Tuesday, July 7, 2015

Q&A: Post education reporter Lyndsey Layton pulls back the curtain on this week’s No Child Left Behind fight in Congress - The Washington Post

Q&A: Post education reporter Lyndsey Layton pulls back the curtain on this week’s No Child Left Behind fight in Congress - The Washington Post:

Q&A: Post education reporter Lyndsey Layton pulls back the curtain on this week’s No Child Left Behind fight in Congress






Both the House and Senate will consider major education bills this week. Lyndsey Layton covers national education issues for The Washington Post and understands the underlying issues as well as anyone. In the latest PostWorthy Q&A, conducted by email Monday night, she pulls back the curtain on key sticking points in negotiations, reflects on Arne Duncan’s legacy as Secretary of Education and previews last-minute efforts by conservatives to limit the further limit the federal role.

“Common Core” has become toxic in Republican politics. What might the GOP Congress do to curtail the Department of Education’s ability to advance or incentivize the initiative?
Actually, both the bipartisan bill in the Senate, written by Lamar Alexander (R) and Patty Murray (D), and the GOP House bill crafted by John Kline (R-Minn.) explicitly prohibit the Education secretary from having any influence over state academic standards. So it’s likely that whatever legislation makes it out of conference will include some language that prohibits the federal government from getting involved in academic standards.
Sign up for The Daily 202, The Washington Post’s new political tipsheet
What are the biggest differences between the House and Senate bills?
Both bills would transfer power over education decisions from the federal government to the states and local school districts, but the House version would go farther – to the point that Democrats, civil rights groups, teachers unions and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce fear it would hand too much authority to states. They argue that the federal government should maintain some kind of oversight over local schools, otherwise some states will ignore the needs of the kids who are the hardest (and most costly) to educate: poor kids, kids with disabilities and English language learners.
In general, how much power is the federal Education Department poised to lose under the legislation now being considered?
Arne Duncan became arguably the most influential education secretary since the job was created in 1979 by exploiting two levers. He got $4.3 billion from Congress – Recovery Act money designed to keep the economy afloat after the 2008 recession – and created Race to the Top, a national contest that required cash-starved states to adopt his education policies just in order to compete for a chance at a grant. Then, he saw that states were struggling mightily under No Child Left Behind and, while Congress dithered on a rewrite, Duncan handed out conditional waivers that excused states from the law – as long as they adopted his favored policies. By doing that, Duncan was able to get 43 states and D.C. to adopt the Common Core State Standards, to require that states evaluate their teachers based in part on student test scores, and to dictate how states should try to improve their worst performing schools, among other things.
It’s a remarkable record, but now the pendulum is swinging back.
Under the legislation that is now under debate, much of that power evaporates. The federal Department of Education would not be able to attach conditions to waivers, nor would it be able to influence state decisions about academic standards, teacher evaluation systems or what to do about their Q&A: Post education reporter Lyndsey Layton pulls back the curtain on this week’s No Child Left Behind fight in Congress - The Washington Post: