{ "id": "R43146", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R43146", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 422866, "date": "2013-07-30", "retrieved": "2016-04-06T23:19:44.253059", "title": "ESEA Reauthorization Proposals in the 113th Congress: Comparison of Major Features", "summary": "The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was last amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB; P.L. 107-110). During the 113th Congress, both the House and Senate have considered legislation to reauthorize the ESEA. On June 12, 2013, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee considered and ordered reported the Strengthening America\u2019s Schools Act (S. 1094) by a strictly partisan vote of 12-10. The House Education and Workforce Committee also considered and ordered reported a bill that would reauthorize the ESEA. On June 19, 2013, on a strictly partisan vote of 23-16, the Success for All Students Act (H.R. 5) was ordered reported. H.R. 5 was subsequently considered and amended on the House floor. The amended version of H.R. 5 was passed on July 19, 2013, by a vote of 221-207. It is unclear whether S. 1094 will be considered on the Senate floor.\nS. 1094 and H.R. 5 would take different approaches to reauthorizing the ESEA, most notably in three key areas: \nAccountability for student achievement: Both S. 1094 and H.R. 5 would modify current accountability requirements related to student achievement, including eliminating the requirement to determine adequate yearly progress (AYP) and the requirement to apply a specified set of outcome accountability provisions to all schools, regardless of the extent to which they failed to make AYP. Both bills would continue to require that states have standards and assessments for reading, mathematics, and science. Both bills would require that state assessments measure student academic proficiency, but only S. 1094 would require state assessments to measure student academic growth. Both bills would require that reading and mathematics be included in each state\u2019s accountability system, and would permit states to include science or other subjects in their accountability systems. S. 1094, but not H.R. 5, would require states to establish \u201cambitious and achievable\u201d annual performance targets for the state, local educational agencies (LEAs), and public schools for each subject area and grade level that is assessed for accountability purposes. Performance targets would have to be established for student proficiency and student growth, as well as for English language proficiency for English learners and high school graduation rates. The secretary would have to approve all performance targets. S. 1094 would require various interventions to be implemented in certain low-achieving schools, while H.R. 5 would not require that specific actions be taken to address issues in low-performing schools.\nTeacher quality versus teacher effectiveness: Both S. 1094 and H.R. 5 scale back (or, in the case of H.R. 5, eliminate) existing teacher quality requirements, and each bill introduces provisions pertaining to the evaluation of teacher and principal performance. H.R. 5 would eliminate current requirements related to \u201cteacher quality,\u201d which focus largely on ensuring the equitable distribution of qualified teachers and that teachers possess a baccalaureate degree, full state teaching certification, and demonstrated subject-matter knowledge in the areas in which they teach. S. 1094 would retain these requirements for new teachers and for all teachers until approved teacher evaluation systems are in place. S. 1094 would require all LEAs that receive Title II-A funds to develop and implement teacher and principal evaluation systems, known as professional growth and improvement systems. H.R. 5 would make the development and implementation of teacher and school leader evaluation systems an optional use of Title II-A funds. Under S. 1094, staff being evaluated would have to be evaluated based, in part, on student achievement. Under H.R. 5, evaluation systems would not be required to include student achievement data.\nTargeted support for elementary and secondary education versus the use of a block grant: Each bill would consolidate some existing competitive grant programs, but H.R. 5 would consolidate a greater number of programs than S. 1094. At the same time, S. 1094 would create several new targeted grant programs, while H.R. 5 would greatly expand the use of block grant funding.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43146", "sha1": "5bb83fb47a1f2c8862c7aa07b64c26da28d817f1", "filename": "files/20130730_R43146_5bb83fb47a1f2c8862c7aa07b64c26da28d817f1.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43146", "sha1": "c94c84a8378f8fc1e443b0d435e11fa3f21941d3", "filename": "files/20130730_R43146_c94c84a8378f8fc1e443b0d435e11fa3f21941d3.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc807920/", "id": "R43146_2013Jul12", "date": "2013-07-12", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "ESEA Reauthorization Proposals in the 113th Congress: Comparison of Major Features", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20130712_R43146_6ec0a9aba33b3b28e8c913b9f18b30fed7d71ad0.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20130712_R43146_6ec0a9aba33b3b28e8c913b9f18b30fed7d71ad0.html" } ], "topics": [] } ], "topics": [ "Education Policy" ] }