State of the Union (1/28/2008)

In his final State of the Union Address, President Bush laid out a broad domestic agenda that included an emphasis on economic growth, federal fiscal discipline, a request to strengthen and reauthorize the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and to provide parents with more school choice.

Beginning with the economy, the President urged Congress to pass the economic stimulus package agreed to by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH). The package, estimated at about $145 billion, is aimed at putting more money into the hands of American consumers to help stimulate the stagnant U.S. economy. Although the Senate is expected to make additions to the stimulus package, there is currently no language for any school construction funding, which is a priority for education advocates.

The President's willingness to sign off on such an expensive stimulus package means that he will be less agreeable to increased spending during the fiscal year 2009 (FY09) appropriations process. The President will release his FY09 budget proposal on Monday and, like last year, it is likely that there will be many program reductions and an estimated 44 program cuts for the United States Department of Education (ED).

President Bush next announced his disappointment at Congress' failure to reign in the practice of earmarking funding for special projects in members' Congressional districts. The President championed fiscal restraint by announcing an executive order to federal agencies to ignore any future earmarks that are not written specifically into bill language. Under the order, future earmarks would be subject to public scrutiny and votes and he promised to veto any spending bill that does not succeed in cutting earmarks in half from fiscal year 2008 levels.

Focusing on education, the President called on Congress to strengthen and reauthorize his key domestic legacy, NCLB. "No one can deny its results," said Bush. "Last year, fourth and eighth graders achieved the highest math scores on record. Reading scores are on the rise. And African-American and Hispanic students posted all-time highs." Building on this success, the President identified four ways that Congress, with his approval, could strengthen the law. "We must work together to increase accountability, add flexibility for States and districts, reduce the number of high school dropouts, and provide extra help for struggling schools." Working together, however, will prove challenging in 2008. The President has already stated his intent to veto any bill that would weaken the law's accountability provisions and he has clearly stated his displeasure with the draft proposed by the Chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor, George Miller (D-CA), last summer. The conventional wisdom is that the House and Senate will both introduce draft language in 2008, but a conference and final passage will likely roll over into 2009, after the 2008 elections.

Speaking to his conservative base, the President next addressed school choice. According to the President, inner city non-public schools are disappearing at an alarming rate. To address this, he proposed to convene a White House summit aimed at strengthening the supply of these schools so parents of "poor children trapped in failing public schools" could have better options. To help children access these schools, the President proposed a new $300 million program called Pell Grants for Kids. But like last year's proposed Promise Scholarships and Opportunity Scholarships, the Pell Grants for Kids has little chance of success. This idea will not likely gain considerable support in this Democratic Congress.

Finally for education, the President called on Congress to fund his American Competitiveness Initiative. Congress passed H.R. 2272, the 21st Century Competitiveness Act last year that authorized over $33 billion over the next three years to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance as a part of the President's initiative. Yet, due to the contentious budget battles between the President and Congress much of the funding was not appropriated. The President would now like to see those initiatives funded in order to "ensure America remains the most dynamic nation on earth."

The President's State of the Union truly begins the second session of the 110th Congress. Pundits will review and analyze the speech in the coming days and many of his initiatives will become clearer when the President releases his FY09 budget proposal on Monday, February 4th. We will continue to monitor and analyze the developments as they occur.

Resources:
"2008 State of the Union Policy Initiatives,"The White House, http://www.whitehouse.gov/stateoftheunion/2008/initiatives/index.html
"President Bush's State of the Union Addresses," Washington Post, January 28, 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/28/AR2008012802536.html?sid=ST2008012802201
State of the Union, http://stateoftheunion.onetwothree.net/
Authors: SAS, DAD

Read More...

Summary only...

House Committee Discusses National STEM Standards

On Wednesday, October 10, the House Science and Technology Committee held a hearing to discuss ways to guarantee students are receiving the best education possible, especially in relation to science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). The hearing provided an opportunity for a range of stakeholders to give their response to the National Science Board (NSB) recommendations, including the Board’s proposal to create a congressionally chartered National STEM Education Council to help foster and guide STEM education improvements. Panelists seemed less than supportive of any movement towards aligning states’ curriculum through a nongovernment council. Panelists included:


• Dr. Steven Beering, Chairman, National Science Board;
• Ms. Judy A. Jeffrey, Director, Iowa Department of Education and Representing the Council of Chief State School Officers;
• Dr. Francis (Skip) Fennell, President, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics and Professor of Education at McDaniel College;
• Ms. Chrisanne Gayl, Director of Federal Programs, National School Boards Association (NSBA);
• Dr. Robert Semper, Executive Associate Director, The Exploratorium and Representing the Association of Science-Technology Centers; and
• Ms. Susan L. Traiman, Director, Education and Workforce Policy Business Roundtable.
In the same period that the National Academies’ report, Rising Above the Gathering Storm, was being developed, the NSB initiated a process to explore how to improve STEM education throughout the nation. As part of this effort, the Board established a STEM education commission to advise it on how to accomplish this goal. At present, there are no consistent STEM content standards in use among the states and no consistency in the sequence in which STEM courses are taught. A chronic shortage of highly qualified STEM teachers is a major impediment to improved student performance in STEM subjects.

Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-MI), ranking member of the Research and Science Education Subcommittee, assured panelists that Congress is not interested in imposing na¬tional standards, but that America’s STEM education system should at least adopt a national sequence. Rep. Ehlers introduced a bill earlier this year that proposes voluntary national standards for K-12 math and science. Advocates such as Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT), who introduced a companion bill, are skeptical that mandatory standards would be successful. Educators and administrators remain skeptical of any national standards, mandatory or voluntary.

Ms. Gayl, who noted that the NSBA does not believe in a one-size-fits-all approach, said schools would appreciate dissemination of best practices and suggested content guidelines, but she cautioned against strong federal oversight. Gayl said the United States is home to 14,000 school districts, which need the flexibility to select their own curriculum and guidelines to fit their needs, but warned that it is a “slippery slope” between content guidelines and national standards. Agreeing that some government involvement would be helpful, Ms. Jeffrey supported recommendations to coordinate federal agencies, which she said often duplicate programs.

Congress will continue working on STEM education issues, following up on their passage of H.R. 2272, which provides $33 billion over the next three years to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance, authorizes grants to support baccalaureate degrees in math and science with concurrent teacher certification, and establishes a public-private partnership with the business community to identify high-needs fields. Although the House is in the middle of reauthorizing No Child Left Behind, Rep. Ehlers said it is unlikely to see any language regarding national STEM standards in any reauthorization package produced by the House Education and Labor Committee.

Resources:
House Science and technology Committee Press Release:
http://science.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1989
Erin Uy, “National STEM Standards Meet Opposition at Hearing,” Education Daily, October 12, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

STEM Legislation a Good First Step

Strengthening science, technology, engineering and math education is a priority issue on Capitol Hill and within the Bush Administration. Leaders on the Hill and within the Administration believe a greater focus on so-called “STEM” issues is necessary to maintain U.S. leadership in the global economy. The campaign was given great emphasis last year following publication of a report by the National Academies titled “Rising Above the Gathering Storm,” which argued that U.S. advantages in the marketplace and in science and technology have begun to erode.

Following the President’s announcement of his American Competitiveness Initiative in
2005, Congress began working on various ways to keep the U.S. competitive in the global market, with a specific focus on educating the next generation of research and technology leaders. H.R. 2272 is the first serious step Congress is taking towards achieving that goal.

On July 19, the Senate passed H.R. 2272, the 21st Century Competitiveness Act, by a voice vote after inserting the text of S. 761, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education and Science (COMPETES) Act. The Senate passed S. 761 in April, a month before the House chose to combine various math and science proposals into one large omnibus bill (H.R. 2272). The bills will now head to conference, the first major step toward improving science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education.

On Thursday, August 9, President Bush signed H.R. 2272 into law (Public Law 110-69), despite concerns that the bill “leaves some of the key priorities unfulfilled and authorizes unnecessary and duplicative programs.” The bill marks the first major step in the President’s American Competitiveness Initiative, first introduced in his 2006 State of the Union. Despite a wide margin of bipartisan support, some Republicans in Congress greeted news of the president’s signing of the bill with skepticism and misgivings.

H.R. 2272 does the following:
• Authorizes spending $33 billion over the next three years to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance;
• Authorizes grants to support baccalaureate degrees in math and science with concurrent teacher certification, and establishes a public-private partnership with the business community to identify high-needs fields;
• Reauthorizes the National Science Foundation at $22 billion from fiscal 2008 to 2010, spread over several grant programs intended to encourage more students to teach math and science, as well as grants for college and graduate student science research;
• Authorizes $2.7 billion for the National Institute of Standards and Technology from fiscal 2008 through 2010, including funding for the institute’s laboratories;
• Authorizes $372 million from fiscal 2008 through 2010 to establish the Technology Innovation Program, intended to help turn cutting-edge research into commercially viable products;
• Authorizes almost $17 billion for the Energy Department from fiscal 2008 through 2010; and
• Establishes a new cutting-edge energy research agency, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy.

ED is authorized to award grants, on a competitive basis for 3 years to state educational agencies (SEAs) for the purpose of awarding subgrants to eligible local educational agencies (LEAs) to carry out teacher assistance and professional development for teachers in elementary, middle and secondary schools. SEAs must submit separate applications for grants for: 1) elementary and middle school programs (K-9) and 2) secondary school programs.

The purpose of a significant portion of grants to SEAs is to hire private contractors who possess expertise in math to provide technical assistance and professional development for math teachers in high-risk, high achievement schools. Each SEA applying for a grant must submit an application to ED that includes a process to safeguard against conflicts of interest and a State peer review process for contractors applying to provide services.

Private contractors providing services under both elementary and middle school programs and secondary school programs must be required, by contract, to screen for conflicts of interest when hiring its employees. The law also requires that any contractor subcontracting must require its subcontractor to similarly screen for conflicts of interest. The minimum requirements of the screening process include a review of the following:

• Each individual performing duties under the contract or subcontract for connections to any State’s professional development and technical assistance program under this law;
• Each individual’s potential financial interests in, or other connection to, products, activities, or services that might be purchased by an SEA or LEA in the course of the agency’s implementation of the program;
• Each individual’s connections to teaching methodologies that might require the use of specific products, activities, or services; and
• Ensuring that individuals performing duties under the contract do not maintain significant financial interests in the products, activities, or services supported under the program.

The Secretary of ED, in consultation with ED’s Office of the General Counsel, has discretion to waive the screening requirements for individual contractors and subcontractors.

Any recipient approved for an America COMPETES Act grant or contract must submit a statement to the Secretary of ED, certifying that no funds derived from the grant or contract will be made available through a subcontract or in any other manner to another person who has a financial interest or other conflict of interest in the person awarded the grant or contract, unless the conflict is previously disclosed and approved in the process of entering into a contract or awarding a grant. Within 60 days of receipt of this certification, the Secretary must make all documents received that relate to the certification available to the public. This requirement applies to all recipients of funds under the America COMPETES Act, not only those funded by ED.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) criticized the bill for authorizing new programs without the necessary funds. Under the House Pay Go rules, any new funding must be offset, either through program cuts or raising taxes. Although Congress has authorized spending for these programs, actual spending levels are determined each year through the appropriations cycle. Therefore, it is not clear how much funding these new programs will actually receive.

Despite some Republican objections, the President joined a bipartisan group of Congressmen, as well as the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in applauding the steps H.R. 2272 takes in helping American stay competitive in the global market. Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK), a cosponsor of the bill, noted that, “by increasing our investment in basic research and the teaching of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, America is addressing the serious competitiveness challenges that it faces in today’s global economy.”

Resources:
John McArdle, “Bush Will Sign Competitiveness Bill Despite Some Misgivings,” Congress Now, August 9, 2007.
“Bush Signs Measure to Promote Competitiveness,” CQ Today, August 9, 2007.
Authors: CWP, SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

COMPETES Act Provides Conflict of Interest Safeguards

Congress recently passed the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science (America COMPETES) Act. Passed as Public Law 110-69, the America COMPETES Act is a large omnibus piece of legislation, the law’s purpose is to invest in innovation through research and development in math and science as covered in previous Updates. The law provides a significant amount of funding to a number of federal agencies, including $33 billion over the next three years to the U.S. Department of Education (ED), to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance. ED is authorized to award grants, on a competitive basis for 3 years to state educational agencies (SEAs) for the purpose of awarding subgrants to eligible local educational agencies (LEAs) to carry out teacher assistance and professional development for teachers in elementary, middle and secondary schools. SEAs must submit separate applications for grants for: 1) elementary and middle school programs (K-9) and 2) secondary school programs.

A significant portion of grants to SEAs will be for the purpose of hiring private contractors who possess expertise in math to provide technical assistance and professional development for math teachers in high-risk, high achievement schools. Each SEA applying for a grant must submit an application to ED that includes a process to safeguard against conflicts of interest and a State peer review process for contractors applying to provide services.
Private contractors providing services under both elementary and middle school programs and secondary school programs must be required, by contract, to screen for conflicts of interest when hiring its employees. The law also requires that any contractor subcontracting must require its subcontractor to similarly screen for conflicts of interest. The minimum requirements of the screening process include a review of the following:
• Each individual performing duties under the contract or subcontract for connections to any State’s professional development and technical assistance program under this law;
• Each individual’s potential financial interests in, or other connection to, products, activities, or services that might be purchased by an SEA or LEA in the course of the agency’s implementation of the program;
• Each individual’s connections to teaching methodologies that might require the use of specific products, activities, or services; and
• Ensuring that individuals performing duties under the contract do not maintain significant financial interests in the products, activities, or services supported under the program.
The Secretary of ED, in consultation with ED’s Office of the General Counsel, has discretion to waive the screening requirements for individual contractors and subcontractors.
Any recipient approved for an America COMPETES Act grant or contract must submit a statement to the Secretary of ED, certifying that no funds derived from the grant or contract will be made available through a subcontract or in any other manner to another person who has a financial interest or other conflict of interest in the person awarded the grant or contract, unless the conflict is previously disclosed and approved in the process of entering into a contract or awarding a grant. Within 60 days of receipt of this certification, the Secretary must make all documents received that relate to the certification available to the public. This requirement applies to all recipients of funds under the America COMPETES Act, not only those funded by ED.
The Secretary of ED is required to establish peer review panels to review SEA applications (for both elementary and middle school programs and secondary school programs) and must consider the recommendation of these peer review panels in deciding whether to approve the applications. The Secretary is also required to establish a process through which individuals on the peer review panels to review SEA applications are themselves screened for potential conflicts of interest. The screening process must:
• Be reviewed and approved by ED’s Office of the General Counsel of the Department;
• Include, at a minimum, a review of each reviewer’s—
o Professional connection to any SEA’s program, including a disclosure of any connection to publishers, entities, private individuals, or organizations related to such SEA’s program;
o Potential financial interest in products, activities, or services that might be purchased by an SEA or LEA in the course of the agency’s implementation of the programs; and
o Professional connections to teaching methodologies that might require the use of specific products, activities, or services; and
• Ensure that reviewers do not maintain significant financial interests in products, activities, or services supported under the program.
The Secretary of ED, in consultation with ED’s Office of the General Counsel, has discretion to waive these screening requirements of review panel members. However, the Secretary must establish criteria for waivers and report any waivers allowed to the House Committee on Education and Labor and the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP).
Author: CWP

Read More...

Summary only...

NCES Report On American Competitiveness

On Tuesday, August 14, the National Center for Education Statistics released a report comparing education systems in the United States to other “Group of 8 (G-8)” countries. Comparative Indicators of Education in the United States and Other G-8 Countries: 2006 is intended to show how American education stacks up against other economically developed countries, as a sign of where the U.S. stands in global competitiveness. Just one week after the president signed H.R. 2272 into law (P.L. 110-69), this report helps to frame the debate on American Competitiveness by pinpointing how the country has fallen behind its competitors.

The report compares data gathered from three primary sources: the Indicators of National Education Systems (INES) project, conducted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD); the 2003 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA 2003), also conducted by the OECD; and the 2003 trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS 2003), conducted by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). These studies look at data in the U.S. as well as Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the other G-8 countries.
The data shows that, in many cases, the U.S. still leads other nations. At a time when the number of people seeking higher education outside their own borders has swelled to 2.7 million in 2004, the year examined in the NCES study, about two-thirds were enrolled in the G-8 countries. Of those students, 22% were enrolled in the United States, followed by 11% in the United Kingdom. However, given the large enrollment of American colleges and universities, the U.S. has one of the smallest proportions of foreigners in its mix of students, with foreign students making up just 3%. The United Kingdom leads this category with 16% of their total enrollment, with Canada, France and Germany also finishing ahead of the U.S. with 11%. The U.S. also continues to spend more money per capita on higher education (and education generally) than its European peers and Japan, spending a total of $24,100 per person on higher education and a total of $37,500 on education over all in 2003. Over all, the U.S. spends about 7% of its gross domestic product on education, with 2.9% going to higher education. None of the other countries that submitted budgetary information spent more than 1.4% of its GDP on higher education.
Statistics related to educational attainment, however, are where the U.S. begins to lag behind other G-8 nations. In the U.S., 39% of citizens in the 25-64 age group have a college degree, trailing both Canada (45%) and the Russian Federation (55%). Data regarding the number of Americans entering scientific disciplines also seemed somewhat disappointing, a fact that drove Congress to pass H.R. 2272, which authorizes funding for programs designed to recruit more effective math and science teachers. Only 17% of “first university degrees” awarded in the United States in 2004 were in science, mathematics and engineering related fields, putting the U.S. near the back of the pack compared other G-8 countries. The growing concern over American competitiveness finally pushed Congress into actions. Following the President’s 2006 State of the Union address, Congressional leaders began work on legislation that would encourage more young Americans to enter into career fields dealing with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), as well as recruit more qualified teachers in those same subjects. H.R. 2272, the America COMPETES Act, is intended for those very purposes. The bill:
• Authorizes $33 billion over the next three years to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance;
• Authorizes grants to support baccalaureate degrees in math and science with concurrent teacher certification, and establishes a public-private partnership with the business community to identify high-needs fields;
• Reauthorizes the National Science Foundation at $22 billion from fiscal 2008 to 2010, spread over several grant programs intended to encourage more students to teach math and science, as well as grants for college and graduate student science research;
• Authorizes $2.7 billion for the National Institute of Standards and Technology from fiscal 2008 through 2010, including funding for the institute’s laboratories;
• Authorizes $372 million from fiscal 2008 through 2010 to establish the Technology Innovation Program, intended to help turn cutting-edge research into commercially viable products;
• Authorizes almost $17 billion for the Energy Department from fiscal 2008 through 2010; and
• Establishes a new cutting-edge energy research agency, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy.
Lawmakers are hoping that once the programs are fully implemented, future studies will show the U.S. leading in more categories regarding global competitiveness.
You can view a copy of the report at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007006.pdf.
Resources:
Doug Lederman, “Matching Up to the Group of 8,” Inside Higher Ed, August 15, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

President Bush Signs Competitiveness Bill into Law

On Thursday, August 9, President Bush signed H.R. 2272, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education and Science (America COMPETES) Act, despite concerns that the bill “leaves some of the key priorities unfulfilled and authorizes unnecessary and duplicative programs.” The bill marks the first major step in the President’s American Competitiveness Initiative, first introduced in his 2006 State of the Union. Despite a wide margin of bipartisan support, some Republicans in Congress greeted news of the president’s signing of the bill with skepticism and misgivings.

H.R. 2272 does the following:
• Authorizes spending $33 billion over the next three years to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance;
• Authorizes grants to support baccalaureate degrees in math and science with concurrent teacher certification, and establishes a public-private partnership with the business community to identify high-needs fields;
• Reauthorizes the National Science Foundation at $22 billion from fiscal 2008 to 2010, spread over several grant programs intended to encourage more students to teach math and science, as well as grants for college and graduate student science research;
• Authorizes $2.7 billion for the National Institute of Standards and Technology from fiscal 2008 through 2010, including funding for the institute’s laboratories;
• Authorizes $372 million from fiscal 2008 through 2010 to establish the Technology Innovation Program, intended to help turn cutting-edge research into commercially viable products;
• Authorizes almost $17 billion for the Energy Department from fiscal 2008 through 2010; and
• Establishes a new cutting-edge energy research agency, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy.
House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) criticized the bill for authorizing new programs without the necessary funds. Under the House Pay Go rules, any new funding must be offset, either through program cuts or raising taxes. Although Congress has authorized spending for these programs, actual spending levels are determined each year through the appropriations cycle, therefore it is not clear how much money these new programs will actually receive.
Despite some Republican objections, the President joined a bipartisan group of Congressmen, as well as the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in applauding the steps H.R. 2272 takes in helping American stay competitive in the global market. Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK), a cosponsor of the bill, noted that, “by increasing our investment in basic research and the teaching of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, America is addressing the serious competitiveness challenges that it faces in today’s global economy.”
Resources:
John McArdle, “Bush Will Sign Competitiveness Bill Despite Some Misgivings,” Congress Now, August 9, 2007.
“Bush Signs Measure to Promote Competitiveness,” CQ Today, August 9, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

Congress Passes Competitiveness Conference Report

On Thursday, the House passed the conference report for H.R. 2272, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education and Science (America COMPETES) Act, by a vote of 367-57. Although the White House expressed concerns over the funding authorized in the bill, which conferees reported out on Tuesday, Congressional leaders expect President Bush to sign the omnibus legislation.

H.R. 2272 contains provisions from S. 761, H.R. 362, H.R. 363, H.R. 1068, H.R. 1867 and H.R. 1868, all of which passed through at least one chamber of Congress earlier this year. The omnibus package provides $33 billion over the next three years to support 25,000 new math and science teachers through professional development and graduate education assistance. The bill also authorizes grants to support baccalaureate degrees in math and science with concurrent teacher certification, and establishes a public-private partnership with the business community to identify high-needs fields. Additionally it supports federal research through the National Science Foundation, Energy Department and the National Institute on Standards and Technology.

Republicans criticized the “excessive” spending levels and the manner in which the Democratic leadership moved the report through both chambers. Normal Congressional proceedings require that a conference report be available for review for three legislative days before coming to the floor for a final vote. H.R. 2272’s conference report was available for fewer than 48 hours. That did not sit well with many Republican leaders. Despite those reservations, the bill passed with overwhelming bipartisan support and President Bush is expected to sign the bill.

Resources:
Jennifer Bendery, “House Approves Competitiveness Conference Report,” Congress Now, August 2, 2007.
Kathryn A. Wolfe, “House Completes Work on Math and Science ‘Competitiveness’ Measure,” CQ Today, August 2, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

Reid To Introduce GRADUATES Act

For the better part of this legislative session, Congress’ education committees have been dominated by work on higher education programs or reauthorizing the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Meanwhile, however, the matter of American competitiveness continues to garner some attention, though remains out of the spotlight. Next week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) plan to introduce the Getting Retention and Diplomas Up Among Today’s Enrolled Students (GRADUATES) Act.


The GRADUATES Act attempts to take strides toward making sure secondary school students are better prepared to move on to postsecondary education or to enter the workforce. At a time when a high school diploma is considered the minimum qualification necessary to support a good job and family well-being, this bill is intended to help curb the 30% dropout rate across the country. Preparing well-educated and well-trained individuals to enter the workforce is considered the cornerstone of any plan to keep America competitive in the global market. The bill would:
• Provide grants to partnerships between state educational agencies or local educational agencies with institutes of higher education, community based organizations, non-profit organizations, businesses, or school development organizations to create innovative models of reform in our nation’s secondary schools;
• Create evidence-based, systemic and replicable models of reform in secondary schools that improve student achievement and prepare students to succeed in post-secondary education and the 21st century workforce;
• Provide for tight research, evaluation and accountability to ensure that while the legislation would support a wide-range of strategies, federal funding would only be sustained for programs with proven improvement in student achievement; the Secretary would distribute “best practices” based on the research and evaluation;
• Support a variety of strategies for innovation in secondary schools such as multiple pathways, personalization, early college and dual enrollment, career academies, improved transitions and alignment, expanded learning time, post-secondary and work-based learning opportunities, increased autonomy and flexibility at the school level, improved learning opportunities in rural schools, and increasing rigor at all levels of secondary education aligned with post-secondary education and the workforce; and
• Authorize $500 million in competitive grants for five years.
No timetable exists for when the bill will go for markup in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee. Meanwhile the House and Senate are ready to go to conference on H.R. 2272, the 21st Century Competitiveness Act, a bill that focuses on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) programs. The Senate version would double the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) budget, from $5.6 billion in fiscal 2006 to $11.2 billion by fiscal 2011. The NSF contributes about 20% of all federal money awarded for basic research at U.S. universities. The House version of the bill reauthorizes the NSF at a total of $21 billion through fiscal year 2010. It would also reauthorize the National Institute of Standards and Technology for the first time in more than a decade at a total of $2.5 billion through fiscal year 2010.

Read More...

Summary only...

Competitiveness Bill Finally Ready For Conference

On Thursday, July 19, the Senate passed H.R. 2272, the 21st Century Competitiveness Act, by a voice vote after inserting the text of S. 761, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education and Science (COMPETES) Act. The Senate passed S. 761 in April, a month before the House chose to combine various math and science proposals into one large omnibus bill (H.R. 2272). The bills will now head to conference, the first major step towards improving science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education.

Following the President’s announcement of his American Competitiveness Initiative in 2005, Congress began working on various ways to keep the U.S. competitive in the global market, with a specific focus on educating the next generation of research and technology leaders. H.R. 2272 is the first serious step Congress is taking towards achieving that goal. The Senate version would double the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) budget, from $5.6 billion in fiscal 2006 to $11.2 billion by fiscal 2011. The NSF contributes about 20% of all federal money awarded for basic research at U.S. universities. The House version of the bill reauthorizes the NSF at a total of $21 billion through fiscal 2010. It would also reauthorize the National Institute of Standards and Technology for the first time in more than a decade at a total of $2.5 billion through fiscal 2010.

At this point, no date is set for a conference between the two versions of the bill. The White House, as with the appropriations, has expressed concerns over the funding levels (seems to be a reoccurring theme) authorized in both versions. Unlike various other spending bills this year, the President has yet to threaten a veto, but he has made it clear that negotiations between the White House and Congress are necessary if the bill is to get past his desk untouched.

Resources:
Kathryn A. Wolfe, “Conference Sought on Bills to Bolster Competitiveness,” CQ Today, July 19, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

House Committee Works on Coordination on STEM Education

House Democrats continue to advance their “Innovation Agenda." On Wednesday, the House Science and Technology Subcommittee on Research and Science Education held a hearing on how to better coordinate federal science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) programs among agencies.

Witnesses at the hearing included:
• Dr. Cora Marrett, Assistant Director, Directorate for Education and Human Resources, National Science Foundation;
• Dr. Joyce Winterton, Assistant Administrator, Office of Education, National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
• Dr. Bruce Fuchs, Director, Office of Science Education, National Institutes of Health; and
• Mr. William Valdez, Director, Office of Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists, Office of Science (SC-27), U.S. Department of Energy.
The subcommittee examined whether educators are utilizing information provided by federal agencies, if the federal government is creating effective and manageable programs for educators, whether there is a lack of a coordinated effort between agencies and whether federal programs are improving STEM education in America. The purpose was to assure that the recently passed STEM legislation could provide usable, effective tools for schools, educators and students.
Last month, the House passed the omnibus STEM bill, H.R. 2272, the 21st Century Competitiveness Act. The package includes H.R. 362, H.R. 363, H.R. 1068, H.R. 1867 and H.R. 1868. Each of these bills previously passed the House by wide bipartisan margins. The reason an omnibus was rushed through the House is to present one bundled bill to conference with the Senate’s more comprehensive bill, S. 761, the America COMPETES Act.
The House package authorizes a total of $23.6 billion over fiscal years 2008 – 2010, including $21 billion for research and education programs at the National Science Foundation (NSF), $2.5 billion for the research labs, the Manufacturing Extension Partnership and other activities at the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST), and $96 million for early career awards and teacher professional development programs at the Department of Energy (DOE). An additional $70 million is authorized for these programs at DOE for fiscal years 2011-2012.
Resources:
House Committee on Science and Technology Press Releases:
“House Advances Major U.S. Competitiveness, Science/Math Education Package,” House Science and Technology Committee, Press Release, May 21 2007.
“Subcommittee Investigates How to Better Coordinate Federal Math and Science Programs,” House Science and Technology Committee, Press Release, June 6, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...