six posts that can be accessed here.
I have already reviewed 10 of the 29 amendments. My review of those first 10 can be accessed here.
In this post, I continue my review of the 29 amendments with the next 10. (I will review the remainder in yet another post.)
I am reviewing the amendments mostly in alphabetical order by file name. Below each file link is my review for that particular amendment.
Let’s begin:
This single-page amendment allots a greater proportion of Title II state funding for “the improvement of teaching and learning” grants based upon “the number of individuals age 5 through 17 from families with incomes below the poverty line in the State.” The original proportion was 65 percent; the amendment raised the proportion to 80 percent.
This three-page amendment to Title II (“High-quality Teachers, Principals, and Other School Leaders”) has to do with a “hold harmless” provision noting that no given funding amount is guaranteed for Title II, Part A “Fund for the Improvement of Teaching and learning”). Among the “hold harmless” stipulations are that states will not being awarded less in 2016 than 14.29 percent of the amount the state was awarded in 2001 (at the inception of No Child Left Behind). The “not less than 14.29 percent” reduction can be doubled in 2017, and tripled in 2018, and so forth– unless there is less money– in which case the secretary will adjust accordingly.
If there is more money than expected, the secretary will once again adjust accordingly.
This “hold harmless” amendment was approved, as was another “hold harmless” amendment for the very same section, but with slightly different details: Casey_TitleII_Amendment#4 Modified – Signed. The Casey amendment uses simpler formulas for funding decisions than does the Burr amendment (the one explained above). I do not know which one was finally approved.
This eight-page amendment adds to Title II grants for developing “ready to learn” television programs “for preschool and elementary school children and their parents in order to facilitate student academic achievement” and “to develop and disseminate education and training materials, including interactive programs and programs adaptable to distance learning technologies, that are designed to promote school readiness….”
Entities receiving such grants will be required to submit an annual report to the Senate ESEA Draft: Review of Approved Amendments, Part II | deutsch29:
