For those keeping score, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was slated for reauthorization in early 2007. These acts are supposed to be reupped every five years. And like clockwork, we tend to forget about the clock and leave existing laws in place long after their expiration date.
The five-year cycle allows us to recognize that the work changes around us. The K-12 education space is vastly different today than it was when the law was written in 2001. From the stronger role of technology in the classroom to the growing needs of addressing a growing ELL population, circumstances change. The Federal law governing our public schools should change as well.
But it has now been a dozen years since the current law was written. We should be preparing for our second revision, and not still waiting for a re-up that is more than six years past due. But we wait.
A few years ago, Eduflack opined that EdSec Arne Duncan didn’t need reauthorization. That the Administration could and would adjust Federal education law through the introduction of new programs (like Race to the Top) and through greater flexibility to NCLB (as we’ve seen with the NCLB waivers and the waiver waivers). And to date, Duncan and company have done a good job playing the hand they’ve been dealt, recognizing that Congress was not looking for another major bipartisan lift on education policy, so one just lives with the law that brought ’em.
Sure, we’ve seen both the House and the Senate debate and even pass some reauthorization legislation. But the differences between the two chambers has been significant. And there seems be a lack of urgency in either side of the Hill to really move major legislation that will improve educational outcomes and opportunities for our kids.
Some of the highlights include:
The vision of American education that President Obama and I share starts in the classroom – with fully engaged students, creative and inspiring teachers, and the support and resources needed to get every child prepared for college and career. Students in our poorest communities should enjoy learning opportunities like those in our wealthiest communities. Zip code, race, disability and family income should not limit students’ opportunities or reduce expectations for them The progress of U.S. students should remain transparent.
Washington’s role is to protect children at risk and promote opportunity for all. The federal government is not, and will never be, in the business of telling states or schools what or how to teach. But it cannot shirk its role of ensuring that schools and students meet the high bar that prepares them for the real world. History shows that, without some kind of accountability, states and districts do not always need the needs of the most vulnerable students.
In the months ahead, I will ask Congress to listen to those doing the real work of education change. Principals, teachers, governors, state education chiefs, superintendents, parents and students themselves know what is and isn’t working. They can guide us to a better law.
Lawmakers in both chambers and parties should agree on a bill that raises the bar, protects children, supports and improves effective teaching and school leadership, and provides flexibility and supports good work at the state and local level. We should give them the resources and the flexibility and make sure we all are accountable for the job we are doing on behalf of our children.
We are fighting not just for a strong education system but also for our country. A good law is part of that fight.
Kudos for Duncan and the folks down on New Jersey Avenue for seeking to regain congressional attention on ESEA reauthorization. But will it help? With issues like accountability, testing, and Common Core State Standards under attack from both the left and the right, it seems unlikely that Congress will find the gumption to take a meaningful stand and do the right thing here. But we can hope, can’t we?