Real-time collaboration and continuous action
create ideal conditions for future success.
boilerplate image

A Federal Education Policy Update

Webinar:


Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Student Success Act, legislation to rewrite the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which is currently known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The legislation passed by a vote of 221 to 207. No Democrats voted for the bill.

Last month, also along party lines, the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions passed its version of a bill to rewrite NCLB. With each committee passing a partisan bill, two very different visions of the federal role in education were set forth.

Members of the Alliance’s federal advocacy staff provided information on the bills and likely next steps, as well as other federal education policy updates, including updates on

  • the federal budget and appropriations process; and
  • the U.S. Department of Education’s (ED’s) waivers from key provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act and other ED programs.

Supplemental Materials

Please direct questions concerning the webinar to alliance@all4ed.org.

NOTE: If you are unable to watch the webinar live, an archived version will be available
here within one to two days after the event airs.

The Alliance for Excellent Education is a Washington, DC–based national policy and advocacy organization that works to improve national and federal policy so that all students can achieve at high academic levels and graduate from high school ready for success in college, work, and citizenship in the twenty-first century. www.all4ed.com
Follow the Alliance on Twitter at www.twitter.com/all4ed; Facebook at www.facebook.com/all4ed; and the Alliance’s “High School Soup” blog at www.all4ed.com/high-school-soup.

Attachment Size
FederalAdvocacyWebina72413final.pdf 443.88 KB

TEST TEST TEST >> GOOD AFTERNOON, WELCOME TO
TODAY’S WEBINAR, I’M THE VICE
PRESIDENT OF FEDERAL ADVOCACY,
I’M HAPPY TO BE YOUR HOST TODAY.
TODAY, WE WILL BE DISCUSSING TWO
SEPARATE BILLS THAT ARE MOVING
IN THE U.S. HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES AND IN THE U.S.
SENATE THAT WOULD REWRITE THE
ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION ACT, CURRENTLY KNOWN
AS “NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND.”
WE WILL DISCUSS APPROPRIATIONS
AND HOW THE HOUSES DIFFER ON THE
SPENDING PLANS.
WE WILL DISCUSS THE ADDITIONAL
FLEXIBILITY ON THE WAIVERS THAT
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
HAS GRANTED TO STATES UNDER NO
CHILD LEFT BEHIND AND CLOSE ON
THE INCREASED ACCESS TO HIGH
SPEED INTERNET IN SCHOOLS AND
LIBRARIES.
THAT IS A LOT OF CONTENT, WHICH
IS WHY WE WILL BE MAKING THE
POWERPOINT SLIDES AVAILABLE TO
YOU ON THE WEBINAR PAGE, AND THE
WEBINAR WILL BE ARCHIVED SO YOU
CAN ADDRESS IT.
YOU CAN FOLLOW TODAY’S
DISCUSSION ON TWITTER BY USING
THE HASH TAG IN THE BOTTOM LEFT
CORNER OF THE SCREEN.
WITH THAT OUT OF THE WAY, LET’S
GET STARTED.
HELLO, GUYS.
>> HELLO.
>> IT’S BEEN A CRAZILY BUSY
SUMMER FOR MANY OF US IN
WASHINGTON.
AND PERHAPS ACROSS THE COUNTRY,
WORKING WITH THE CONGRESS ON,
ESA ESPECIALLY, THE HOUSE AND
SENATE HAVE VERY DIFFERENT
BILLS, WE ARE GOING TO GO
THROUGH A NUMBER OF THE
DIFFERENCES.
IN FACT, WE RECEIVED THE
QUESTION FROM PAM FROM
MASSACHUSETTS WHERE SHE ASKS,
WHAT ISSUES ARE THE SENATE AND
HOUSE COMMITTEESS FURTHEST APART
ON.
HOPEFULLY WE CAN ADDRESS THAT
ANSWER.
LET’S START WITH TITLE 1 OF ESA,
AS OUTLINED IN THE HOUSE BILL
AND SENATE BILL, FRED, TELL US
ABOUT THE PURPOSE STATEMENTS IN
BOTH OF THE BILLS.
>> SURE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
DIFFERENCES IN SIMILARITY IN
BOTH BILLS AND I WILL START
FIRST WITH THE SIMILARITIES.
ONE, BOTH BILLS WANT TO FOCUS ON
CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP.
I THINK SECONDLY THEY WANT TO
FOCUS ON IMPROVING ACADEMIC
OUTCOMES FOR THE MOST
DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS AND
THIRDLY THEY WANT TO SUPPORT
HIGH QUALITY TEACHING IN ALL
SCHOOLS.
I THINK THE BIG DIFFERENCES COME
AT LEAST ON THE SENATE SIDE ON
THE PURPOSE STATEMENT REGARDING
TWO COLLEGE AND CAREER
READINESS, THE SENATE REALLY
WANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
STUDENTS THAT GRADUATED FROM
HIGH SCHOOL, ARE READY FOR
COLLEGE AND CAREERS.
THEY ALSO HAVE AN EMPHASIS ON
DEVELOPING COMPETENCIES AND THAT
EXTENDS TO CRITICAL THINKING.
PROBLEM SOLVING, AND
COLLABORATING WITH OTHER
STUDENTS AND COMMUNICATING
EFFECTIVELY.
THAT HELPS STUDENTS EXCEL IN THE
CLASSROOM.
IN THE HOUSE, THEIR PURPOSE IS
TO FOCUS ON BUILDING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENTS TO
GRADUATE AND PREPARE FOR
POST-SECONDARY SUCCESS.
OR WORKFORCE.
SO, REALLY THE EMPHASIS AND
DIFFERENCES, THE HOUSE SIDE,
IT’S ABOUT DEVELOPING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE STUDENTS
TO EXCEL IN THE POST-SECONDARY
LEVEL OR THE WORKFORCE.
>> EXCELLENT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND ANOTHER IMPORTANT PIECE OF
THE PUZZLE FOR THE BILLS, THE
FUNDING STRUCTURE WITHIN THEM,
AND I WILL GO OVER SOME THE KEY
SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES
WITHIN THEM.
BOTH BILLS BASICALLY MAINTAIN
THE SAME TITLE 1 FUNDING
STRUCTURE, BUT THAT IS WHERE THE
SIMILARITIES END WITH THE TWO
BILLS.
IT’S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THE
SENATE CONSOLIDATED PROGRAMS BUT
MAINTAINED TARGETED FUNDING FOR
A NUMBER OF KEY INITIATIVES,
WHICH WE WILL GO ON LATER IN THE
WEBINAR.
THE HOUSE ELIMINATES MORE THAN
70 PROGRAMS AND THEN CREATES A
BLOCK GRANT THAT STATES CAN USE
FOR ANYTHING THAT THEY SEE
IMPROVEMENT FOR LOCAL ACADEMIC
ACHIEVE
ACHIEVEMENT, IT’S A BIG
DIFFERENCE IN APPROACH.
ANOTHER KEY DIFFERENCE, THE
HOUSE BILL, THEY IMPLEMENT THE
SEQUESTER IN THE LEGISLATION.
SO, THEY DEFINE THE FUNDING
LEVELS FOR THE FEW PROGRAMS THAT
ARE IN THE HOUSE BILL AT THE
SEQUESTER LEVEL.
WE WILL GET A BIT MORE IN THE
SEQUESTER LATER ON IN THE
WEBINAR, THE SEQUESTER BEING THE
ACROSS THE BOARD CUTS THAT THEY
PUT IN PLACE DUE TO THEIR OWN
INACTION.
AND THEN THE BACKPACK IDEA, THE
FUNDING CAN FOLLOW THE CHILD,
AND THE SENATE DISCUSSED THIS
IDEA IN THE COMMITTEE BUT IT HAS
NOT APPROVED IT.
A FEW KEY ITEMS ON DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE
SENATE.
AND ACTUALLY, IT OCCURS TO ME
THAT I DID NOT MENTION IT
BEFORE.
WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE
HOUSE BILL, WE MEAN THE HOUSE
BILL THAT PASSED THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES LAST WEEK.
AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE
SENATE BILL, WE MEAN THE SENATE
BILL THAT PASSED OUT OF THE
COMMITTEE, THE HEALTH,
EDUCATION, PENSIONS AND LABOR
COMMITTEE.
SO, MOVING ON, WE HAVE TALKED
ABOUT THE PURPOSE.
WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE FUNDING
STRUK BROADLY.
FRED, CAN YOU TELL US THE
DIFFERENCES IN SIMILARITIES AND
DIFFERENCES IN THE BILLS WITH
REGARDS TO ACADEMIC STANDARDS?
>> SURE, I WILL START WITH THE
SIMILARITIES, ONE, BOTH BILLS
PROHIBIT A FEDERAL SET OF
STANDARDS.
ALONG WITH A FEDERAL ASSESSMENT.
THAT IS PROHIBITED IN BOTH THE
HOUSE AND THE SENATE BILL.
IT IS CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT
LAW AS WELL.
AND SO, THAT IS VERY SPECIFIC
AND OUTLINED IN BOTH BILLS.
I THINK THE DIFFERENCES COME
AROUND WHETHER OR NOT, THESE ARE
COLLEGE READY STANDARDS ON THE
SENATE SIDE.
THEY SPECIFY THAT STATES DEVELOP
STANDARDS AND WHAT EVER
STANDARDS THEY DEVELOP IS
COLLEGE AND CAREER READY.
ON THE HOUSE SIDE, STATES HAVE
THE FLEXIBILITY TO DEVELOP
STANDARDS THAT ARE ACADEMICALLY
CHALLENGING, SO STATES HAVE A
FLEXIBILITY TO DEVELOP STANDARDS
THEY DO NOT HAVE TO BE SET TO A
CERTAIN BAR OR BE CONSISTENT
WITH COLLEGE AND CAREERS.
BUT THE STANDARDS THEMSELVES ARE
DIFFERENT WHEN IT PERTAINS TO
COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS.
>> GOTTCHA, ON THE SENATE SIDE,
BOTH BILLS INCLUDE PROHIBITION
LANGUAGE.
AND THE STANDARDS, IF THEY DO
FIT, THEY NEED TO REACH THAT
COLLEGE AND CAREER READY BAR.
THERE’S QUITE A BIT OF
DISCUSSION IN BOTH THE HOUSE AND
THE SENATE WHEN IT CAME TO THIS
ISSUE OF STANDARDS.
ONE THING THAT I HIGHLIGHT IS IN
THE SENATE.
WHERE DURING THE MARK-UP, THERE
WAS AN AMENDMENT FROM A SENATE
SCOTT, SENATE SCOTT FROM SOUTH
CAROLINA, TO MODIFY THE LANGUAGE
THAT WAS IN THE CHAIRMAN’S BILL.
AND IT BECAME CLEAR EARLY ON,
AND TO THAT DEBATE, THAT REALLY,
THE AMENDMENT WAS INTENDED TO BE
AN ATTACK ON THE COMMON CORE.
THE STANDARDS THAT ARE, YOU
KNOW, MORE 46 STATES HAVE ARE
ADOPTED.
AND CHAIRMAN HARKEN JUST CALLED
HIM OUT ON IT.
AND HE SAID, SPECIFICALLY, LET’S
BE HONEST ABOUT THIS, AS I SEE
IT, IT’S A DIRECT ATTACK ON
COMMON CORE STANDARDS.
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS.
AND TO MY SURPRISE, SENATOR
SCOTT IMMEDIATELY SAID, WITH
PRIDE, YES IT IS.
AND WAS REALLY UNFORTUNATE, THIS
WAS NOT EVEN A POLICY ARGUMENTARGUMENT,
IT WAS REALLY AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
THE OPPONENTS ON OF THE COMMON
CORE TO SPEAK OUT, WHEN REALLY
THE BASE BILL ALREADY
PROHIBITED, YOU KNOW, A FEDERAL
IMPOSITION OF STANDARDS AND
CONTINUING POLICY OF CURRENT
POLICY LIKE YOU HAD SAID
EARLIER, FRED, THAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT CANNOT IMPOSE
SPECIFIC STANDARDS.
IT WAS UNFORTUNATE.
WHAT WE GATHER FROM THIS IS SOME
OF THE PUSH-BACK THAT THE COMMON
CORE RECEIVED LOCALLY IN THE IS
THAT STATE LEVEL IS
UNFORTUNATELY, ITS MADE ITS WAY
INTO WASHINGTON.
IT’S IMPORTANT THAT PROPONENTS
OF COLLEGE AND CAREER READY
STANDARDS REALLY COMMUNITY TO
THEIR POLICY MAKERS AT ALL
LEVELS AT THE LOCAL, STATE AND
FEDERAL LEVEL, THAT THESE
STANDARDS ARE STATE-LEAD, STATE
DEVELOPED, AND STATE-IMPLEMENTED
AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS
NOT HAD A ROLE IN DEVELOPING,
NOT A SINGLE DIME OF FEDERAL
MONEY WAS SPENT ON THIS.
LIKE I SAID IN THE SENATE,
JESSICA, WHY DON’T YOU TELL US
ABOUT THE DISCUSSION ON THE
HOUSE SIDE ABOUT THE COLLEGE
CAREER READY STANDARDS.
>> WE HAD SOMETHING SIMILAR ON
THE HOUSE SIDE.
A NUMBER OF MEMBERS USED THEIR
FLOOR TIME WHEN THEY PASSED TO
THE COMMITTEE FROM THE FLOOR.
THERE WAS A LOT OF
MISCOMMUNICATION AROUND THE
COMMON CORE.
SOME MEMBERS USED THE TERMS
STANDARDS CURRICULUM AND
ASSESSMENTS INTERCHANGEABLY.
THE ASSESSMENTS ARE THE WAY OF
MEASURING WHETHER OR NOT
STUDENTS ARE GETTING THERE OR
HOW THEY ARE PROGRESSING.
BUT ALL OF THEM LEAVE THE
DECISIONS TO THE STATES.
WHAT WE HAD ON THE HOUSE SIDE
WAS AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS
OFFERED AND PASSED.
MISSOURI’S REPRESENTATIVE
EXPRESSED THAT STATES AND
DISTRICTS MAIN AUTONOMY.
IT’S AN AMENDMENT OFFERING
SOMETHING THAT IS CURRENTLY
ALLOWED UNDER BOTH BILLS AND
CURRENT LAW.
IT WAS SORT OF INTERESTING.
THAT BILL WAS ADOPTED AND AGREED
TO BY A VOTE OF 241-182 WITH TEN
DEMOCRATS VOTING FOR IT, THERE
WAS A LOT MORE DISCUSSION
BECAUSE THE BILL WAS ON THE
FLOOR AROUND THE COMMON CORE IN
THE HOUSE.
A LOT OF MISCHARACTERIZATION,
AND CONFUSING STANDARDS WITH
CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENTS.
>> I RECALL ONE OF THE
PROVISIONS CONGRESSMAN’S
LANGUAGE WAS THAT WAIVERS,
COVERSE STATES INTO ADOPTING THE
COMMON CORE.
WHICH COULD NOT BE FURTHER THAN
THE TRUTH.
CONSIDERING THAT THE STATES THAT
ADOPTED COMMON CORE DID SO
BEFORE THE WAIVER PROCESS BEGAN.
SO MISINFORMATION.
>> AND VIRGINIA DID RECEIVE A
WAIVER, ADOPTED THE COMMON CORE.
THERE WERE A NUMBER OF DEMOCRATS
THAT RESPONDED TO SOME OF THE
STATEMENTS, IF A MEMBER WAS
INTERESTED IN NO LONGER ADOPTING
OR NO LONGER ADOPTING THE COMMON
CORE, THAT THEY RUN FOR STATES
OF, THIS IS A STATE DECISION,
NOT SOMETHING TO BE MADE AT THE
FEDERAL LEVEL.
>> THE CONVERSATION NEEDS TO
TAKE PLACE AT THE STATE HOUSE,
NOT AT THE U.S. HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES.
>> AND IT’S SOMETHING THAT IS
HAPPENING AT THE STATE LEVEL, SO
THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE
AUDIENCE TO GRASP AS WELL.
>> SO, IN ADDITION TO STANDARDS,
THE — BOTH BILLS INCLUDE
LANGUAGE AROUND ASSESSMENTS AND
THERE’S A VERY IMPORTANT
DIFFERENCE IN THE HOUSE AND THE
SENATE BILLS THAT I WANTED TO
BRING UP.
AND THAT IS, THAT AMONG THE 70
PROGRAMS THAT THE HOUSE BILL
REPEALS, ONE OF THEM IS THE
SPECIFIC FUNDING FOR STATE
ASSESSMENTS.
STATES CHOOSE THEIR OWN ASSESS
MANIES.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, SINCE NO
CHILD LEFT BEHIND PASSED HAS
BEEN PROVIDING FUNDING THAT
SUPPORT ASSESSMENTS.
THE HOUSE BILLS ELIMINATES THE
PROGRAMS SAYS THAT STATES CAN
USE SOME OF THE FUNDING FROM THE
LOCAL ACADEMIC FLEXIBLE GRANT
THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.
IT’S A BIG DIFFERENCE.
AND ANOTHER BIG DIFFERENCE IS
THAT THE SENATE BILL REALLY
RECOGNIZES THE LOW LEVEL OF
ASSESS MANIES THAT ARE
CURRENTLY — ASSESSMENTS THAT
ARE CURRENTLY BEING RECOMMENDED.
IT THE NOT REQUIRE STATES TO
IMPLEMENT ANY SPECIFIC
ASSESSMENT.
BUT IT REQUIRES THAT OF THE
ASSESSMENTS THAT ARE PUT IN
PLACE, THEY HAVE TO USE THE FULL
RANGE OF MEASUREMENT.
NOT JUST THE ONES THAT ARE
TESTED BY FILL IN THE BUBBLE.
AND THEY SHOULD MEASURE THE
DEEPER LEARNING, THE CRITICAL
THINKING AND PROBLEM SOLVING.
ANOTHER DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE
SENATE STIPULATES THAT THE
ASSESSMENTS CAN IN PART TAKE THE
FORM OF PROJECTS, PORTFOLIOS AND
PERFORMANCE TASKS AND THE IDEA
HERE IS THAT THE ASSESS MANIES
WOULD AGAIN MEASURE MORE HIRE
ORDER THINKING SKILLS AND NOT
JUST MEMORYIZING.
SO MANY OF THE STATES ARE
MEASURING THE LOW LEVEL SKILLS
THAT DO NOT PREPARE KIDS AND DO
NOT DRIVE INSTRUCTION TOWARD
PREPARING KIDS FOR COLLEGE AND
CAREER.
SOME IMPORTANT CHANGES THERE.
AND VICKI FROM LOUISIANA HAD
ASKED WHAT DECISIONS HAVE BEEN
MADE ABOUT ALTERNATIVE
ASSESSMENTS FOR STUDENTS WITH
DISABILITIES AND IF THERE’S ANY
FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW FOR VARIOUS
DIPLOMA TYPES.
I WANT TO GET TO THAT.
THERE’S LANGUAGE IN THE BILL
THAT ALLOWS FOR ALTERNATIVE
ASSESSMENTS FOR STUDENTS WITH
DISABILITIES AND THEN TO ANSWER
A QUESTION ABOUT FLEXIBILITY FOR
DIFFERENT DIPLOMA TYPES, THAT IS
WHERE THERE’S LESS FLEXIBILITY
IN THE SENATE, AND MORE
FLEXIBILITY IN THE HOUSE THAN WE
WOULD AGREE WITH — I’M SORRY
WITH THE LESS FLEXIBILITY THAT
IS IN THE SENATE.
THE DEFINITION OF THE GRADUATION
RATE STIPULATE LATES THAT IT’S
ONLY THE REGULAR DIPLOMA ONLY —
ONLY THE REGULAR DIPLOMA THAT
ACCOUNTS FOR THE ACCOUNTABILITY
PURPOSE.
SO, SOME NUANCE AND SIGNIFICANT
DIFFERENCES AGAIN, BETWEEN THE
HOUSE AND SENATE BILLS.
THE REPORTING PROVISIONS OF THE
TWO BILLS ARE ALSO DIFFERENT,
AND GOT QUITE A BIT OF ATTENTION
ON THE SENATE SIDE.
JESS, YOU WANT TO TELL US ABOUT
THE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS?
>> SURE, AND BEFORE I GO THROUGH
THEM, REMEMBER THESE ARE
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS THEY DO
NOT TRIGGER INTERACTION, BUT IN
TERMS OF WHAT THE STATE AND
DISTRICTS NEED TO INCLUDE IN
THEIR REPORT CARDS.
THE SIMILARITIES, IT IS REQUIRED
TO REPORT THE ADJUSTED COHORT
GRADUATION RATE.
THE CUMULATIVE RATE IS ALLOWED
TO BE INCLUDED.
THAT IS FOR STATES THAT TAKE
LONGER THAN FOUR YEARS TO
GRADUATE.
ENGLISH PROFICIENCY, AND SOME
REPORTING ON TEACHERS BY
CATEGORY.
HOW THEY DEFINE THE CATEGORIES
DIFFERS A BIT IN BOTH BILLS.
AGAIN, THAT IS WHERE THE
SIMILARITIES END.
THE SENATE ASKS FOR ADDITIONAL
DATA.
IN PARTICULAR, LOOKING AT
ADVANCED COURSE WORK.
DISCIPLINE DATA, THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE NOT SEEN
IN THE 2011 BILL THAT PASSED OUT
OF COMMITTEE, LOOKING AT ASKING
SCHOOLS — THEY HAVE A LIST OF
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR
PREGNANT TEENS.
EXCITING ADDITIONAL REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS TO GET A BETTER
SENSE OF WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE
SCHOOLS AND WHAT OPPORTUNITIES
ARE AVAILABLE.
THE SENATE BILL DOES INCLUDE A
SEPARATE EQUITY REPORT CARD,
DIFFERENT FROM THE 2011 BILL AND
DIFFERENT FROM THE CURRENT HOUSE
BILL THAT LOOKS A LOT MORE AT
ACCESS, WHETHER STUDENTS IN THE
SCHOOLS HAD ACCESS TO PRE-K, AND
TALENTED AND GIFTED PROGRAMS.
SCHOOL CLIMATE INDICATORS AND
FUNDING.
TRYING TO GIVE A MORE ACCURATE
ASSESS MANY OF WHAT IS GOING ON
IN THE SCHOOLS.
SO NOT JUST THE OUTCOMES BUT THE
INPUTS AS WELL.
>> EXCELLENT.
AND ONE OF THE — ONE OF THE
POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR
BIPARTISAN SHIP THAT I RECALL
FROM THE SENATE MARK-UP, WAS
WHEN SENATOR MURRAY OFFERED THE
TRACKING OF MILITARY FAMILIES.
ONE, THEIR PARENTS ARE SERVING
THE COUNTRY AND THEY ARE
ESSENTIALLY SERVING THEIR
COUNTRY, THEY MOVE AROUND SO OF,
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY GET
THE SUPPORT THEY NEED AND NOT
EVEN THAT HAD BIPARTISAN
SUPPORT.
IT WAS REALLY UNFORTUNATE.
>> RIGHT, THEY ARE, QUICKLY, IT
WAS THE SENSE THAT SOMEHOW THE
DATA IS COLLECTED AND NOT USED
MUCH IT’S IMPORTANT TO NOTE,
THAT ONE OF THE PRIMARY REASONS
TO COLLECT THE DATA, IS TO
TARGET THE LIMITED RESOURCES TO
KNOWING WHERE OUR MILITARY
STUDENTS, WHERE DO WE HAVE HIGH
CONCENTRATIONS OF PREGNANT AND
PARENTING TEENS AND WHERE DO WE
HAVE SCHOOLS ARE NOT A LOT OF
STUDENTS HAD EXPOSER TO PRE-K,
SO WE CAN TARGET OUR RESOURCES
MORE EFFICIENTLY.
IT’S NOT JUST DATA COLLECTIONING
FOR DATA COLLECTING SAKE, BUT
FOR USING THE INFORMATION.
>> THAT IS IMPORTANT.
JUMPING BACKWARDS.
BARRY ASKED REGARDING
ASSESSMENTS, DO YOU FEEL THE
FEDERAL FUNDING OF ASSESSMENTS
WILL REMAIN AT CURRENT LEVELS.
I WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT
QUESTION.
YOU KNOW, UNDER THE SEQUESTER,
EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE
DECREASED AND SO, WE WILL GET
MORE INTO FUNDING AND
APPROPRIATIONS LATER.
BUT BARRY, YOU KNOW, MY SENSE IS
THAT, IS THAT FUNDING REALLY
WILL GO DOWN FOR ASSESSMENTS
LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE, UNLESS WE
CAN REPLACE SEQUESTER WITH
ANOTHER OPTION FOR DEFICIT
REDUCTION.
SO, UNFORTUNATE NEWS.
ALSO PART OF THE REASON, THAT

— THAT ASSESSMENTS THAT ARE
IMPORTANT.
IT’S IMPORTANT IF YOU UNDERSTAND
THE IMPORTANCE OF ASSESSMENTS
THAT YOU VOICE IT TO POLICY
MAKERS.
IT’S NOT AN ISSUE THAT A LOT OF
PEOPLE ARE KNOCKING ON THE DOOR
FOR.
A REMINDER TO THE AUDIENCE, SEND
IN YOUR QUESTIONS AND AS WE CAN,
WE WILL GET TO THEM DURING THE
WEBINAR CONVERSATION LET’S SEE,
MOVING ON.
WE TALKED ABOUT REPORTING.
ONE OF THE KEY FEATURES OF THE
NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT,
PROBABLY THE NUMBER ONE REASON
WHY THE PUBLIC GENERALLY
DISLIKES NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND,
WAS SCHOOL IDENTIFICATION, THE
YEARLY PROGRESS IS ELIMINATED
AND BOTH HOUSES TAKE DIFFERENT
APPROACHES TO IT.
JESS, CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT
THIS?
>> WE ARE SEEING DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND SENATE
SIDE IN TERMS OF APPROACH TO
SCHOOL IDENTIFICATION.
IN THE SENATE, THEY ARE
ACTUALLY — THEY HAVE A LIST OF
TRIGGERS ACHIEVEMENT.
THE LOWEST 5% ARE IDENTIFIED.
HIGH SCHOOLS WITH A GRADUATION
RATE OF LESS THAN 60% AND THEY
LOOK AT ACHIEVEMENT AND
GRADUATION GAPS.
THE SCHOOLS WITH THE GREATEST
ACHIEVEMENT GRADUATION GAPS —
GRADUATION GROUPS ARE IDENTIFIED
AND ANY SCHOOL THAT MISSES A SUB
GROUP TARGET, WHETHER IT’S
ACHIEVEMENT OR GRADUATION FOR
TWO YEARS OR MONTH IS
IDENTIFIED.
ON THE SENATE SIDE, THERE ARE
NOT ANY —
>> ON THE HOUSE SIDE.
>> I’M SORRY, ON THE HOUSE SIDE,
THERE’S NOT ANY AUTOMATIC
TRIGGERS.
IT’S SET BY THE STATE.
THERE’S NOTHING IN FEDERAL LAW
THAT REQUIRES THEM TO IDENTIFY
NIECE SCHOOLS.
STATES ARE DIRECTED TO ANNUALLY
EVALUATE SCHOOLS BASED ON THEIR
PERFORMANCE, AGAIN, SET THE
MINIMUM FLOOR THAT SCHOOLS WOULD
HAVE TO TRIGGER AN INTERVENTION
SO, VERY DIFFERENT APPROACHES ON
THE SENATE SIDE VERSUS THE HOUSE
SIDE.
>> AND YOU KNOW, WHAT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT WHEN IT COMES TO
SCHOOL IDENTIFICATION, IT’S NOT
JUST IDENTIFYING THE SCHOOLS
THAT NEED THE SUPPORT, IT’S WHAT
IMPROVEMENT IS REQUIRED OR WHAT
SUPPORT WILL THE SCHOOLS BE
GETTING.
ARGUABLY UNDER NO CHILD LEFT
BEHIND, IDENTIFIED A WHOLE LOT
OF SCHOOLS, BUT THE SUPPORT OF
THE INTERVENTIONS THAT WERE
REQUIRED WERE ONE-SIDE FITS ALL
AND LARGELY INEFFECTIVE.
CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH THE
IMPROVEMENT PROVISIONS OF THE
BILLS?
>> SO, ON THE SENATE SIDE, ANY
SCHOOL THAT IS IDENTIFIED OR ANY
SCHOOL THAT IS IN THE BOTTOM 5%
IN TERMS OF ACHIEVEMENT OR HAS A
GRADUATION RATE OF LESS THAN 60%
IS IDENTIFIED AS A PRIORITY
SCHOOL.
AND UNDER THE SENATE BILL, THOSE
PRIORITY SCHOOLS WILL UNDERGO A
NEEDS AND CAPACITY ANALYSIS,
WHICH IS PRETTY EXTENSIVE AS A
REVIEW.
IT’S AN ASSESSMENT OF WHAT IS
CAUSING THE OUTCOMES WHAT IS THE
CAPACITY OF THE SCHOOL TO
IMPROVE, WHAT ARE RESOURCES IN
THE SCHOOL COMMUNITY.
AND THEN THOSE SCHOOLS THAT ARE
IDENTIFIED AS PRIORITY SCHOOLS
CAN CHOOSE FROM ONE OF SIX
STRATEGIES.
4 OF THEM DO REQUIRE MAJOR
CHANGES TO STAFFING.
THE TRANSFORMATION RESTART, AND
TURN AROUND AND SCHOOL CLOSURE.
RURAL SCHOOLS HAVE SOME
FLEXIBILITY AROUND HIRING AND
FIRING.
AND WHOLE SCHOOL REFORMS THAT DO
NOT INCLUDE PROVISIONS AROUND
HIRING AND FIRING, BUT THE
SCHOOL HAS TO ADOPT AN EVIDENCED
BASED REFORM MODEL AND A
FLEXIBILITY MODEL.
AND IT HAS TO BE APPROVED BY THE
CONSECUTIVE.
AND THEN FOR THOSE SCHOOLS WITH
THE BOTTOM 10%, WITH THE
GREATEST ACHIEVEMENT OF
GRADUATION RATE GAPS, THEY DO
NOT HAVE TO ADOPT ONE OF THE
MODELS BUT HAVE TO IMPLEMENT
SOME TYPE OF TARGETED
INTERVENTION TO ADDRESS THE
GAPS.
ON THE HOUSE SIDE, IT’S
DETERMIND SOLELY BY THE STATE.
THERE’S NO MODELS, THERE’S NO
TYPE OF MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR
INTERVMP ENTION, SO ENTIRELY
LEFT UP TO THE STATE TO ADDRESS
THE NEEDS.
>> FLEXIBILITY IN BOTH
APPROACHES BUT THE HOUSE’S
APPROACH DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY
SORT OF FEDERAL DIRECTION
GUIDANCE WHATSOEVER.
WE HAVE GONE, IF A NO CHILD LEFT
BEHIND WAS TOO PRESCRIPTIVE, I
WOULD ARGUE THAT THE HOUSE SIDE
APPROACH GOES WAY TOO FAR IN THE
OTHER DIRECTION IN TERMS OF
PROVIDING PROTECTION FOR LOW
ACHIEVING STUDENTS.
SO, WE TALKED ABOUT SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENT, AND A NUMBER OF
ISSUES.
ONE OTHER ISSUE THAT IS
IMPORTANT FOR THE ALLIANCE FOR
EXCELLENCE OF EDUCATION WITH THE
FOCUS OF SECONDARY SCHOOLS.
IS THE FUNDING FOR HIGH SCHOOLS
THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE BILL.
VERY DIFFERENT APPROACHES IN THE
BILL BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND
SENATE.
THE SENATE TOOK STEPS TO ADDRESS
AN ISSUE THAT HAS BEEN, I WOULD
SAY PLAGUING TITLE I FOR QUITE
SOME TIME.
HIGH SCHOOLS RARELY RECEIVE
FUNDING FROM TITLE I, THEY SERVE
A QUARTER OF LOW INCOME KIDS.
THE SENATE SIDE LOWERS THE
THRESHOLD LEVEL FOR FUNDING FROM
75 — FROM 75% POVERTY TO 50%
POVERTY.
THEY LOWERED THE THRESHOLD.
AND ANOTHER MAJOR CHANGE THAT
WAS MADE IS THAT THE POVERTY
MEASURE WITHIN HIGH SCHOOL
LEVELS ARE USED FOR DETERMINING
TITLE I ALLOCATIONS, IT WOULD BE
REQUIRED TO INCLUDE THE FEEDER
PATTERN.
THAT IS THE AVERAGE POVERTY RATE
OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS THAT FEED
INTO THE HIGH SCHOOL.
THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE MOST
SCHOOLS USE FREE AND REDUCED
PRICED LUNCH AND THE HIGH SCHOOL
STUDENTS ARE LESS LIKELY TO FILL
IN THOSE FORMS.
THE RESEARCH SHOWS IF YOU USE A
FEEDER PATTERN, YOU GET A MORE
ACCURATE MEASURE OF POVERTY AND
THEN THIRD IMPORTANT PROVISION
IN THE SENATE BILL IS THAT,
THERE’S A SPECIFIC TARGETED
PROGRAM FOR HIGH SCHOOL REFORM,
HIGH SCHOOL REDESIGN, AND THE
PATH WAYS TO COLLEGE PROGRAM, IN
ADDITION, THERE’S TARGETED
FUNDING FOR PLACEMENT.
THERE’S A NUMBER OF PROVISIONS
FOR HIGH SCHOOL.
TITLE I, THEY APPLY TO NEW
MONEY.
SO THEY WOULD NOT TAKE MONEY
FROM ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS OR
MIDDLE SCHOOLS AND GIVE IT TO
HIGH SCHOOLS, THAT IS BAD
POLICY.
AND THE SO, AND YOU KNOW, WE
HAVE TO GET THE FUNDING LEVELS
UP TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, MAKE THE
CHANGES REALLY MATTER.
BUT IT’S A GOOD STEP, AND I
WOULD SAY IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION
AND THE HOUSE INCLUDES ANY SORT
OF POLICY ALONG THE LINES.
>> UM, SO, SPEAKING OF SPECIFIC
PROGRAMS FOR, THAT WERE INCLUDED
IN THE SENATE, AND UNFORTUNATELY
NOT IN THE HOUSE.
THE SENATE INCLUDES, IN ADDITION
TO THE FOCUS PROGRAM, ARE HIGH
SCHOOLS THAT INCLUDE SPECIFIC
FOCUS ON TECHNOLOGY, AND
INCLUDES THE ATTAIN ACT, THAT IS
SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT FROM AS YOU
WERE SAYING THE 2011 SENATE
BILL, IT INCLUDES THE LANGUAGE
FROM THE ENHANCING EDUCATION
THROUGH TECHNOLOGY ACT.
WHICH WAS INTRODUCED BY SENATOR
HAGEN.
THE BILL WAS FIRST WRITTEN BY
GEORGE MILLER IN THE HOUSE AND
CALLED THE TRANSFORMING
EDUCATION THROUGH TECHNOLOGY
ACT.
BUT IT PROVIDES SUPPORT FOR
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND
TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE THAT
IS SO IMPORTANT IN SCHOOLS THESE
DAYS.
THERE ARE A FEW OTHER SPECIFIC
TARGETED PROGRAMS THAT ARE
INCLUDED IN THE SENATE BILL,
INCLUDING WITHIN AROUND
LITERACY.
YOU WANT TO TAKE THE HELM?
>> IT’S A COMP HENCEIVE PROGRAM,
THAT HELPS STUDENTS WITH
LITERACY INSTRUCTION.
IT ADOPTS SENATOR PATTI MURRAY’S
LEARN ACT BILL.
IT TAKES A VERY COMPREHENSIVE
APPROACH FOR LOW INCOME STUDENTS
AND STUDENTS THAT HAVE LOW
LITERACY SCHOOLS.
TO HOUSE SIDE, THERE’S NO SUCH
PROVISION.
IT ELIMINATES THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT LONE LITERACY
PROGRAM.
BUT WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW,
IS RANKING MEMBER, GEORGE MILLER
INTRODUCED A SUBSTITUTE
AMENDMENT TO REPLACE THE ACTA
PASSED LAST WEEK.
AND IN THAT BILL, THERE WAS A
NUMBER OF PROVISIONS THAT WERE
CONSISTENT IN THE SENATE BILL,
SUCH AS THE LITERACY PROVISIONS
AND THE TECHNOLOGY PROVISIONS
THAT YOU SPOKE TO EARLY AS WELL
AS A NUMBER OF ITEMS.
>> DEFINITELY.
UM, SO, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE
HOUSE PROVISIONS, WE TALKED
ABOUT THE SENATE PROVISIONS.
THE HOUSE, ACTUALLY REACHED THE
FINISH LINE.
THEY ARE ACTUALLY ON THE FLOOR
LAST WEEK.
LAST FRIDAY.
FRED, CAN YOU GIVE US THE LOW
DOWN ON THE FINAL VOTE?
>> SURE.
IT WAS VERY ENTERTAINING TO
WATCH ON THE TV LAST WEEK.
CHAIRMAN KLEIN HAD ZERO
DEMOCRATS VOTE FOR HIS BILL,
WHILE 12 REPUBLICANS VOTED
AGAINST IT.
IT WAS A PARTISAN APPROACH.
AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, JUST A
COUPLE MINUTES AGO, RANKING
MEMBER GEORGE MILLER INTRODUCED
A SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT THAT
REPLACED JOHN KLEIN’S BILL.
HE RECEIVED ONE REPUBLICAN VOTE
FOR THE BILL.
AND TWO DEMOCRATS VOTED AGAINST
IT FOR A VOTE OF 193 TO 233,
WHAT THIS SHOWS ME AND WHAT YOU
CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, THE
PEOPLE WATCHING, THE WEBINAR
ONLINE, THE HOUSE HAS INTRODUCED
A VERY PARTISAN BILL.
AND I THINK IT’S VERY IMPORTANT
TO KNOW, THAT AS THINGS MOVE
FORWARD, THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE
TO GAIN SOME DEMOCRATIC VOTES
FOR THE BILL.
I THINK FOR SOMETHING TO BE
SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENT.
BUT IT WAS VERY PARTISAN, IT WAS
A VERY PARTISAN DEBATE AND VOTE
COUNT.
>> AND I THINK YOU KNOW, TO BE
FAIR, THE SENATE’S BILL WAS ALSO
PARTISAN, SO SOMETHING, SOMEONE
HAS TO GIVE.
WE WILL WITH SEE WHO GIVES HOW MUCH,
AND TO THAT END, WE RECEIVED A
QUESTION FROM RICHARD FROM
ARIZONA WHO ASKS HAVE THE ODDS
THAT ESA BE RENEWED GO UP OR
DOWN SINCE THE PREVIOUS WEBINAR.
>> THANK YOU FOR WATCHING THE
PREVIOUS WEBINAR.
JESSICA, YOUR THOUGHTS?
>> WE HAD A BILL THAT PASSED OUT
OF THE HOUSE, THAT BILL HAS TO
GO TO CONFERENCE WITH THE BILL
THAT PASSED OUT OF THE SENATE.
WE HAD A BILL THAT PASSED OUT OF
COMMITTEE IN THE SENATE, BUT
THEY NEED TO BRING THAT BILL TO
THE FLOOR.
ONE THING TO NOTE IS THAT THE
HOUSE BILL WAS VERY MUCH A
PARTISAN BILL.
AND ON THE SENATE SIDE, ALTHOUGH
THE BILL THAT PASSED OUT OF
COMMITTEE DIDN’T RECEIVE
REPUBLICAN VOTES, THE LANGUAGE
IN THE BILL, THERE’S A NUMBER OF
PROVISIONS IN THE — THE BILL
THAT JUST RECENTLY PASSED LAST
MONTH THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE
2011 BIPARTISAN BILL THAT PASSED
OUT OF COMMITTEE.
SO, IN TERMS OF WHAT ARE THE
CHANCES OF THE BILL GOING TO THE
SENATE FLOOR?
THERE WERE POSITIVE WORDS
OFFERED BY RANKING MEMBER
ALEXANDER ON THE HELP COMMITTEE
TOWARDS THE END OF THE MARK-UP
AND WE HAVE A SLIDE WITH THE
FULL QUOTE AND RANKING MEMBER
ALEXANDER SAID, WE HAVE SOME
DISAGREEMENTS BUT WE HAVE A
PROCESS IN CONGRESS FOR
RESOLVING DISAGREEMENTS, IT’S
CALLED AMENDMENTS AND VOTING.
SO I’M GLAD WE HAD THIS
EXERCISE, WE HAD A CHANCE TO
HAVE A SAY, WE VOTED, WE CAME
CLOSE AND LOST, WE WILL GO TO
THE FLOOR AND AS LONG AS WE ARE
ALLOWED TO HAVE AMENDMENTS I
WILL SUPPORT THE ABILITY TO HAVE
AMENDMENTS AND HOPE WE GO TO
CONFERENCE WITH WHAT RESULT WE
HAVE.
THIS STATEMENT WAS MADE BEFORE
THE HOUSE BROUGHT THEIR
AMENDMENT TO THE FLOOR.
IT SEEMS THAT FROM RANKING
MEMBER ALEXANDER’S STATEMENT, HE
IS IN SUPPORT OF IT COMING TO
THE FLOOR, IT WOULD OFFER AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR AMENDMENTS.
IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION,
THAT BILLS ARE STILL AS WE HAVE
KIND OF NOTED THE LAST HALF
HOUR, VERY FAR APART.
AND SO, IT WILL BE A CHALLENGE
TO GET A BILL OUT OF CONFERENCE
THAT PLEASES BOTH SIDES.
>> I THINK THAT DURING OUR LAST
WEBINAR, I WOULD HAVE GIVEN ESCA
REAUTHORIZATION AND PRESIDENT
OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY, A 2% CHANCE
OF THAT HAPPENING.
MY GLASS TODAY, I WOULD SAY IT’S
AT LEAST A QUARTER FULL.
THAT THERE REALLY HAS BEEN SO
MUCH PROGRESS MADE ON IT, I
THINK IT WILL LARGELY DEPEND ON
HOW MUCH CONGRESS WANTS TO
WEIGH-IN, WITH REGARD TO THE
WAIVERS THAT TATES ARE
IMPLEMENTING THAT WE WILL GET TO
IN A FEW MINUTES.
I THINK A LOT OF THE ACTION IS
LARGELY IN RESPONSE TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION STEPPING
IN SAYING, CONGRESS, IF YOU ARE
NOT GOING TO DO YOUR JOB, WE
WILL STEP IN AND PROVIDE STATES
RELIEF AND FLEXIBILITY.
IF CONGRESS GETS TOO IRRITATED
WITH THAT PROGRESS, WE WILL SEE
A BILL THAT MAKES IT TO THE
PRESIDENT’S DESK.
>> THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE
PRESIDENT SAID.
HE OPPOSED THE STUDENTS SUCCESS
ACT THAT PASSED THE HOUSE.
IF THE HOUSE AND SENATE GO TO
CONFERENCE AND THE BILL LOOKS
MORE LIKE THE HOUSE BILL, I
THINK IT WILL HAVE A HARD TIME
FOR THE PRESIDENT TO SIGN IT.
>> I THINK IT WOULD BE HARD FOR
THE SENATE TO COME CLOSE TO
PASSING IT.
LIKE JESS SAID, THE BILL REALLY
STARTED WITH THE BIPARTISAN BILL
FROM 2011, SO, FROM I THINK THE
SENATE DEMOCRATS PERSPECTIVE,
THEY GAVE A LOT ALREADY.
AND SO, NOT SURE HOW MUCH
WILLING THEY ARE TO GIVE MORE.
AND THE HOUSE, ON A VARIETY OF
ISSUES, HAS NOT REALLY TENDED
TOWARDS PASSING COMPROMISED
LEGISLATION.
SO WE WILL HAVE TO SEE.
BUT AT LEAST WE ARE — IT’S BEEN
AN INCREDIBLY BUSY LAST SEVERAL
WEEKS.
WE ARE FURTHER ON IN THE PROCESS
THAN I WOULD HAVE PREDICTED.
SO —
>> AND THE SENATE BILL DOES COME
A WAYS IN TERMS OF FLEXIBILITY.
IT HAS SAFEGUARDS AND TRIGGERS,
BUT THERE’S A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY
IN THE BILL.
>> SO THAT IS THE UPDATE.
WE ARE NOW GOING TO TURN TO A
ANOTHER FUN FILLED AND EXCITING
TOPIC.
WE WILL TRY TO BE BRIEF.
BUDGET AND APPROPRIATIONS.
FRED, KICK IT OFF FOR US, TELL
US WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE
BUDGET AND APPROPRIATIONS
PROCESS.
>> YEAH, A LOT IS HAPPENING,
ACTUALLY WITH APPROPRIATIONS AND
BUDGET PROCESS.
FOR THOSE WHO ARE VIEWING
ONLINE, WE HAVE A LOT OF NUMBERS
ON THE SLIDE HERE, BUT I’M NOT
GOING TO GO THROUGH THE DETAILS
TOO MUCH, I WANT TO SPEAK AT IT
FROM A MORE MACRO LEVEL.
THERE’S JUST A, WHAT I WANT TO
SAY, THERE’S A BIG DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN WHAT THE SENATE IS
PROPOSING AND WHAT THE HOUSE HAS
PROPOSED.
SO I’M KIND OF LOOKING AT THE
TOP LINE NUMBERS HERE.
WITH THE THREE BULLET POINTS,
WITH THE TOP LINE DISCREATIONARY
ALLOCATION, IT INCLUDES DEFENSE
AND NONDEFENSE, THERE’S A
DIFFERENCE IN THE BUDGETS BY
ABOUT $91 BILLION BETWEEN THE
HOUSE AND SENATE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOP LINE,
WHICH IS EDUCATION AS WELL AS A
NUMBER OF OTHER DOMESTIC
PROGRAMS, THERE’S AN ADDITIONAL
$91 BILLION DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE.
A LOT OF THAT IS DUE ON THE
HOUSE SIDE, WHY THE NUMBER IS
MUCH LOWER, IS BECAUSE THE HOUSE
HAS SHIFTED THE CUTS TO
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING, SO
DISCRETIONARY HAS TAKEN A HUGE
BUDGET CUT.
THAT IS WHY YOU SEE, ABOUT $414
BILLION THERE INSTEAD OF THE
$505 BILLION LEVEL THAT THE
SENATE PROPOSED.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE HHS FUNDING,
WHICH IS THE APPROPRIATIONS BILL
THAT FUNDS EDUCATION.
THERE’S ALSO A $42 BILLION
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE
SENATE PROPOSED AND WHAT THE
HOUSE HAS PROPOSED.
I THINK MOVING FORWARD FROM A
JUST, AN ECONOMIC AND POLICY
STANDPOINT, THE SENATE AND THE
HOUSE AS IT RELATES TO
APPROPRIATIONS AND BUDGET ARE
EQUALLY FAR APART AS IT IS WITH
THE AUTHORIZING OF THE ESCA —
>> ACTUALLY MORE SO.
PERHAPS EVEN MORE SO.
>> PERHAPS EVEN MORE SO.
I MEAN, THERE ARE BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS APART.
— THEY ARE BILLS OF DOLLARS
APART.
THESE TWO CHAMBERS ARE BEEN $100
BILLION APART.
WHAT IT MEANS IN REAL TERMS,
EVEN IF YOU MEET SOMEWHERE IN
THE MIDDLE, THERE’S GOING TO BE
TONS AND TONS AND TONS OF
STUDENTS, TEACHERS AND FAMILIES
EFFECTED BY A LOSS OF PROGRAMS,
WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO
ALLEVIATE THIS.
CONGRESS HAS A LOT OF WORK TO
DO.
>> AND TO THAT END, WE RECEIVED
A QUESTION, ANNA FROM MARYLAND
ASKED, HOW CAN WE MAKE THE
NEGATIVE IMPACT OF THIS
SEQUESTRATION CUTS TO EDUCATION
BETTER KNOWN TO THE AMERICAN
PUBLIC?
>> AND BEFORE I TURN IT TO FRED
FOR THAT ANSWER, I WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
YOU SAID AND THAT IS THAT, THE
REASON WHY, AND THAT MIDDLE
BULLET POINT, THAT IS ON THE
APPROPRIATIONS AND BUDGET
UPDATES SLIDE, YOU SEE THE TOP
LINE, NONDEFENSE DISCRETIONARY
SPENDING.
I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THIS,
BECAUSE I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT.
THE HOUSE DECIDED, WHEN WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT THE SEQUESTER, THE
IDEA WAS THAT BOTH DEFENSE AND
DOMESTIC PENDING WERE EACH GOING
TO TAKE A HIT.
AND SUCH A BIG HIT THAT CONGRESS
WILL NEVER GO FOR THAT.
WELL, TURNS OUT THAT CONGRESS
WENT FOR IT.
BUT THE HOUSE’S APPROACH TO
IMPLEMENTING THE SEQUESTER NOW
THAT IT’S IN PLACE IS TO SHIFT
ALL OF THOSE CUTS FROM DEFENSE
ON TO THE DOMESTIC SIDE.
SO, ONE THING I THINK WOULD BE
IMPORTANT FOR ANNA AND FOR YOUR
COLLEAGUES IS TO MAKE SURE THAT
PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT THE
HOUSE’S APPROACH TO THE
SEQUESTER IS COMPLETELY JUST
UNTENABLE.
IT WOULD BE DECIMATING THESE
PROGRAMS, FRED, HOW DO WE MAKE
SURE THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS THE
IMPACT OF THE SEQUESTER.
>> YOU HAVE TO HAVE YOUR VOICE
KNOWN AND HEARD BY THE ELECTED
OFFICIALS.
HEAD START IS GETTING CUT,
HEALTH SERVICES ARE GETTING CUT,
SO PEOPLE ARE GOING TO FEEL THIS
IN MULTIPLE WAYS.
I THINK WHAT IS VERY, VERY, VERY
IMPORTANT IS TO REALLY CONTACT
YOUR MEMBER OF CONGRESS AND LET
THEM KNOW THAT YOU ARE OPPOSED
TO SUCH PROVISIONS, ESPECIALLY
AS SHIFTING THE COST FROM THE
DEFENSE TO THE DOMESTIC SIDE OF
THINGS SUCH AS EDUCATION, THE
MORE PEOPLE COLLECTIVELY COME
TOGETHER, WHETHER IT’S WRITING
LETTERS OR WHETHER IT BE HOSTING
EVENTS AND SKG THEIR MEMBER OF
CONGRESS TO COME TO THEIR HALLS
OR DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS, THE
BETTER.
THESE ARE MAKING A REALLY BIG
IMPACT IN CERTAIN PLACES AND SO
THE MORE THAT YOU CAN VOCALIZE,
THE BETTER OFF YOU WILL BE.
>> I TOTALLY AGREE, I THINK WE
REALLY NEED TO BE A NUMBER OF
FOLKS ARE, WE NEED TO PUT A FACE
TO THE DOLLAR SIGNS AND SHOW
THE, YOU KNOW, THE KIDS WHO
CAN’T GET INTO AFTER SCHOOL
PROGRAMS BECAUSE OF THE 21st
CENTURY LEARNING CENTER PROGRAM
HAS BEEN CUT.
OR YOU KNOW, THE TEACHERS OR THE
SCHOOLS THAT HAVE LARGER CLASS
SIZES BECAUSE TEACHERS HAVE HAD
TO BE LAID OFF BECAUSE TITLE I
IS BEING CUT OR STUDENTS CAN
DISABILITIES ARE BEING ROLLED
BACK BECAUSE IDA IS BEING CUT.
WE NEED TO BE VERY SPECIFIC, NOT
JUST ABOUT THE DOLLARS AND
CENTS, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH LESS
IN FUNDING TITLE I IS PROVIDING,
BUT WHAT SERVICES KIDS ARE NOT
RECEIVING BECAUSE OF THESE CUTS.
>> AND I THINK ALSO, PEOPLE ARE
IMPACTED IN MULTIPLE WAYS AND BY
MULTIPLE CUTS.
SO, A CHILD NOT HAVING A SPOT IN
HEAD START IMPACTS THEIR
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT AND COULD
PREVENT THEIR PARENT FROM GOING
BACK TO WORK, THAT PARENT THAT
MAY BENEFIT FROM HEAD START, MAY
BENEFIT FROM THE HEALTH CARE
PROVISIONS AS WELL, SO, PEOPLE,
THESE CUTS ARE IMPACTING
FAMILIES IN DIFFERENT WAYS AND
IN DIFFERENT PROGRAMS AS WELL.
I ANY GETTING A FACE ON SOME OF
THE CUTS AND CONVEYING THAT TO
YOUR MEMBER OF CONGRESS IS KEY.
>> DEFINITELY.
>> WELL, JILL FROM CALIFORNIA
ASKED A QUESTION, SHE ASKED HOW
CAN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
BALANCE COMPETITIVE AND FORMULA
GRANT PROGRAMS SO THAT ALL POOR
CHILDREN CAN RECEIVE FEDERAL
DOLLARS?
>>> FRED, CAN YOU TAKE US
THROUGH THE WAY THAT THE FEDS
ARE TRYING TO BALANCE THE
COMPETITIVE AND FORMULA GRANTS?
>> SURE, THE NEXT SIDE IS THE
APPROPRIATIONS UPDATE AND
THERE’S A CHART HERE THAT JUST
PERTAINS, OR OUTLINES SOME OF
THE KEY EDUCATION FUNDING THAT
THE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE CAME UP WITH TO LET
THE VIEWERS KNOW, THIS IS NOT
LAW OR THIS IS NOT THE FINAL
NUMBERS, BUT THIS IS SIMPLY
STILL A PROPOSAL THAT PASSED OUT
OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE SENATE
SIDE.
AND IT IDENTIFIES SOME OF THIS,
BUT FOR EXAMPLE, TO ANSWER
JILL’S QUESTION, THERE WAS A
MODEST INCREASE OF TITLE ONE,
AND SO THAT IS A FORMULA GRANT
PROGRAM AND THAT IS ONE WAY THAT
THE MONEY IS BEING DISPERSED TO
LOW INCOME STUDENTS.
THERE’S ADDITIONAL COMPETITIVE
GRANT PROGRAMS THAT RECEIVED
FUNDING SUCH AS THE RACE TO THE
TOP AND ALSO THE I-3 GRANTS.
BUT I’M GOING TO RUN THROUGH
SOME OF THE THINGS WITH YOU.
BUT, THE TITLE ONE GRANTS HAD A
MODEST INCREASE OF 6.2% AND THEY
CLARIFIED IT IN THE SENATE
APPROACH THAT THE MONEY, SOME OF
THE TITLE I MONEY CAN BE USED
FOR TRANSPORTATION ISSUES.
THEY CLARIFIED THAT LANGUAGE
THERE FOR THE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
GRANT, THEY HAD A 12.2% INCREASE
AND THEY INCLUDED A WHOLE SCHOOL
REFORM OPTION AS WELL AS A STATE
FLEXIBILITY OPTION TO GO ALONG
WITH THE TRADITIONAL MODELS FOR
IMPROVEMENT THAT WAS TALKED
ABOUT EARLIER.
I THINK JESS MENTIONED THAT.
STRIVING READERS HAD AN
INCREASE, WHICH IS WHAT I TALKED
ABOUT.
THE LITERACY PROGRAM.
PROMISE NEIGHBORHOODS WAS FLAT
FUNDED, ESSENTIALLY THEY HAD AN
ADDITIONAL $43 MILLION, BUT
SENATOR KIRK HAD $43 MILLION
THAT TOOK AWAY FROM THE GRANT
AND SHIFED IT TO I.D.E.A,
THERE’S NOW A NEW COMPLETION
GRANT, COMPETITIVE GRANT THAT IS
FUNDED AT $250,000, IT HELPS
WITH THE COLLEGE — EXCUSE ME.
$250 MILLION, THAT HELPS WITH
ACCESS AND COMPLETION.
THEY WERE DISAPPOINTED ON THE
HIGH SCHOOL REDESIGN.
IT DID NOT GET FUNDING.
BUT BACK IN FEBRUARY, PRESIDENT
BOMB IN THE STATE OF THE UNION
FIRST TALKED ABOUT HOW HE WANTED
TO CREATE A PROGRAM FOR HIGH
SCHOOLS, IT WAS LATER FLUSHED
OUT IN HIS BUDGET AND WHERE HE
CREATED THE HIGH SCHOOL REDESIGN
MODEL WHERE LOCAL SCHOOL
DISTRICTS AND EMPLOYERS AND
OTHERS CAME TOGETHER.
UNFORTUNATELY THAT WAS NOT
FUNDED IN THE SENATE
APPROPRIATIONS BILL, BUT MOVING
FORWARD, HOPEFULLY WE CAN FIND A
WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT HIGH
SCHOOLS OR THAT THIS PROGRAM CAN
RECEIVE FUNDING MOVING FORWARD.
THAT IS A BRIEF BREAK DOWN, IF
YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AFTERWARDS,
PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
BUT, YEAH, THAT WAS A BRIEF OVER
VIEW.
>> EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT, ALL
RIGHT.
SO, LET US SEE, SO WE HAVE
TALKED ABOUT ESEA, WE TALKED
ABOUT BUDGET AND APPROPRIATIONS,
NOW LET’S TURN OUR ATTENTION TO
THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
JESSICA, CAN YOU GIVE US AN
UPDATE ON THE COMPETITIVE GRANTS
AND THE WAIVER PROCESS THAT IS
TAKING PLACE AT THE DEPARTMENT
OF ED?
>> THERE’S NOT MUCH TO REPORT.
STATES AND DISTRICTS ARE IN THE
PROCESS OF CONTINUING THEIR RACE
TO THE TOP EFFORTS.
THE I-3 PROGRAM, THAT IS THE
INVESTING IN INNOVATION, IT HAS
THREE TYPES OF AWARDS.
THE SCALE UP AND VALIDATION
GRANTS ARE CLOSED.
THEY ARE IMPLEMENTING THAT WORK,
BUT THE VALIDATION, SORRY,
THE — A NUMBER OF PREAPPLICANTS
THAT WERE INVITED TO APPLY FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS, THEY ARE
DUE AUGUST 16th AND THE AWARDS
WILL BE GIVEN IN THE FALL.
TO COMPETITIVE GRANT SIDE, IT’S
BEEN QUIET FROM THE DEPARTMENT
IN TERMS OF OPENING UP THOSE
COMPETITIONS.
ON THE WAIVERS, WE HAVE A MAP
THAT SHOWS THE STATES THAT HAVE
RECEIVED WAIVERS UP UNTIL TODAY.
THERE ARE 39 STATES, PLUS THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, SO WE HAVE
40 WAIVERS THAT HAVE BEEN
GRANTED.
AND SO GOING BACK TO KIND OF A
FEW UPDATES ON THE ESEA
FLEXIBILITY REQUEST.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE A
NUMBER OF GREEN STATES, SO THERE
ARE NINE PENDING APPLICATIONS,
SIX STATES PLUS PUERTO RICO, AND
A GROUP OF CALIFORNIA DISTRICTS
WHICH SERVE ABOUT A MILLION
STUDENTS, IT’S A LARGE, ALTHOUGH
IT’S TEN DISTRICTS, THEY SERVE
MORE STUDENTS THAN A NUMBER OF
STATES THAT HAVE RECEIVED WAIVER
APPLICATIONS.
I THINK EVERYONE IS WATCHING
PRETTY CLOSELY TO SEE WHETHER
CORP, WHICH IS THE ONLY DISTRICT
APPLICATION, EVEN THOSE IT’S A
GROUP OF DISTRICTS RECEIVE THEM.
REASONLY THE DEPARTMENT APPROVED
FIVE WAIVER APPLICATIONS.
ALASKA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, SORRY,
ALABAMA, ALASKA, HAWAII, NEW
HAMPSHIRE AND WEST VIRGINIA, AND
RECENTLY APPROVED THOSE.
THE ONE THING TO NOTE, A REPORT
LOOKING AT GRADUATION
ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE WAIVER
SPURRED CONCERNS, IN PARTICULAR
IN THE WAY THAT GRADUATION RATES
CARRY AND WHETHER THEY ARE
ACCURATELY MEASURED.
IN MOST OF THE FIVE STATES THAT
WERE RECENTLY APPROVED, THEY
WERE FINE IN TERMS OF GRADUATION
RATE ACCOUNTABILITY BUT WE SAW
IN A NUMBER OF THESE STATES SOME
CONCERNS AROUND SUB GROUP
GRADUATION RATE ACCOUNTABILITY.
THERE’S CONCERN THAT THE
APPROVED WAIVERS HAVE NOT, ARE
NOT MEETING THE 2008 REGULATIONS
REQUIREMENTS REGARDING
GRADUATION RATE ACCOUNTABILITY
AND ACTUALLY, DURING THE HOUSE
MARK-UP OF ESEA, WE SAW
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT FROM
VIRGINIA SPEAK TO THE IMPORTANCE
OF FULLY ADHERING TO THE 2008
REGULATIONS.
SO WE HAVE A CLIP THAT WE ARE
GOING TO SHOW THE AUDIENCE, WITH
CONGRESSMAN SCOTT SPEAKING TO
THE 2008 REGULATIONS.
>> GREAT.
>> SO AFTER THE DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION UPDATE.
>> ALTHOUGH WE FOCUS ON THE
GRADUATION RATES, SOME OF THE
BEST WAYS TO REMEDY CONCERNS IS
THROUGH A REAUTHORIZATION.
IT’S ANOTHER REASON TO PAS A LAW
AND MAKE SURE THERE’S
CONSISTENCY.
>> EXCELLENT.
AND WE RECEIVED A QUESTION FROM
KELLY, SHE ASKS, CAN YOU
SPECULATE ON WHAT RENEWAL OF THE
ESEA WAIVERS MAY LOOK LIKE?
WILL STATES MAKE SIGNIFICANT
CHANGES OR CONTINUE AS IS UNTIL
ESEA IS REAUTHORIZED?
SO, KELLY, I HAVE MY CRYSTAL
BALL AND MY CRYSTAL BALL TELLS
ME THAT, I DON’T THINK THAT WE
ARE GOING TO SEE A WHOLE LOT OF
MAJOR CHANGES WITH THE WAIVER
RENEWAL PROCESS.
TRUST ME, AS WE GET MORE
INFORMATION THAT IS PUBLIC, WE
WILL BE DOING ANOTHER WEBINAR ON
THAT TOPIC.
I PROMISE.
I THINK THAT THERE’S GOING TO BE
A LOT OF MONITORING AND
HOPEFULLY, I SHOULD SAY, I HOPE
THERE’S GOING TO BE MONITORING
AND COURSE CORRECTING.
SO, THERE ARE BIG CHANGES IN A
LOT OF STATE ACCOUNTABILITY
SYSTEMS.
HOW ARE THESE SUPER SUB GROUPS
WORKING AND CAN WE ANALYZE THE
DATA TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE
NOT OVERLOOKING LOW INCOME
STUDENTS AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE
LEARNERS AND STUDENTS WITH
DISABILITIES.
I WOULD SEE MORE TWEAKS AROUND
THE EDGES THAN MAJOR POLICY
CHANGES TAKING PLACE AS PART OF
THE WAIVER AND RENEWAL PROCESS,
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
>> I THINK YOU ARE RIGHT, AND I
THINK NOW ALL 40 WAIVERS WILL
HIT THE RENEWAL MARKET AT
DIFFERENCE POINTS.
WE HAVE FIVE RECENTLY APPROVED
WAIVERS AND A NUMBER, THE
INITIAL ROUND OF WAIVERS WERE
APPROVED WELL OVER A YEAR AND A
HALF AGO AND STATES, ANY KIND OF
COURSE CORRECTION THAT YOU WILL
SEE WILL BE STAGGERED OUT OVER
THE NEXT YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF.
>> IT’S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT
STATES WENT THROUGH A LOT TO
DEVELOP THE PLANS, SO THE
DEPARTMENT, IN TERMS OF
ADMINISTERING THE PROGRAM.
SO I JUST DON’T THINK THAT THE
STATE NOR THE DEPARTMENT
CHANGING IT WHOLE SCALE, I DO
THINK THAT THERE WILL BE MODEST
CHANGES TO HOPEFULLY IMPROVE THE
APPLICATIONS AND OR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WAIVERS,
BUST I DON’T SEE MAJOR, MAJOR
THINGS CHANGING IN THE FUTURE.
>> SO, ONE OTHER VERY IMPORTANT
THING TAKING PLACE AT THE
FEDERAL LEVEL, NOT NECESSARILY
ADMINISTERED BY THE DEPOSITION
OF EDUCATION, IT’S ACTUALLY
REALLY THEIR RESPONSIBILITY OF
THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION.
AND THAT IS, E-RATE.
SO, E-RATE IS REALLY A DISCOUNT
THAT SCHOOLS AND LIBRARIES
RECEIVE, IF THEY SERVE CERTAIN
NUMBERS OR PERCENTAGES OF LOW
INCOME STUDENTS ON THEIR PHONE
AND ON THEIR INTERNET ACCESS.
AND A COUPLE OF IMPORTANT THINGS
ARE HAPPENING THAT CAN REALLY
EXPAND THE AVAILABILITY OF HIGH
SPEED INTERNET ACCESS TO MORE
SCHOOLS AND LIBRARIES AND MAKE
IT MORE EFFICIENT.
AND THAT IS THE PRESIDENT HAS
ANNOUNCED THE CONNECT —
E.D.INITIATIVE.
THE INITIATIVE WAS ANNOUNCED A
FEW WEEKS AING, THE LEAD THE
COMMISSION WAS LAUNCHED BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, IT’S A
BIPARTISAN, A HIGH LEVEL
COMMISSION.
IT’S CO-CHAIRS THAT INCLUDE
MARGARET SPELLINGS, AND JIM SIRE
AT COMMON SENSE MEDIA.
WE ARE GUIDING RECOMMENDATIONS
TO THE FCC, AND INCLUDING, THEY
ARE INCLUDING IN THEIR
RECOMMENDATIONS THE
MODERNIZATION OF E-RATE.
AND LAST FRIDAY, THE FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
ANNOUNCED THAT, AND VOTED TO
ISSUE A NOTICE OF PROPOSED
RULEMAKING.
WHICH IS BASICALLY THE
OPPORTUNITY TO REVISE MODERNIZE,
I HOPE, EXPAND E-RATE.
RIGHT NOW, WE ARE HOPING TO
PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THE
PUBLIC AT LARGE ON AN ONGOING
BASIS ABOUT THIS REALLY EXCITING
OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND INTERNET
ACCESS, WE HAVE LAUNCHED THE
CAMPAIGN, IN 99 IN 5 CAMPAIGN,
THAT FOLKS CAN GO ON THE
WEBSITE.
SIGN THE PETITION, AND IT WILL
PROVIDE SUPPORT INTERNET AND
BROAD BAND TO LIBRARIES AND
SCHOOLS.
IT IS A CAMPAIGN THAT WILL GO ON
FOR THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS
UNTIL THE FCC WILL EXPAND THE
E-RATE.
YOU WILL GET MORE INFORMATION
AND YOU CAN SUBMIT YOUR STORIES
IN ABOUT WHAT YOU COULD — HOW
YOU ARE USING TECHNOLOGY NOW,
HOW E-RATE IS BENEFITTING YOU
NOW AND WHAT YOU COULD BE DO IF
YOU HAD BETTER ACCESS TO THE
INTERNET, ESSENTIALLY IF THIS
CONNECT TO THE INTERNET SCREEN
THAT IS ON THE SLIDE, IF IT DOES
NOT COME UP, WHAT CAN YOU DO
WITH BETTER ACCESS TO
TECHNOLOGY.
SO, IT’S BEEN BETWEEN ESEA,
APPROPRIATIONS, E-RATE, WAIVERS,
IT’S BEEN A VERY, VERY BUSY
SUMMER.
AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE BUSY.
WE ARE ALMOST INTO AUGUST AND
AUGUST IS SUPPOSED TO BE A DOWN
TIME, BUT I DO NOT SEE IT AS
BEING TOO MUCH OF A DOWN TIME
FOR US.
WE ARE JUST ABOUT AT 3:00 AND WE
MAYBE HAVE TIME FOR JUST ONE OR
TWO QUESTIONS THAT WE RECEIVED.
FIRST, I WILL GO TO KEVIN FROM
NEVADA.
HE ASKS, ARE THERE ANY
INDICATORS AS TO THE LONG-TERM
EFFECTS OF SEQUESTRATION, IN THE
SPECIFIC CASE, THE COMPREHENSIVE
LITERACY PROGRAM.
FRED MENTIONED THAT, ANY
THOUGHTS ON?
>> I THINK IT DEPENDS ON WHICH
CHAMBER OF CONGRESS YOU ARE
LOOKING AT ON THE SENATE SIDE.
THE APPROPRIATORS HAVE CREATED
FUNDS FOR STRUGGLING READERS AND
THEY INCREASED IT ON THE HOUSE
SIDE, AT LEAST WITH SENATE
KLEIN’S BILL, THEY CUT STRIVING
READERS AND IF THEIR
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE, WHICH
WE ARE PLANNING TO MEET
TOMORROW, I THINK HAS POSTPONED
THE MEETING, THEY ARE LIKELY
GOING TO CUT MANY OF THE
PROGRAMS THAT I THINK WERE
ELIMINATED AND CHAIRMAN KLEIN’S
BILL.
SO, I THINK RIGHT NOW, IT’S
MIXED AND IT’S PROBABLY IN THE
GOODEST POSITION THAT IT CAN BE,
AND MOVING FORWARD, WITH THE
APPROPRIATIONS PROCESS, MAKING
SURE THE PROGRAM AND A LOT OF
OTHERS REALLY GET THE ATTENTION
THEY DESERVE AND THE FUNDING TO
BACK IT.
>> YEAH, I THINK WE ARE REALLY
HEADING TOWARD YET ANOTHER
CONTINUING RESOLUTION, THAT WE
HAVE BEEN WORKING UNDER FOR THE
LAST SEVERAL YEARS THAT WILL BE
THREATS OF GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN
AND POSSIBILITY OF GOVERNMENT
SHUTDOWN.
THE QUESTION IS, WILL THAT
CONTINUING RESOLUTION REALLY BE
A CONTINUING RESOLUTION?
OR WHAT LEVEL OF CARDIOS THE
BOARD CUTS ARE THEY — YOU KNOW,
ARE SOME FOLKS GOING TO TRY TO
PUSH INTO THAT, AND SO, IT
REALLY GOES BACK TO ONE OF OUR
OTHER QUESTIONS THAT WAS ASKED,
HOW CAN WE DEMONSTRATE THE
IMPACT OF THE CUTS.
I THINK PART OF HOW WE IMPACT
THE CUTS IS BY DEMONSTRATING THE
IMPACT, THE POSITIVE IMPACT THAT
THE PROGRAMS HAVE TODAY.
SO, YOU DO NOT NECESSARILY HAVE
TO SAY, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE FEWER
KIDS, BECAUSE OF SEQUESTER NOW,
YOU CAN ALSO SHOW, HERE IS WHAT
WE ARE DOING IN OUR CLASSROOMS,
BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE
LITERACY PROGRAM, X-NUMBER OF
STUDENTS ARE GETTING, MORE
EFFECTIVE LITERACY INSTRUCTION.
AND SO ON YOU TURN IT TO THE
POSITIVE, NOT JUST WHAT IS LOST
IF WE GET CUT, SHEAR IS WHAT WE
ARE GAINING NOW, LET’S NOT LOSE
GROUND.
>>> BUT WITH THAT, THAT IS
REALLY ABOUT ALL THE TIME THAT
WE HAVE FOR TODAY, I WANT TO
THANK JESSICA AND FRED FOR
JOINING ME AND THANK EACH OF YOU
FOR WATCHING.
IF YOU MISSED ANY OF TODAY’S
WEBINAR, YOU CAN FIND THE
ARCHIVES VIDEO AND THE
POWERPOINT SLIDES THAT WE USED
TODAY AT ALLFORED.ORG/WEBINARS,
HOPEFULLY A SITE THAT YOU ARE
VISITING OFTEN.
VISIT 99IN5.ORG, IT’S A HISTORIC
OPPORTUNITY THAT WE NEED TO ALL
WORK TOGETHER TO REACH THIS GOAL
OF GIVING 99% OF STUDENTS ACCESS
TO HIGH SPEED INTERNET IN THE
NEXT FIVE YEARS.
THANKS AGAIN FOR JOINING US, AND
HAVE A GREAT DAY.

Categories: E-Rate
thumbnail

Action Academy

Welcome to the Alliance for Excellent Education’s Action Academy, an online learning community of education advocates. We invite you to create an account, expand your knowledge on the most pressing issues in education, and communicate with others who share your interests in education reform.

Register Now

or register for Action Academy below:


Join the Conversation

Your email is never published nor shared.

What is this?
Add 11 to 2 =
The simple math problem you are being asked to solve is necessary to help block spam submissions.

Close

 

Every Child a Graduate. Every Child Prepared for Life.