The chairman of the House education committee has pledged to seek significant revisions to the No Child Left Behind Act, but education lobbyists say it鈥檚 still too early to say whether such plans will result in major changes to the types of measures states may use to gauge student achievement under the law.
Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., says he would like to allow states to be able to use so-called multiple measures to assess student progress under the law, giving graduation rates as one example. But the question of including alternative measures in the bill to reauthorize the main federal K-12 law has become a major point of discussion, as lawmakers work to craft a bipartisan measure.
In what some observers viewed as a subtle softening of his staunch support for the NCLB law鈥檚 accountability system, Rep. Miller late last month signaled that he had come to agree that the statute was in need of an overhaul.
鈥淚 can tell you that there are no votes in the U.S. House of Representatives for continuing the No Child Left Behind Act without making serious changes to it,鈥� Mr. Miller said in a in Washington. 鈥淲e didn鈥檛 get it all right with the writing of this law.鈥�
Rep. Miller said that both Democrats and Republicans on the Education and Labor Committee had listened closely to various critiques of the law and were working toward ironing out a bipartisan reauthorization bill that he hoped the House could pass early this fall.
The NCLB act passed Congress with broad bipartisan support and was signed into law by President Bush in January 2002 as a five-year reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which dates back to 1965. The current law鈥檚 centerpiece is a requirement that schools test students annually in reading and mathematics in grades 3-8, and once in high school. Schools that fail to meet benchmarks for progress face a series of consequences intended to hold them accountable for students鈥� academic performance.
Rep. Miller said his first goal for the next version of the law will be to provide schools with more flexibility and fairness. His bill will introduce so-called growth models, accountability approaches that give schools credit for the progress that individual students make over time, instead of just comparing one cohort of a grade of students with its predecessor.
The Department of Education is conducting a growth-model pilot program in which nine states have been approved to use the method for complying with the NCLB law.
Meanwhile, Rep. Miller endorsed using multiple measures to determine whether a school is achieving adequate yearly progress, or AYP, under the law. He said the law would continue to include annual tests of reading and math in most grades.
鈥淲e will allow the use of additional valid and reliable measures to assess student learning and school performance more fairly, comprehensively, and accurately,鈥� Mr. Miller said. 鈥淥ne such measure for high schools must be graduation rates.鈥�
鈥楻esistance鈥� Threatened
Mr. Miller鈥檚 mere hint of allowing multiple measures for schools and districts to reach AYP under the law appeared to spark immediate expressions of concern from some key Republicans.
Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings indicated that she would rather delay action on a bill than accept one that softened the law鈥檚 accountability measures.
鈥淲hile we all hope to see action on reauthorization soon, a comprehensive bill that has bipartisan support and holds firm to the goal of every child reading and doing math on grade level by 2014 is worth the wait,鈥� she said in after Rep. Miller鈥檚 remarks.
For more discussion on this topic, see our blog .
Rep. Howard P. 鈥淏uck鈥� McKeon of California, the ranking Republican on the education committee, said in that 鈥渁ny attempts to weaken the law will be met with stiff resistance from House Republicans who have already joined with the civil rights community and business leaders in expressing concerns that some of the Democratic proposals will undermine transparency for parents and the ability to hold schools accountable for student performance.鈥�
Vic Klatt, the staff director for Republicans on the education panel, said this week that discussions on the NCLB reauthorization have been largely bipartisan, but that Democrats and Republicans are still trying to reach agreement on a number of critical issues.
鈥淲e鈥檙e very uncomfortable with things that are hard to measure being lumped in with the accountability system,鈥� Mr. Klatt said. 鈥淎nything that鈥檚 not directly tied to student achievement is a problem for us.鈥�
He added that 鈥淢r. Miller has a very difficult balancing act as an original author of NCLB, but he鈥檚 done this before, and we think it鈥檚 possible to get a bipartisan bill.鈥�
Issues involving English-language learners, funding, school choice, and supplemental educational services, as well as multiple measures, are said to be still on the table.
Mary Kusler, the assistant director of government relations for the Arlington, Va.-based American Association of School Administrators, which favors allowing locally crafted tests to be used for accountability, said it鈥檚 unclear whether Rep. Miller will seek to allow states to incorporate such assessments into the final bill. She said, however, that he鈥檚 been open to listening to education groups, and talking to his colleagues to get a sense of what House Democrats want to see in the final bill.
But Cynthia G. Brown, the education policy director for the Center for American Progress, a Democratic-leaning think tank in Washington, said that while measures such as student portfolios and formative assessments鈥� tests that give teachers continuing feedback on how their students are doing鈥攈elp improve instruction and deserve federal encouragement, they鈥檙e not appropriate for accountability purposes. In her view, it鈥檚 unlikely Rep. Miller will let states make them a major part of their accountability systems.
鈥淭hat would really be a step backward,鈥� Ms. Brown said. 鈥淢y crystal ball says he won鈥檛 do that.鈥�
A Change in View?
At his National Press Club event, Rep. Miller was pressed about the extent of relief from a reliance on test scores that multiple measures of progress might provide schools. He said students would have to be close to scoring at the proficient level on reading and math tests for such measures to play a role.
鈥淭his is not an escape hatch,鈥� he said.
This week, more than 20 civil rights and education organizations sent to education committee leaders, including Reps. Miller and McKeon, urging them to permit states to use measures including written essays, research papers, open-ended problems, and performance-based tasks for accountability purposes, rather than relying primarily on state achievement tests.
The groups include the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the New York City-based Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, and the Arlington- Va.-based Council for Exceptional Children.
鈥淭he law鈥檚 every-grade, every year testing requirement has discouraged the use of assessments of higher-order thinking that motivate ambitious intellectual work and leverage stronger teaching and learning, but take more time and resources to score,鈥� the organizations wrote.
Joel Packer, the director of education policy and practice for the National Education Association, said he noticed a change in tone on Rep. Miller鈥檚 part regarding reauthorization of the law.
鈥淗e has been much more of a defender of the existing law,鈥� said Mr. Packer, who is the chief lobbyist for the teachers鈥� union on the NCLB law. 鈥淏ut I think he is changing his view based on what he is hearing from educators, and based on what he is hearing from his fellow members, especially House freshmen.鈥�
