Legislative Action Team Advisory

Use This New LAT Blog Link!

2008-12-16T13:13:00.000-05:00

From now on click this new link for the latest and best LAT news and issues:

http://sites.google.com/site/iralatupdate/

Legislative Update November 7, 2008

2008-11-07T11:21:00.000-05:00

In this issue:

IRA Letter to President-Elect Obama
New Regulations Finalized for NCLB
Changes at ED re: Title III
Issues Early 2009: Audio Call November 18, 8 PM EST

IRA Letter to President-Elect Obama to Emphasize Professional Development

The IRA board of directors approved sending a letter to the president-elect. Linda Gambrell chairs the letter-drafting committee that includes Jay S. Blanchard, William T. Hammond, Marsha E. Lewis, Maryann M. Manning, James E. Newkirk, Brenda J. Overturf, Ray Reutzel, and advisor Richard C. Anderson. Staff members on the committee are Alan Farstrup, Richard Long, Cathy Roller, and Barbara Tierney. The Legislative Action Team supplied input via the September 2008 survey. Look for an article outlining survey responses in the November 2008 Reading Today.

Recommendation to President-Elect: Emphasize Professional Development.
Professional development is one of many tools a teacher should have access to with the goal of helping all of their students. Not all teachers need a massive amount of professional development. Target date to send the letter: mid-November. We will send the letter to the Legislative Action Team (LAT) when it is released. It will also be posted on the LAT blog at http://www.latadvisory.blogspot.com/.

New Regulations Governing Title I of NCLB

On October 29th, 2008 the U.S. Department of Education (US ED) issued new regulations governing parts of Title I of No Child Left Behind. Among the key elements: graduation requirements, growth models, supplemental education services, public school choice, and school improvement. For a copy of the regulations and a summary from US ED: http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2008/10/10282008.html

These regulations are over 400 pages long and take effect on December 1, 2008. The graduation rate requirement will hold schools accountable for dropouts and others who do not graduate from high school with a regular diploma. Schools must have written confirmation that the student has enrolled in another school or educational program that culminates in a regular high school diploma. The schools can also use a separate formula (other than the primary four-year formula) to reflect that some students need more than four years to graduate. The regulations also cover areas such as when buildings don’t need to withhold 20% of their Title I Part A funds for Supplemental Education Services (SES) and public school choice. The regulations outline how a building can reallocate their 20% obligation and also what the penalty is for claiming that they don’t need these monies but later find they need them for SES and/or public school choice.

While the U.S. Department of Education claims that many of these regulations reflect a new state of practice in implementing NCLB, others see that the new regulations will require a significant amount of time to implement. It is possible that the new Congress or Administration may make changes in the coming year. How likely this is to happen is hard to tell since many in Congress did not publicly raise any issues when comments were solicited at the notice of proposed rule making in April 2008.

Changes at US ED and Title III

In June 2008, the U.S. Department of Education (US ED) announced that it would change the program monitoring of Title III of NCLB. Title III is the section of NCLB that provides funds to those schools which apply and meet the criteria to provide English language acquisition programs to students who are ELLs.

U.S. ED hopes to better coordinate both monitoring visits and how different facets of NCLB are integrated. However, some are worried that the ELL program may lose emphasis - either by a funding cut or by a loss of leadership at the U.S. Department of Education. While the monitoring function has shifted to Title I, the Office of English Language Acquisition will still be doing policy work.

On October 2, 2008, U.S. ED sent a policy letter to the Chief State School Officer of each state outlining U.S. ED’s concerns around the use of funds for assessment programs and how they are –– or are not –– impacted by the supplement/not supplant requirements. The letter outlined how some schools are using federal funds to conduct assessments and points out that this is a local responsibility. The federal funds are designed to be used in addition to the local funds –– and not to replace the local funds.

Issues in Early 2009: Audio Call Nov. 18, 8 PM EST

The new president will face a wide range of challenges. He will create and submit a new budget shortly after he takes office, and deal with the funding for the current fiscal year. (Funding runs out in early March for most government agencies.) The new president and Congress will allocate resources and either change the funding plan for the balance of the fiscal year - or simply allow for the old policy to be maintained. Few expect that the old funding plan will simply be extended.

Audio call: “What Is the Likely Education Agenda for President Obama?” – Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 8 PM EST. For more information contact btierney@reading.org.

I:\GR IRA\monthly updates\November 7 2008.doc

June 25-27, 2009 Legislative Workshop

2008-11-05T15:59:00.000-05:00

Save the Date!
International Reading Association
2009 Government Relations Workshop
June 25-27, 2009
Washington, DC

Ø Strengthen your advocacy efforts
Ø Actively impact legislation such as the reauthorization of NCLB
Ø Learn about federal and state legislative issues
Ø Directly communicate with your congressional leaders or their staffs

Fully refundable $50.00 registration fee required. (Refunded upon notification of cancellation or when attending the conference. This policy is to provide an accurate meal count to IRA. IRA provides breakfast and working lunch on Friday, June 26th.) All expenses (transportation, lodging, food, and entertainment) are responsibility of workshop attendees. (Many participants get funding from their state councils.)

Hotel rooms: We have a block of rooms at the luxurious Liaison Capitol Hill for a bargain $189 a night (single or double). You must call to book your own reservation:
The Liaison Capitol Hill
415 New Jersey Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001T: 202-434-0121/F: 202-347-1813

Questions? 202-624-8800 or irawash@reading.org

Updates: www.reading.org

We look forward to seeing you in June 2009!

Final Regulations for Title I

2008-10-28T12:05:00.001-04:00

U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings, on October 28, 2008, announced final regulations to strengthen and clarify No Child Left Behind (NCLB), focusing on improved accountability and transparency, uniform and disaggregated graduation rates and improved parental notification for Supplemental Education Services and public school choice.

This is a pre-publication copy of the final regulations for Title I. The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. This document will be published in the Federal Register on October 29, 2008.

http://federalregister.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2008-25270_PI.pdf

Audio Conference: Impact of New Regulations for NCLB

2008-10-27T14:52:00.000-04:00

Audio Conference: Impact of New Regulations for NCLB
October 29, 7:30 pm EDT

How will the new regulations to NCLB impact education in 2009?
Join Richard Long, IRA Director of Government Relations, as he discusses the impact of new regulations for NCLB that will effect NCLB's cell size calculations, use of growth models, graduation rates and other parts of NCLB.

This will be a free service, but registration is limited.

Register by Tuesday, October 28 (the day the new regulations are being announced) with btierney@reading.org to receive the call-in number and a Power Point set of slides that will be sent 10/29. Dr. Long will brief callers for 20 minutes and then answer questions.
E-mail concise questions in advance to btierney@reading.org. (We cannot guarantee that all questions will be answered during the call. We will try to answer all questions by e-mail.) Include your name and affiliation when posting your questions.
__________________________________________________________________________________________If Listen in to the US Department of Education's briefing on the new regulations-- sign up for one of these services:

1) IN-PERSON BRIEFING
When: Tuesday, October 28, 2:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m. ET
Where: U.S. Department of Education's Auditorium (400 Maryland Ave.,S.W., Washington, D.C.)
Deputy Secretary Ray Simon, Assistant Secretary for Elementary andSecondary Education Kerri Briggs, and Assistant Deputy Secretary forInnovation and Improvement
RSVPs are not required.

2) CONFERENCE CALL
When: Tuesday, October 28, 3:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m. ET
Phone #: 1-800-779-8307
Passcode: EDUCATION
Deputy Secretary Ray Simon, Assistant Secretary for Elementary andSecondary Education Kerri Briggs, and Assistant Deputy Secretary forInnovation and Improvement
Again, RSVPs are not required.

3) LIVE WEBCAST
When: Thursday, October 30, 1:00 p.m.-2:00 p.m. ET
Senior Department officials will host this event. More details to follow.

<http://www.ed.gov/>http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2008/10/10282008.html.

Election Education Issues

2008-10-23T13:50:00.001-04:00

Candidates Differ on Key Issues for Principals

NASSP has a new website section that showcases responses from the Obama and McCain campaigns to a recent presidential questionnaire on pressing school reform issues.

To view the questionnaire and responses, visit www.principals.org/s_nassp/sec.asp?CID=1621&DID=58461.

NASSP asked the education advisers to the presidential candidates to weigh in on issues that would affect you and your school. Along with the candidates’ positions on each issue, the advisers were asked to submit quotes or links to verbiage that support that position. The following documents contain their verbatim responses.

Documents
No Child Left Behind and Adequate Yearly Progress
Federal Education Funding and Professional Development
National Standards and Graduation Rates
Addressing the Dropout Crisis
Literacy and Numeracy
School Safety, Charter Schools, and Vouchers

The National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) is a non-partisan 501(c)(3) organization that does not endorse, support, advocate for, or encourage people to vote for any political candidate or party. The information provided on the 2008 presidential candidates does not reflect the opinion of or endorsement by NASSP.

Webcast Archive: Education and the Next President

Register to view the archive of this Webcast now.
View “Education and the Next President,” a live debate that took place at Teachers College, Columbia University, between

Linda Darling-Hammond, education adviser to Barack Obama, and

Lisa Graham Keegan, education adviser to John McCain.

The event was exclusively Webcast by edweek.org. Campaign '08 Coverage: See Education Week's continuing coverage and interactive resources of the 2008 presidential campaign to learn more about where the two candidates and their running mates stand on education. Also read the edweek.org blog, Campaign K-12, for more analysis of the candidates' views. -->Register for the Archived Webcast now. Read the Full Transcript

http://www.edweek.org/ew/marketplace/webinars/webcast_ed_next_president_transcript.html

Education and the Election Tuesday 10/21 7pm est

2008-10-20T13:50:00.000-04:00

Education and the Election
Two must-see events on edweek.org --
Live Debate: Education and the Next President
Exclusive webcast, Tuesday, October 21, 7 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Eastern time.
Live from Teachers College, Columbia University: "Education and the Next President," a debate between Linda Darling-Hammond, education adviser to Democratic nominee Barack Obama, and Lisa Graham Keegan, education adviser to Republican nominee John McCain.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/collections/campaign08/index.html
Register now to watch the live debate at
https://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/EventLobbyServlet?target=registration.jsp&eventid=122206&sessionid=1&key=F133A5219746027376C0662466473BDD&sourcepage=register

****************************
Analyzing the Election: What’s at Stake for Schools?
Check back here (http://www.edweek.org/ew/collections/campaign08/index.html)
on Wednesday, Oct. 22, noon Eastern time for a post-debate discussion with leading education analysts, moderated by Education Week's David Hoff.
Available online Wednesday, Oct. 22, 12 p.m. Eastern time
Education Week’s David J. Hoff moderates a post-debate discussion with leading education analysts.

2008-10-01T13:29:00.002-04:00

International Reading Association

Monday, September 29, 2008

Legislative Action Team Legislative Update
IRA Washington Office
irawash@reading.org
(202) 624-8800

Legislative Workshop
June 25 – 27, 2009

Overview

>Funding
>Revised Americans with Disabilities Act
>Recently enacted Higher Education Act’s impact on reading
>New National Technical Council.
>Looking ahead

Funding

The Congress, while working on the finance bailout bill, passed and sent to the president a massive continuing resolution bill that rolled together 12 appropriations bills to fund the government for FY 2009 from October 1st to March 6th. While the Congress did deal with a Pell Grant shortfall, almost everything else was left at last year’s levels. This means that the increases proposed during the summer for Title I Part A and IDEA were not realized. Equally, the zeroing out of Reading First was not enacted either. However, the money for many K-12 education programs are forward funded, which means the money being talked about now will not be sent to the schools until July 1st. Thus the new Congress and new president will have to set the spending levels early next year.

In addition, a supplemental stimulus package that included money for school construction failed to be enacted. The $ 700 billion bailout package will also have an impact on education funding. During the Sunday September 28, 2008 edition of Meet the Press, the chief strategist for Senator Obama said that if elected the new president would be looking for programs that failed and cut them, and he cited the president’s reading program.

Revised Americans with Disabilities Act

Reading and the new ADA:
On September 11, 2008 Congress passed the ADA Amendments Act (S.3406) which greatly expands the number of individuals covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA Amendments Act suggests changes for Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 which prohibits discrimination for individuals with disabilities by organizations, such as schools, that receive federal funding. President Bush is expected sign the law and the Act will go into effect January 1, 2009.

There is a small group of students with health or cognitive problems who might be covered by Section 504 protections, but are not eligible under IDEA. Examples of pupils who might need a “504 plan” are students with diabetes who need accommodations to maintain proper blood-sugar levels, or students with ADHD who may need more time to complete tests.

S.3406 protects the rights of children to be eligible under 504, just as adults would be under the ADA. The Act includes provisions to protect schools against inappropriate disability claims. S.3406 will not cause schools to face any major changes in determining IDEA eligibility. Two main factors play into eligibility. First, is there a physical or mental impairment? Second, does that physical or mental impairment substantially limit one or more major life activities? While the regulations provide no definition of a “substantial limitation”, the LEAs are to define the phrase and may look to the ADA for guidance.

Some of the significant changes under The ADA Amendments Act include:
> The Act expands the definition of “major life activities” to specifically include such things as standing, lifting, bending, reading and concentrating, along with performing manual tasks, thinking, working, caring for oneself, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, speaking, breathing, learning, and communicating.
> Under the Act, an individual will be considered disabled if the individual is substantially limited in a major life activity in his unmedicated state even though the limitations may be corrected by medication.
> An individual may also now be disabled even if the individual’s impairment or condition does not currently substantially limit a major life activity. Under the Act, an impairment that is episodic or in remission will be considered a disability if, when active, it would substantially limit a major life activity.

What Should Educators Do?
Schools will need to re evaluate the manner in which they determine whether a student qualifies for an accommodation or other protections under the ADA. Students who may not have been disabled under the prior law may now have protections afforded by the ADA. Under the ADA, schools must reasonably accommodate and provide modifications for their students with disabilities. Under the ADA Amendments, disability discrimination claims will now likely hinge on whether a particular duty is an essential function and whether the organization has offered a reasonable accommodation, instead of whether an individual is disabled.

The issue comes down to what it means to be "substantially limited" in the activity of reading and if the education profession will offer a way of creating standards that would then be applicable to this issue. Response to Intervention is one strategy that can help to distinguish children who are unable to read because they have a disability from those who have simply received poor instruction. The bill will prompt schools to pay more attention to reading and create an opportunity for reading professionals to create a better understanding of what students need.

Recently enacted Higher Education Act’s impact on reading

Results of IRA’s Advocacy on Literacy Training in the Higher Education Reauthorization: College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2008 (HR 4137)

The Higher Education Act was passed on July 29, 2008. While the majority of the bill is on student loans and grants as well as new accountability for institutions of higher education, IRA had a fundamental role in impacting the reading and literacy sections by having very specific language included in the process. The idea of this language was the result of an IRA board committee which drafted a set of legislative recommendations to improve professional development opportunities and programs in reading. Members of the IRA were then able to reinforce the importance of reading pre-service and in-service programs during their congressional visits at the IRA Legislative Workshop.

This advocacy resulted in several key changes in literacy training to provide additional literacy instruction for elementary and secondary teachers, principals and administrators. These changes are included in HEA’s Title II - Teacher Quality Enhancement and include:
> establishing reading as a high need area for support,
> expanding the understanding of preparation of reading teachers to include more emphasis on high need students with a well-educated teacher.

Specific Language in HEA Related To Literacy
Definitions:
Early childhood education programs will address the children's cognitive (including language, early literacy) development.
1) Literacy coaches will have teaching experience and a master's degree with a concentration in reading and writing education; will have demonstrated proficiency in teaching reading and writing in a content area; will provide professional development related to literacy; and may provide students with reading or writing diagnosis, instruction, and assessment.
2) Teacher will have the teaching skills to focus on …students with low literacy levels,
3) Teacher mentoring of new or prospective teachers will include instructional strategies for literacy instruction.

Teacher Quality Partnership Grants Program:
Teacher Quality Partnership Grants will be awarded to programs that include:
> strategies to meet the needs of students with low literacy level
> successfully employ effective strategies for reading instruction using the essential components of reading instruction;
> an evaluation plan that includes objectives and measures for increasing the percentage of such teachers who teach high-need academic subject areas (such as reading…);

Literacy Training:
Teacher Quality Partnership Grant Programs must:
> Provide reading instruction for elementary and secondary teachers and literacy coaches;
> Provide evidenced-based reading curricula aligned with State academic content standards and with postsecondary standards for reading and writing;
> Provide training for principals so they understand the teaching of reading, and
> Select mentor teachers who have skills in the essential components of reading instruction and teacher training in literacy instructional strategies across core subject areas.

Allowable use of Funds:
Partnership grant funds may be used to
> upgrade curriculum with high-quality instructional strategies for teaching reading
> develop teacher preparation programs that emphasize the essential components of reading instruction
> address early intervention strategies for students with reading difficulty
Partnership grant funds may be used by community colleges to:
> develop associate's degree programs with an emphasis on the essential components of reading instruction to train pre-service teachers, paraprofessionals, speech-language pathology assistants, and tutors to teach students with reading difficulties
> develop licensure programs for early childhood educators that emphasize the essential components of reading instruction
> address strategies for early screening and early intervention for students with reading difficulty

Next steps:
The passage of the literacy training provisions in HEA provides teacher education programs the opportunity to expand their programs for high quality reading education.

The U.S. Department of Education will seek feedback in proposing regulations for the law, including Title II which encompasses the literacy training pieces in the Teacher Quality Partnership Grants and other new grant programs, including Preparing General Education Teachers to Teach Students With Disabilities.

ED will hold hearings around the country to give the public an opportunity to comment. Those interested may also submit written comments to Wendy Macias, U.S. Department of Education, 1900 K Street N.W., Room 8017, Washington, D.C. 20006. Respondents may also e-mail comments to http://xsuite.thompson.com/SF_Module/newsletter/pr_e.cfm?m=479018.4953.1764649. Comments are due Oct. 8.

The National Technical Advisory Council

The National Technical Advisory Council has been formed by the U.S. Department of Education to advise on state standards, assessments and accountability systems. The Council will offer expert advice on such things as the use and applicability of minimum subgroup sizes for proficiency calculations, confidence intervals and the principles necessary for ensuring that performance indexes are consistent with the Title I statute and regulations. The 16 member group includes psychometricians, researchers, and past-and-present state education agency officials.

Tom Fisher, former Florida state director of testing, will chair the Council. Members will serve staggered terms, ranging from one to three years. The Council will meet twice a year and additional meetings may be called at the request of the Secretary.

The group first met in Washington DC on September 16, 2008. Proceedings from the meeting will be made available to the public on the U.S. Department of Education's Website, http://www.ed.gov/.

Looking ahead…

The US Department of Education is expected to issue new regulations governing parts of Title I sometime before November 1st. These regulations will impact states and how they determine cell sizes for AYP calculations at the local school building, graduation rates, supplemental education services and other issues related to implementation of No Child Left Behind. In addition, with the Congress setting March 6th for when a new funding bill will be needed it means that the Congress will have to decide on education spending levels for the upcoming school year.

###

Richard M. Long, Ed.D.
Director, Government Relations
International Reading Association
Suite 523
444 North Capitol Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 624-8800
(202) 624-8826 (fax)

IRA Legislative Update, August 11, 2008

2008-08-13T11:03:00.001-04:00

Overview

The Congressional session only has a few short weeks left before it ends on 26 September. During that time it is anticipated that the funding process for education will change from the appropriations process to the emergency spending plan called the continuing resolution. The first section of this report on appropriations/funding will cover these issues.

After years of delay, the Higher Education Act’s Reauthorization passed the House and Senate is now awaiting the president’s signature. While the majority of the bill is on student loans and grants as well as new accountability for institutions of higher education, there are several sections that impact reading and literacy. The second section is the Higher Education Act which will cover these points, and IRA’s role in the literacy language.

The third section will look at some possible, but unlikely action that could result in several education initiatives move through at least the House or Senate. The bill that is most likely to move is the adolescent literacy bill.

Appropriations/Funding

The Congress has partially moved the regular spending bill for the Department of Education programs. It is hung up on a number of partisan issues. The result looks to be that the appropriations process will give way to the wide-ranging continuing resolution (CR). The CR will set government spending for at least until after the first of the year, but may well go through the entire fiscal year. It will use three points as its guide posts, first what each chamber’s appropriation committee has set as their spending level by program; and it will take into account the previous year’s spending level. This means when you look at the attached chart you will notice that a handful of programs have gone up – Part A (LEA programs) of Title I and IDEA specifically, in contrast Reading First has been zeroed out.

Reading First was zeroed out after the release of the Institute for Education Sciences report on Reading First was issued in late April. The key finding was the lack of improvement in comprehension scores. This was on top of the findings by the investigative arm of the US Department of Education. The US Department of Education had changed of how Reading First is administered; but the fallout from the various reports has had a significant impact. Currently, many Congressional offices are saying that teachers are writing letters of support of Reading First and the Administration is hoping to see some money for Reading First in the CR. However, while it is possible, it is unlikely as there are no funds that haven’t been spoken for, which means to fund Reading First money will have to be taken from other programs. This isn’t likely to occur, but it is possible.

Higher Education Reauthorization: College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2008

After over four years of work, the Congress has sent to the president a rewritten higher education act. This act contains many changes to the student loan and grants program. In addition it also requires public and private institutions to make public several reports on graduation rates, retention and cost. This is in the name of accountability. Many in the higher education community are against these requirements because of their costs. IRA did not take a position on these issues.

IRA was able to have very specific language included in the process. The idea of this language was the result of board appointed committee that drafted a set of legislative recommendations to improve professional development opportunities and programs in reading. This resulted in several key areas of the Higher Education Act’s Teacher Quality Enhancement being changed. These changes included: establishing reading as a high need area for support, expanding the understanding of preparation of reading teachers to include more emphasis on high need students with a well-educated teacher. (See attachment for more specific information.) We will be providing a more detailed report on how best to use this initiative to help teacher education programs expand their offerings in the area of high quality reading education.

Movement on education bills in September?

When Congress reconvenes in September they hope to finish their work on or about September 26^th. The entire agenda will be tied up in the election. While it is highly unlikely that any additional education measures will be enacted, it isn’t impossible that one or more measures may pass one house or the other. The most likely candidate is the House version of adolescent literacy legislation, HR 2289 the Striving Readers Act of 2007. This measure has 51 co-sponsors and is supported by a wide range of groups. It was originally introduced by Congressman John Yarmuth (KY-3). There is a companion version in the Senate (S. 958) sponsored by Senators Sessions (AL) and Murray (WA) and Sessions (AL). Another possibility is the HR 1623 the Graduation for All Act sponsored by Congressman Ruben Hinojosa.

H.R.4137

College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2008 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)

`TITLE II--TEACHER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT

`SEC. 200. DEFINITIONS.

`For purposes of this title:

`(4) EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAM- The term `early childhood education program' means--

`(C) a State prekindergarten program (including a program authorized under section 619 or part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) that serves children from birth through kindergarten and that addresses the children's cognitive (including language, early literacy, and pre-numeracy), social, emotional, and physical development.

`(7) ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF READING INSTRUCTION- The term `essential components of reading instruction' has the meaning given such term in section 1208 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

`(14) LITERACY COACH- The term `literacy coach' means an individual--

`(A) who--

`(i) has teaching experience and a master's degree with a concentration in reading and writing education; and

`(ii) has demonstrated proficiency (as determined by the principal of the individual's school) in teaching reading and writing in a content area such as math, science, or social studies;

`(B) whose primary role with teachers and school personnel is--

`(i) to provide high-quality professional development opportunities for teachers and school personnel related to literacy;

`(ii) with respect to the areas of reading and writing, to collaborate with paraprofessionals, teachers, principals, and other administrators, and the community served by the school; and

`(C) who may provide students with--

`(i) reading or writing diagnosis and instruction; and

`(ii) reading and writing assessment, including assessment in cooperation with other professionals (such as special education teachers, speech and language teachers, and school psychologists).

`(18) TEACHING SKILLS- The term `teaching skills' means skills that enable a teacher to--

`(C) employ strategies grounded in the disciplines of teaching and learning that--

`(iii) focus on the identification of students' specific learning needs, particularly students with disabilities, students who are limited English proficient, students who are gifted and talented, and students with low literacy levels, and the tailoring of academic instruction to such needs;

`PART A--TEACHER QUALITY PARTNERSHIP GRANTS

`SEC. 201. PURPOSES; DEFINITIONS.

`(b) Definitions- In this part:

`(4) TEACHER MENTORING- The term `teacher mentoring' means the mentoring of new or prospective teachers through a new or established program that--

`(B) provides high-quality training for such mentors, including instructional strategies for literacy instruction and classroom management;

`SEC. 202. PARTNERSHIP GRANTS.

`(d) Partnership Grants for Pre-Baccalaureate Preparation of Teachers- An eligible partnership that receives a grant to carry out an effective program for the pre-baccalaureate preparation of teachers shall carry out a program that includes all of the following:

`(aa) meet the specific learning needs of all students, including students with disabilities, students who are limited English proficient, students who are gifted and talented, students with low literacy levels and, as applicable, children in early childhood education programs;

`(bb) differentiate instruction for such students; and

`(cc) effectively teach high-order analytical, evaluative, problem solving and communications skills appropriate for the teacher's content or specialty area;

`(VI) can successfully employ effective strategies for reading instruction using the essential components of reading instruction;

`(6) LITERACY TRAINING- Developing and implementing a program to strengthen content knowledge and teaching skills of elementary and secondary school teachers or literacy coaches that--

`(A) provides teacher training in reading instruction for elementary or secondary school teachers or literacy coaches who--

`(i) train classroom teachers to implement literacy programs; or

`(ii) tutor students with intense individualized reading, writing, and subject matter instruction during or beyond the school day;

`(B) develops or redesigns rigorous evidenced-based reading curricula that are aligned with challenging State academic content standards, as required under section 1111(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and with postsecondary standards for reading and writing;

`(C) provides opportunities for teachers to plan and assess instruction with other teachers, school leaders, and faculty at institutions of higher education;

`(D) provides training and professional development for principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement; and

`(iv) The establishment of clear criteria for the selection of mentor teachers based on measures of teacher effectiveness and the appropriate subject area knowledge. Evaluation of teacher effectiveness shall be based on, but is not required to include all of, the observations of such domains of teaching, which may include the following:

`(V) In the case of mentor candidates who will be mentoring current or future literacy and mathematics coaches or instructors, appropriate skills in the essential components of reading instruction, teacher training in literacy instructional strategies across core subject areas, and teacher training in mathematics instructional strategies, as appropriate.

`SEC. 204. ACCOUNTABILITY AND EVALUATION.

`(a) Eligible Partnership Evaluation- Each eligible partnership submitting an application for a grant under this part shall establish and include in such application an evaluation plan that includes strong performance objectives. The plan shall include objectives and measures for increasing--

`(4)(A) the percentage of highly qualified teachers hired by the high-need local educational agency participating in the eligible partnership;

`(B) the percentage of such teachers who are members of underrepresented groups;

`(C) the percentage of such teachers who teach high-need academic subject areas (such as reading, mathematics, science, and foreign languages, including less commonly taught languages and critical foreign languages);

`PART C--ENHANCING TEACHER EDUCATION

`Subpart 1--Recruiting Teachers With Math, Science, or Language Majors

`SEC. 241. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

`(c) Use of Funds- Grant funds made available under this subpart--

`(2) may be used to upgrade curriculum to provide all students studying to become teachers with high-quality instructional strategies for teaching reading and teaching the English language to students who are limited English proficient, and for adopting, modifying, and differentiating instruction to teach students with disabilities;

`(7) may be used to develop innovative teacher preparation programs that emphasize the essential components of reading instruction and other strategies based on scientifically valid research and that address early intervention strategies for students with reading difficulty or language processing differences.

`Subpart 2--Community Colleges as Partners in Teacher Education Grants

`SEC. 251. GRANTS TO COMMUNITY COLLEGES.

`(b) Authorized Uses of Funds- Grant funds provided under this subpart shall be used to carry out the activities described in subsection (a), and may be used to--

`(12) develop associate's degree programs with an emphasis on the essential components of reading instruction to train educators such as pre-service teachers, paraprofessionals, speech-language pathology assistants, and tutors to teach students with reading difficulties and students who learn to read differently than their peers; and

`(13) develop licensure programs for early childhood educators that emphasize the essential components of reading instruction and other strategies based on scientifically valid research, and that address strategies for early screening and early intervention for students with reading difficulty and who learn to read differently than their peers.

NCLB UPDATE

2008-07-18T09:58:00.000-04:00

from U.S. Department of Education
ED REVIEW
July 18, 2008

The Department has published Fiscal Year 2008 Title I allocations by school district. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, districts must spend an amount equal to 20% of their Title I, Part A allocation to cover public school choice-related transportation costs and pay for supplemental educational services (SES). Districts have some discretion to determine the allocation of funds between the activities, but they must use at least one-quarter (5%) of the 20% "reservation" on each activity, if the cost of satisfying demand for each exceeds 5%. Moreover, for each student receiving SES, districts are required to pay the lesser of the actual cost of such services or an amount equal to the district's Title I, Part A allocation divided by the number of poor children within the district, as determined by Census Bureau estimates. FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE GO TO http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/titlei/fy08/. (Note: Due to state-level adjustments of Title I allocations, the amounts received by districts will be smaller than shown.)

Speaking of SES, on July 7, the Department's Office of Innovation and Improvement (OII) announced a new grant competition to encourage the establishment or expansion of partnerships between supplemental educational services programs and 21st Century Community Learning Centers projects, in order to increase the academic achievement of low-income students in Title I schools identified for improvement, correction action, or restructuring. Through this demonstration, OII will fund proposals that will serve as national models of how these two federally authorized after-school initiatives can be coordinated so that a greater number of students enroll in, participate in, and complete academic after-school services. A "notice of intent" to apply is due July 21, while the deadline for applications is August 12. FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE GO TO http://www.ed.gov/programs/sesdemo/. (Note: In the near future, the Department will be holding a technical assistance conference call for interested applicants. Details will be posted on the program's web site.)
______________________________________________________________________

Statement of the International Reading Association on Reading First

2008-05-23T08:15:00.000-04:00

The national debate on reading in the United States has never wavered on one clear point, that excellent reading ability is essential for the success of students. Furthermore, most agree on the critical importance of teachers in fostering student success in reading. What has been under debate is determining how to create excellent readers.

The latest report on Reading First highlights the need to develop policy that schools and teachers can effectively implement. This preliminary report indicates that Reading First has not yet had a statistically significant impact on student reading comprehension test scores in grades 1-3. This finding does not come as a surprise to reading educators, given the program’s emphasis in many states on instructional areas other than comprehension.

National policymakers need to look at a wider range of indicators in determining what works. These indicators should include data from individual states and school districts. By drawing on the data from individual states and districts, we will gain a much better picture of the conditions that helped, or did not help, teachers to advance children’s learning of comprehension and other reading proficiencies. We need to support teachers by providing them with the detailed information about best practices that can be culled from continued research on Reading First.

When teachers are given flexibility, resources, and evidence as to what is effective they can and do improve student reading. The data suggest that we must build programs that provide:
· the long-term professional development of teachers that is based on evidence and experience,
· the expansion of links between high-need K-12 schools and colleges of education to enhance the reading instruction in those schools,
· the flexibility for schools and school districts to meet the increasing needs of ELL students, struggling readers, and others who need reading instruction tailored to their needs and circumstances,
· middle and high school reading instruction that builds on the already improved elements of elementary school reading instruction, and
· a range of assessments to improve instruction.

The International Reading Association knows that teacher quality makes a difference. However, the policy community must help by changing both statutes and regulations to provide for more research on what is effective instruction, flexibility for teachers in determining how best to meet the needs of their students, and support for the effective implementation of reading programs.

The latest data on Reading First should be seen for what they are—a call to look closely at reading instruction in our schools and how we can support our children and our teachers. We need to work together to develop policies in an open and transparent environment that will result in improvements in reading instruction and achievement.

We can make a difference with our children. But it will require collaboration between policy makers and educators.

Decision on Connecticut NCLB lawsuit

2008-04-29T14:53:00.000-04:00

Judge Kravitz's April 28th , 2008 decision on the administrative appeal aspects of Connecticut's NCLB suit is linked here: C:\Documents and Settings\mbell\Desktop\NCLB DECISION on summary judgment 4-28-2008 (3).htm
The decision finds that the Secretary’s decisions denying Connecticut’s requests to test ELL students after three years and to test students with disabilities at their instructional rather than grade level, per their IEP, are consistent with the statute and regulations and thus not arbitrary and capricious.
The ruling finds that Connecticut waived any claim with regard to a hearing on those requests and that it never presented to the Secretary (and so could not have decided in court) a claim under the Unfunded Mandates provision with regard to those requests.

IRA Government Relations Update, April 11, 2008

2008-04-16T08:30:00.000-04:00

Overview

The House of Representatives has all but given up any hope of passing a new No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) this year. The Senate is still saying that they are working on a new version. What we have heard is that the Senate’s bill may not be comprehensive but rather reflect where there is consensus on changing NCLB. The House may take some of the programs of NCLB and pass them individually, but even this is unclear. What is happening is that the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act is moving ahead and is being actively discussed by the education committee staffs of both chambers with the expectation that they may be able to pass a compromised version soon.

Funding

Funding for education is currently being debated in two separate, yet related Congressional processes. First is the budget where overall spending levels are fixed. Both the House and Senate are pushing for budget allocations for education that would be increases over this year’s level, both are planning for modest increases. Parallel to this process is the appropriations process which takes the overall allocation and distributes it to the specific programs. Currently the House and Senate appropriators are taking testimony from government and non-government experts. Next week the Senate appropriators are going to talk with the Department about teacher programs. It is anticipated that the House and Senate will propose increased levels but at the end of the year that they will not have an appropriations bill that the president will sign.

Selected Reading Legislative Issues

Reading First
Reading First is a part of No Child Left Behind that has been highly controversial. Over the past several years the U.S. Department of Education issued several inspector general reports that found fault with how the program was administered. Last year, the Secretary of Education reorganized the program and stated that she would follow all of the recommendations. However, Congress cut the program by over 61%. Now there is a push to take many of the procedural recommendations from the inspector general reports and codify them into federal law. There is both a Democratic and a Republican proposal to accomplish this task. What is unclear is whether or not this legislation will need to wait for the full reauthorization of NCLB or whether it may move alone.

Striving Readers
Striving Readers is the name of a small adolescent literacy program administered by the US Department of Education and a legislative imitative long backed by IRA. The legislation, when passed, would provide funds to high-need school districts to support new reading programs designed to help "struggling readers" to become proficient readers. It has been hoped that when NCLB is rewritten that this new legislative initiative would be passed. The legislation has a wide range of bipartisan support.

Higher Education Reauthorization (HEA)

Currently staff members from the Senate, Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee (HELP) and the House Education and Labor Committee are meeting to iron out any differences between the House (HR 4137) and Senate(S 1642) bill. They are working against an April 30th deadline (which can be extended).
Of particular IRA interest is the literacy training provision for elementary and secondary school teachers and literacy coaches along with a definition of literacy coach.
In the current House HEA draft is a section defining partnership grants. It establishes:
` (6) LITERACY TRAINING- Establishing and implementing a program that strengthens content knowledge and teaching skills of elementary and secondary school teachers or literacy coaches that--
`(A) provides teacher training in reading instruction for elementary or secondary school teachers or literacy coaches who train classroom teachers to implement literacy programs; or who tutor students with intense individualized reading, writing, and subject matter instruction during or beyond the school day;
`(B) develops or redesigns rigorous evidenced-based reading curricula that are aligned with challenging State academic content standards, as required under section 1111(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and with postsecondary standards for reading and writing;
`(C) provides opportunities for teachers to plan and assess instruction with other teachers, school leaders, and faculty at institutions of higher education;
`(D) Provides training and professional development for principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement.; and
‘(E) establishes an evaluation and accountability plan for activities conducted under this paragraph to measure the impact of such activities.
One draft definition for a literacy coach being proposed includes the following:
The term `literacy coach' means a professional:
whose primary role with teachers and school personnel is to--
(i) provide high-quality professional development opportunities for teachers and school personnel;
(ii) collaborate with paraprofessionals, teachers, administrators, and the community served by the school in the areas of reading and writing; and
(iii) work cooperatively and collaboratively with other professionals in planning programs to meet the needs of diverse population learners, including children with disabilities and students who are limited English proficient; and
(C) who may provide students with--
(i) reflective, inquiry-based reading or writing diagnosis, instruction, and assessment; and
(ii) reading and writing assessment, in cooperation with other professionals (such as special education teachers, speech and language teachers, and school psychologists).

IRA Professional Development Initiative

During the February 2008 Legislative Workshop IRA members went to meet with their representatives. Ten reported back that they thought that their member had an interest in championing IRA’s Professional Development Initiative. Currently, staff is meeting to follow-up.
The initiative proposes that professional development funds for reading be available for all grade levels plus pre-service teacher education. The purpose would be to provide for:
*Resources to Ensure That Reading Instruction Is Continuously and Effectively Improved,
*Recruiting and Retaining High Quality Teachers in High Needs Schools,
*Identifying, Implementing, and Disseminating Effective Evidence-Based Reading Practices, and
*Raising Reading Performance and Closing the Achievement Gap Through High Quality Professional Development.

Regulations from US ED

In late March, Secretary Spellings of the US Department of Education issued a statement outlining a new program to allow ten states to apply for a new program that would change how schools identified for school improvement are treated. Specifically, states will be able to differentiate how schools with many groups of students who are not making AYP are treated with respect to intervention in contrast to the schools that have only one or two groups that are failing to make AYP. Both groups will still need to be eligible for public school choice and supplemental education services. Any state that chooses to apply must state how their program will insure that high need students are receiving the high levels of instruction that they need. Applications are due to the US Department of Education by May 2nd.

Next steps

Questions about when the Higher Education Act may be finalized and whether or not the provisions IRA supports are included in the final version are still open. The lack of a full reauthorization of NCLB is stimulating discussion around the idea that some parts may move this year while other more controversial parts await a future debate. Meanwhile, the US Department of Education continues to issue guidance on areas of NCLB where there is a consensus that change needs to be pushed such as on the differentiated accountability pilots (this follows the changes that have allowed for growth models to be used). Even when there is little going on, there are changes taking place.

IRA responds to NAEP writing results

2008-04-03T16:29:00.000-04:00

Media contact: John Micklos, Editor, Reading Today
Telephone 302-731-1600, ext. 250
E-mail: jmicklos@reading.org; website www.reading.org

Time, Resources Needed to Bridge the Gap in Writing Scores:
International Reading Association Responds to NAEP Writing Results

NEWARK, DELAWARE, USA –"As educators, we need to devote time and resources to writing instruction if we want to see continued improved scores and a narrowing of the achievement gap," said Cathy Roller, Director of Research and Policy for the International Reading Association, responding to today's release of The Nation's Report Card: Writing 2007. "Teachers also need access to high-quality materials and ongoing professional development. This is especially important in urban schools, which often face challenges created by high levels of poverty and student bodies with large numbers of Black and Hispanic students, who continue to score at lower levels than Whites and Asians."

We need to place emphasis on both reading and writing in order to raise overall writing scores and to narrow racial/ethnic achievement gaps and gaps between students in urban schools and students in other settings, said Roller. Results of the nationwide assessment showed gains among both 8th- and 12th-graders, as well as gains among most racial/ethnic groups and in several large school districts that participated in the Trial Urban District Assessments. However, significant gaps remain between girls and boys, White students and Black and Hispanic students, and large urban districts and the nation as a whole.

The 2007 NAEP writing assessment was administered between January and March 2007 to approximately 140,000 students at grade 8 and 28,000 students at grade 12. The assessment provided an overview of student achievement in narrative writing, informative writing, and persuasive writing. Results were presented nationally for both 8th- and 12th-grade students, and in 10 participating urban districts for 8th-graders only.

The International Reading Association is a community of reading professionals with more than 80,000 members in nearly 100 countries, dedicated to promoting higher achievement levels in literacy, reading, and communication worldwide. A network of 1,250 councils and more than 40 national affiliates forms the working foundation for the Association. The Association has spotlighted urban education issues in a number of ways. For further information, visit the Association's website at www.reading.org and click on the Quick Links box. Once inside that page, click on Urban Education for recommended readings and other resources.

IRA Legislative Update, March 14, 2008

2008-03-17T08:49:00.000-04:00

Overview
The Congress has recessed for the next two weeks. Each chamber has finished their version of the budget for the upcoming year. When they come back they will meet to finish that work and write one budget. The rewriting of the Higher Education Act is coming close to the end and when members return it is expected that they will finish. Sitting in the wings is the rewriting of the No Child Left Behind Act. While most now think there is little to no chance of finish rewriting it this year, there is still some discussion of taking parts out and seeing if they could pass. All of this is taking place in an election year, which means that the number of legislative workdays is fewer, and the willingness to compromise is smaller. As the days tick off, legislators begin to wonder if they will get a better deal by finishing their task now or by waiting a year.

Budget and Appropriations
Both the House and Senate have finished working on their individual versions of the budget. The budget is a congressional blueprint that allocates money between various areas (mandated programs, defense and non-defense discretionary) and, in theory, balances spending in these areas against anticipated revenues. They do this by planning in five year segments. These overall categories are then used to allocate money to the appropriators.

During this debate both chambers stated that they wanted to spend more money on education than the president proposed in his budget and what was spent last year. Several key areas were voted on. One was to put more money in the budget for high school and drop out prevention programs. While this doesn’t have the force of law, it does indicate what many members of Congress think is important.

When the Congressional members get back to DC, they will then discuss both bills and create a joint budget document. The next step is appropriations.

This year the appropriations process will have a special twist. Most Democrats believe that if they wait until next January they will have a larger majority in the Congress AND someone different in the White House. This last point is important because the President has said he will veto any appropriations bill that is higher than his recommendation.
Clearly it will be important to push for higher amounts for literacy and education programs. Pushing for higher amounts now will result in Congress having to build from this base.

Higher Education Act
Usually this Act has moderate interest to IRA. Generally speaking, the bill provides money for student loans and grants, with some attention to other areas such as teacher education. Over the last five or six years, the awareness that teacher education is important has impacted how this bill is structured. In the current House and Senate drafts there is language to support literacy coaches and increased reading education programs for elementary and secondary teachers. As this language is debated we may be asking for support from the IRA Legislative Action Team. During the recent IRA Legislative Workshop, several members of the IRA were able to reinforce the importance of reading pre-service and in-service programs to their state representatives.

No Child Left Behind Act
At the beginning of the year, most pundits in education policy were saying that there was no chance for NCLB would be rewritten this year. It looks like they were right. Every day that ticks by means that there is less chance of passing this massive bill. Still, Senator Kennedy (D-MA) is saying that his staff is drafting a bill that will be released soon. The question now is: will they be moving a comprehensive bill or a slimmed down version that would only include areas of agreement. Congress has until early October to finish their legislative work, but realistically the summer will be shortened with the two presidential party conventions in addition to adjourning for the fall elections (which includes the entire House and 1/3rd of the Senate).

IRA Professional Development Initiative
IRA believes that there must be a major national investment in teacher preparation and professional development to ensure that high-need students are provided continuous high-quality reading instruction throughout their schooling experiences.

Therefore, IRA has developed a set of legislative recommendations for a new federal program to provide funds to consortiums of local school districts, state education agencies, and higher education teacher preparation programs to support and sustain the reading professional development of educators.

This comprehensive initiative will include all grade levels plus pre-service teacher education to ensure that every teacher is competent to teach reading to students of various ability levels through:
* Resources to Ensure That Reading Instruction Is Continuously and Effectively Improved,
* Recruiting and Retaining High Quality Teachers in High Needs Schools,
* Identifying, Implementing, and Disseminating Effective Evidence-Based Reading Practices,
* Raising Reading Performance and Closing the Achievement Gap Through High Quality Professional Development,
* Developing Community Partnerships

Currently we are following up with a set of meetings with ten members of Congress who told their IRA Legislative Action Team members who visited them during the Legislative Workshop that they would be interested in considering sponsoring this measure.

IRA to Propose New Legislative Initiative

2008-02-14T11:21:00.000-05:00

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act has been rewritten eight times since it was originally signed into law in 1965. With each change the bill has shifted more and more from being a source of funds to supplement the amount of money local school districts in the United States can spend on high-need children to a statute that has an increasingly wider set of requirements for what is being taught.
Unfortunately, the act hasn’t enhanced the capacity of the system to progressively expand the quality of the education the neediest youths are receiving. IRA is proposing to change that.
In December 2007 the IRA Board of Directors passed a motion to proceed with the development of a set of legislative recommendations to expand the capacity of local schools to improve their educational programs. The recommendation is to establish a new federal program that provides funds to schools to support multi-year professional development of teachers to expand and improve their knowledge of reading instruction. The proposed program would provide money to local school districts, state education agencies, and higher education teacher education programs over several years to enhance professional development and teacher education.
IRA’s Government Relations Legislative Workshop, scheduled for February 21–22 in Washington, DC, is expected to emphasize this new initiative, and attendees will work to expand Congressional support for it. The IRA Legislative Action Team (LAT) will also be asked to lend its voice to explaining the need and raising awareness of why professional development is critical to the success of any literacy initiative. In addition, IRA state council legislative chairs will be asked to support this initiative by providing information to IRA state council members.
This is a presidential and Congressional election year in the United States, and most observers believe that large-scale legislation is almost impossible to pass. However, there is also a tradition of smaller, more bipartisan initiatives passing during election years. The key for passage is to focus on a common area of need—such as education—and provide a focused initiative that demonstrates leadership. A professional development program that covers all grade levels plus pre-service teacher can be such an initiative.
For more information contact the IRA Washington Office at irawash@reading.org. Watch future issues of Reading Today for updates on this initiative.

IRA Audio Call: Update on the President's FY 09 budget request and NCLB reauthorization

2008-02-06T15:49:00.000-05:00

Join Richard Long, IRA Director of Government Relations, in a live audio-conference on Tuesday, February 19, at 8:00 pm EST as he gives an update on the President's FY 09 budget request and NCLB reauthorization.

This will be a free service, but registration is limited. Participants are asked to register by February 14 with irawash@reading.org to receive the
call-in number and a Power Point set of slides.

Dr. Long will brief callers for about 20 minutes and then answer questions. Participants are asked to e-mail their questions in advance to irawash@reading.org. We cannot guarantee that all questions will be answered during the call. We will try to answer all questions by e-mail. Concise questions are encouraged. Please be sure to include your name and affiliation when posting your questions.

FY 2009 President's Education Budget

2008-02-04T15:05:00.000-05:00

On February 4, 2008, President Bush unveiled his FY 2009 Budget. Information on the President's FY 2009 Education Budget Request includes summary and background information by program area, detailed budget tables, and State tables.
http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget09/summary/index.html

State tables show how funds will be distributed under State formula-allocated and selected student aid programs. State allocations for fiscal years 2008 and 2009 are preliminary estimates based on currently available data. Allocations based on new data may result in significant changes from these preliminary estimates.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy09/bis.html

HEA Reauthorization: Building Capacity for Student Achievement

2008-01-17T13:26:00.000-05:00

The rewriting of the Higher Education Act is now awaiting House floor action. IRA has been working to include provisions for literacy training. Currently, the House version (HR 4137) contains a literacy training provision. The Senate version (S.1642) does not include a literacy provision.

After the House finishes working on their version, the next stage in the process is when the House and Senate assign members to a committee to workout the differences between each chambers’ versions. When we know who the members of the committee are, we will be asking you to write your member of Congress and the Senate to support the literacy training provision in the House draft. The committee is expected to meet in mid to late February.

(House) Higher Education Reauthorization Act Literacy Training Provision:

Purpose: To provide additional literacy instruction for elementary and secondary coaches, principals and administrators.

Goal: To retain in the final higher education reauthorization act the following provisions:

HR 4137 Title II Teacher Quality Enhancement
Section 200 Definitions:
`(15) LITERACY COACH- The term `literacy coach' means a professional--
`(A) who--
`(i) has teaching experience and a master's degree with a concentration in reading and writing education;
`(ii) has demonstrated proficiency as determined by the principal of the individual's school in teaching reading and writing in a content area such as math, science, or social studies;
`(B) whose primary role with teachers and school personnel is to--
`(i) provide high-quality professional development opportunities for teachers and school personnel related to literacy;
`(ii) with respect to the areas of reading and writing, collaborate with paraprofessionals, teachers, principals, and other administrators, and the community served by the school; and
`(iii) work cooperatively and collaboratively with other professionals in planning programs to meet the needs of diverse population learners, including children with disabilities and limited English proficient individuals; and
`(C) who may provide students with--
`(i) reading or writing diagnosis, instruction, and assessment; and
`(ii) reading and writing assessment, in cooperation with other professionals (such as special education teachers, speech and language teachers, and school psychologists).

Section 202 State Partnership Grants
6) LITERACY TRAINING- Developing and implementing a program to strengthen content knowledge and teaching skills of elementary and secondary school literacy coaches that--
`(A) provides teacher training in reading instruction for literacy coaches who--
`(i) train classroom teachers to implement literacy programs; or
`(ii) tutor students with intense individualized reading, writing, and subject matter instruction during or beyond the school day;
`(B) develops or redesigns rigorous evidenced-based reading curricula that are aligned with challenging State academic content standards, as required under section 1111(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and with postsecondary standards for reading and writing;
`(C) provides opportunities for teachers to plan and assess instruction with other teachers, school leaders, and faculty at institutions of higher education;
`(D) provides training and professional development for principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement; and
`(E) establishes an evaluation and accountability plan for activities conducted under this paragraph to measure the impact of such activities.

IRA Audio-Conference, January 15

2008-01-07T14:00:00.000-05:00

What is happening with NCLB and how will the President's new FY 08 budget impact reading education?

Join Richard Long, IRA Director of Government Relations, in a live audio-conference on Tuesday, January 15, at 8:00 pm EST as he discusses the status of NCLB as well as the new federal budget and its impact on reading education.

This will be a free service, but registration is limited. Participants are asked to register by January 11 with irawash@reading.org to receive the
call-in number and a Power Point set of slides.

Dr. Long will brief callers for about 20 minutes and then answer questions. Participants are asked to e-mail their questions in advance to irawash@reading.org. We cannot guarantee that all questions will be answered during the call. We will try to answer all questions by e-mail. Concise questions are encouraged. Please be sure to include your name and affiliation when posting your questions

IRA Legislative Update December 19, 2007

2007-12-19T12:16:00.000-05:00

Funding

The Congress is still in session; it is finalizing the funding bill for the current fiscal year. The Labor/Health and Human Services/Education appropriations bill was passed by the Congress, vetoed by the president, and the veto was sustained. This has resulted in education funding program that is now part of the FY08 Omnibus Spending Bill. Within the spending bill is also language that is intended to put into law several of the ethnical procedural issues outlined in the Inspector General’s reports pertaining to Reading First.

Head Start Reauthorization signed – changes impacting literacy

On Wednesday, December 13, President Bush signed into law a renewal of Head Start through 2012. The Head Start Reauthorization will help more children arrive at kindergarten ready to succeed by raising the eligibility ceiling, setting clear standards and measures for Head Start programs, improving coordination with other early childhood education programs and strengthening program accountability. The controversial assessment, the Head Start National Reporting System, has been eliminated.
Key points of interest to IRA in the law include:
· Improvement of teacher qualifications by requiring half of all Head Start teachers to hold bachelor’s degrees by 2013, but it would not penalize any program that did not meet that goal.
· Requirement of Head Start agencies to implement research-based early childhood curricula that promote young children’s school readiness in the areas of language and early reading.
· Requirement that each Head Start agency ensure that all of its teachers receive ongoing training in language and emergent literacy. Adds language detailing use of training funds to support enhanced early language and preliteracy development of children in Head Start programs.

For a summary description of the changes go to:
http://www.reading.org/downloads/resources/071218_HeadStartReauth.pdf

Higher Education Reauthorization: House HR 4137 Senate S 1642

A provision in the House version (HR 4137) of the Higher education Reauthorization Act will allow state partnership grants for developing and implementing a program to strengthen content knowledge and teaching skills of elementary and secondary school literacy coaches. The grants will, if enacted,
· provide teacher training in reading instruction for literacy;
· develop reading curricula that are aligned with State academic content standards;
· provides opportunities for teachers to plan and assess instruction with other teachers; school leaders, and faculty at institutions of higher education; and
· provide training and professional development for principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement, and establish an evaluation and accountability plan for activities.

HR 4137 is expected to be brought to the House floor for a vote and passed in early 2008. IRA will lead an effort to retain the House provision through lobbying efforts, coalition building and grassroots advocacy.

Looking ahead

2008 will open with the House and Senate education committees focused on No Child Left Behind, the Congressional funding committees expecting fewer allocations for the upcoming year, the US Department of Education continuing to make regulatory changes on NCLB, a continued push to implement Response to Intervention, new literacy requirements being implemented for Head Start, a new panel to look at reading research still waiting to be announced, and many states having smaller budgets to work with as the impact of the sub prime mortgage market continues to impact the US economy.

Legislative Update November 16, 2007

2007-11-16T14:46:00.000-05:00

Quick Report

Override Vote

The House of Representatives by a vote of 277-141 failed to override the president’s veto of the Appropriations for the Departments of Labor/Health and Human Services/Education for the current fiscal year. The Senate will not push for a vote. There is a plan circulating in the Senate to redraft the spending plan splitting the difference between what the Congress proposed and vetoed and what the President’s budget outlined. In round figures this results in a loss of about $2.25 billion in funds from the Congressional proposal. Currently, the government is functioning under a continuing resolution which expires on December 14.

House Committee Action on Higher Education Act

The House Education and Labor Committee passed, 45- 0, a reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. It is expected that this bill will be acted on by the full House when they return in January. During the debate, which stretched over two days, the Committee accepted 12 Republican amendments.

Head Start Reauthorization Going to President’s Desk

The House and Senate have agreed to the same set of changes to Head Start and the legislation now goes to the president for his expected signature. In this revised Head Start is a new focus on literacy. A background memo is being prepared to brief IRA members as to the new literacy sections of this Act.

Reports

NAEP’S 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA)

NAEP’S 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) was released Thursday, November 15, 10:00 am. (The participating urban districts’ scores in reading and math are reported separately from the NAEP states results.)

Reading scores for 4th and 8th graders are generally the same or have increased slightly since 2002, when the TUDA began collecting these statistics from volunteer urban public school districts. The exception: Houston’s 4th grade reading scores dropped since 2005 to the same level recorded for 2002. Only Atlanta and DC posted reading gains in both 4th and 8th grade.

The Nation’s Report Card Reading 2007: Trial Urban District Assessment and the Nation’s Report Card Mathematics 2007: Trial Urban District Assessment are at http://nationsreportcard.gov/

National Assessment of Title I: Final Report

This Congressionally mandated two-volume report, “Summary of Key Findings,” presents findings on the implementation and impact of the Title I program. Volume I contains key findings on the implementation of the program under No Child Left Behind, and Volume II reports on follow-up findings from Closing the Reading Gap, an evaluation of the impact of supplemental remedial reading programs on the achievement of 3rd and 5th grade students. For the summary and full report go to:http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20084012/index.asp

Register Now! IRA Government Relations Workshop, February 21 and 22, Washington DC

2007-11-14T10:25:00.000-05:00

You are invited to participate in the 2008 Governmental Relations Workshop hosted by the International Reading Association and the Government Relations Committee in Washington, D.C. The workshop will be held on February 21, from 12:00 pm – 7:00 pm and February 22, from 8:00 am - 3:00 pm.

The goals of the workshop are to strengthen your and your council’s ability to impact legislation by providing training and information. The 2008 Legislative Workshop will focus on training workshop participants to be effective advocates on both federal and state issues. Participants will have the opportunity to meet with their Members of Congress and/or their staffs on Capitol Hill.

This is a no-cost workshop to IRA members. There is a fully refundable $50.00 registration fee which is returned on notification of cancellation or when attending the conference. This policy is to provide an accurate count to IRA. We will provide lunch on Thursday and breakfast and lunch on Friday. All other expenses are the responsibility of the attendees. Many participants receive funding from their state councils to help pay for costs. The workshop will be held at the Hall of the States building on Capitol Hill. We have a block of rooms at the Hyatt Regency Capitol Hill. The rates are $289.00 single and $314.00 double. The hotel telephone is 202-737-1234. Be sure to mention you are part of the IRA group. The cut-off date to reserve a room is January 21st.

Questions? Call 202-624-8800 or e-mail irawash@reading.org
________________________________________________________

House Mark-up of Higher Education Act

2007-11-13T14:53:00.000-05:00

As reported earlier, the Higher Education Act (HEA) is scheduled to be reauthorized. The House Committee on Education and Labor has released its most current draft and is planning a mark-up (the time when the committee opens the text to change by members of the House Education and Labor Committee) for Wednesday, November 14th. The Senate has a separate bill. There are several sections of the Higher Education Act that are of significant interest to IRA. This short note is to highlight those sections.

General background on the Higher Education Act Amendments of 2007
The House Education and Labor Committee announced introduction of an HEA reauthorization bill and intend to mark it up in committee on November 14. A press release announcing the bill’s introduction asserts that the bill would:
· Streamline the federal student financial aid application;
· Make textbook costs more manageable for students;
· Expand college access for low-income and minority students;
· Increase college aid and support programs for veterans and military families;
· Create safer college campuses for students and faculty;
· Ensure equal college opportunities and fair learning environments for students with disabilities; and
· Help strengthen our nation’s workforce and economic competitiveness.

The term “literacy coach” is defined in the new HEA and means “a professional ‘‘(A) who ‘‘(i) has teaching experience and a master’s degree with a concentration in reading and writing education; ‘‘(ii) has demonstrated proficiency as determined by the principal of the individual’s school in teaching reading and writing in a content area such as math, science, or social studies; ‘‘(B) whose primary role with teachers and school personnel is to ‘‘(i) provide high-quality professional development opportunities for teachers and school personnel related to literacy; ‘‘(ii) with respect to the areas of reading and writing, collaborate with paraprofessionals, teachers, principals, and other administrators, and the community served by the school; and ‘‘(iii) work cooperatively and collaboratively with other professionals in planning programs to meet the needs of diverse population learners, including children with disabilities and limited English proficient individuals; and ‘‘(C) who may provide students with ‘‘(i) reading or writing diagnosis, instruction, and assessment; and ‘‘(ii) reading and writing assessment, in cooperation with other professionals (such as special education teachers, speech and language teachers, and school psychologists).”

Of particular interest to IRA is Title II of the HEA – specifically, the Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants – which enables K-12 schools and institutions of higher education to form partnerships for improving teacher preparation. This Title includes:
· LITERACY TRAINING – “Developing and implementing a program to strengthen content knowledge and teaching skills of elementary and secondary school literacy coaches that - ‘‘(A) provides teacher training in reading instruction for literacy coaches who ‘‘(i) train classroom teachers to implement literacy programs; or ‘‘(ii) tutor students with intense individualized reading, writing, and subject matter instruction during or beyond the school day; ‘‘(B) develops or redesigns rigorous evidenced-based reading curricula that are aligned with challenging State academic content standards, as required under section 1111(b) (1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and with postsecondary standards for reading and writing…(D) provides training and professional development for principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement.”
· TEACHING RESIDENCY PROGRAMS – “Evaluation of teacher effectiveness
shall be based on observations of such domains of teaching as the following: (V) “Evaluation of teacher effectiveness for choosing mentor candidates who will be mentoring current or future literacy and mathematics coaches or instructors, “appropriate skills in the essential components of reading instruction, teacher training in literacy instructional strategies across core subject areas...”

It is important to note that certain definitions in HEA Reauthorization Act are reliant on the meanings given the terms in section 1208 the ESEA Act of 1965 (which are expected to be changed when NCLB is reauthorized):
· ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF READING INSTRUCTION - The term essential components of reading instruction' means explicit and systematic instruction in — (A) phonemic awareness; (B) phonics; (C) vocabulary development; (D) reading fluency, including oral reading skills; and (E) reading comprehension strategies.
· READING- The term reading' means a complex system of deriving meaning from print that requires all of the following: (A) The skills and knowledge to understand how phonemes, or speech sounds, are connected to print. (B) The ability to decode unfamiliar words. (C) The ability to read fluently. (D) Sufficient background information and vocabulary to foster reading comprehension. (E) The development of appropriate active strategies to construct meaning from print. (F) The development and maintenance of a motivation to read.
· SCIENTIFICALLY BASED READING RESEARCH- The term scientifically based reading research' means research that - (A) applies rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain valid knowledge relevant to reading development, reading instruction, and reading difficulties; and (B) includes research that - (i) employs systematic, empirical methods that draw on observation or experiment; (ii) involves rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the stated hypotheses and justify the general conclusions drawn; (iii) relies on measurements or observational methods that provide valid data across evaluators and observers and across multiple measurements and observations; and (iv) has been accepted by a peer-reviewed journal or approved by a panel of independent experts through a comparably rigorous, objective, and scientific review.

The House Education and Labor Committee’s higher education subcommittee is interested in whether the HEA and NCLB laws are working together at the federal, state and local level, and whether they are aligned with respect to teacher preparation. Title II of NCLB provides grants to states to improve teacher quality. The reauthorization of the two laws will provide Congress an opportunity to consider the relationships between the goals for each.

Government Relations Update - November 7, 2007

2007-11-08T10:36:00.000-05:00

Overview
There are three issues addressed in this update, the funding bill and what happens next; the status of NCLB and the expected pending action on the Higher Education Act. The backdrop driving all three of these issues is the calendar. The First Session of the 110th Congress is scheduled to adjourn sometime this month. The House hopes to be finished by November 16th and the Senate is planning on coming back after Thanksgiving. This means that there is very little time to finish anything. The second conundrum is that next year is both a presidential and Congressional election year. Interestingly enough, after the first week of February, both parties may know who their presidential nominee will be. There may be a bit of a window for Congressional action on several measures including the re-write of NCLB.

Funding
The House and Senate Conferees met and came to an agreement on funding for school year 2008-09 (Fiscal Year 2008). The president has said that he will veto this spending level when it is presented to him. Congressional leaders are creating a funding bill that will include not only the traditional Labor/Health and Human Service/Education spending bill with two other spending bills, Military Construction and Veterans. This large appropriations bill will most likely be vetoed and the Congress will then move for an override. The bill originally passed the Senate with enough votes to override a veto but not enough to override in the House. The override fight will be in the House. A chart from the IRA supported Committee for Education Funding can be viewed at www.reading.org/association/advocacy/updates.html.
Please note several key points: first, Title I funding is increased; Reading First is decreased, as is Even Start; Striving Readers received a small increase. It is expected that the entire education, health, and other communities will push for a veto override because this bill increases funding over all for education. The president’s spending recommendations were over $2 billion less than this measure.

If the override vote isn’t successful, then Congress is likely to pass another emergency spending bill that will keep the spending levels at last year’s levels for at least the next three months.

NCLB
The House and Senate Education Committee chairs have acknowledged that moving a reauthorization of NCLB this year will not happen. At the same time, Senator Kennedy (D-MA) and Senator Enzi (R-WY), the chair and ranking member on the Senate Education Committee, have said that they will be moving a proposal early in the new year. Senator Kennedy has said they might have until the spring of 2008 to finish it. The Senate Education Committee has released a draft proposal, but without the sections of Title I, covering literacy, adequate yearly progress, growth models, and other controversial areas.

Higher Education
The House and Senate Education committees have announced that they are now going to focus their time for the balance of the session on reauthorizing the Higher Education Act. We are expecting new language to be introduced in the next week and will update you on the literacy sections.

Next Steps
The next big step for the education community will come if the president vetoes the education spending bill. While the veto may not be overridden, the amount of attention it gets is. It is important to get members of Congress on record as to whether or not they support funding for education programs. Please watch the IRA Legislative Action Team blog for updates at http://www.latadvisory.blogspot.com/.

Reading First and Funding

2007-11-01T10:34:00.000-04:00

The House/Senate conference to decide on the funding of Reading First is scheduled to begin today, Thursday, November 1st. The House appropriators cut the funding level from $1billion to $400 million, the Senate to $800 million. Last year Reading First provided funds for over 100,000 teachers to participate in professional development activities. While we realize that in several states the IRA community has had significant disagreements with how Reading First has been implemented, we also know that most states haven’t had those problems. We are also aware that the US Department of Education’s Office of Inspector General has issued several reports highly critical of the US Department of Education and how it administered Reading First. IRA has been working with the US Department of Education to support the changes that they are making in the process of administering Reading First. We have been invited to attend meetings, been given copies of documents, and generally are seeing a much more open and above board process in how Reading First is being administered at the federal level. In addition, we have been talking with the state Reading First directors about Reading First and have again found the process to have significantly changed in most states.
When the House appropriators voted its deep cut to Reading First, they did so saying that they would restore the funds when the changes outlined by the Inspector General and agreed to by the US Department of Education we made in the legislation itself. We have been working with a member of Congress who has drafted legislative language and are expecting it to be added to the reauthorization of NCLB. Unfortunately, the funding is being decided on before NCLB is rewritten.
We are asking you to contact your Senator (202-224-3121) and ask them to support the $800 million spending mark for Reading First in order to continue reaching the teachers who need and deserve continued professional development resources.
If you have any questions or wish to give us feedback from your conversations, please feel free to contact us at 202 624-8800 or (rlong@reading.org).
To see the IRA position on Reading First please go to: http://www.reading.org/resources/issues/positions_reading_first.html

Save The Date! Government Relations Workshop, Feb. 21–22

2007-10-30T12:30:00.000-04:00

The 2008 Government Relations Workshop hosted by the International Reading Association on February 21 and 22, 2008 in Washington, D.C., will help you strengthen your advocacy efforts and actively impact legislation such as the reauthorization of NCLB. You will learn about federal and state legislative issues and have the opportunity to communicate directly with your congressional leaders or their staffs.

This is a no-cost workshop for IRA members hosted by IRA's Washington Office and the Government Relations Committee. There is a fully refundable $50.00 registration fee. This fee is refunded upon notification of cancellation or when attending the conference. This policy is to provide an accurate meal count to IRA. We will provide a breakfast and working lunch on Friday. All other related expenses (transportation, lodging, food, and entertainment) are the responsibility of the workshop attendees. Many participants receive funding from their state councils to help pay for costs.

Registrations will be sent out shortly. Feel free to call the IRA Washington office with questions regarding the workshop at 202-624-8800 or contact us at irawash@reading.org. Updates for the Workshop will be posted on the IRA website, http://www.reading.org/. We look forward to seeing you in February 2008.

CEF chart outlines several key programs

2007-10-16T13:40:00.000-04:00

Federal Funding for the next school year

2007-10-16T13:20:00.000-04:00

The fiscal year began on October 1st with a continuing resolution in place. For education programs this has little impact as our funding for this school year was appropriated last year. However, it is important for next year. IRA members routinely report that one of the key problems with NCLB is the lack of funds.

This week the Senate is expected to take up their appropriations bill. The Senate bill is above the President in its proposed spending for education, but below the president. In gross terms:

FY 07 President 08 House 08 Senate Committee 08
$67.2 $62.6 $65.6 $63.6 (in billion)

The problem is the overall spending level for non-defense appropriations. The President is pushing for a lower figure and may well veto any spending bill over his budget. The Senate a coalition of Democrats and Republicans are saying that they want an increased allocation so that they can put more into education. In the House they made a higher allocation to education and are trying to expand support for a higher Senate level – in both Republican and Democratic circles. They want to have a bill that is “veto-proof.”

Current timing is for the Senate to vote this week and then quickly move to a House-Senate conference and then send the bill to the president. Most likely it will be vetoed and then more cuts will be made OR an over-ride.

The Committee for Education Funding (CEF), a coalition of over 100 education groups, including IRA, is pushing for the entire education community to push for a vote in the Senate and then for the higher numbers in the House. For IRA members who wish to support higher spending, call your Senator this week (202-224-3121) and ask for your Senator to support the higher allocation for education. There are a lot of discussions going on now to determine what program will get what specific funding amount.

IRA Audio-Conference: Congressional Agenda for fall of 2007, Wednesday, Sept. 19, 8:00 PM EDT

2007-08-28T11:14:00.000-04:00

What does the fall political landscape look like for reading education as Congress reconvenes? What is NCLB's schedule? How much money will the programs get?

Join Richard Long, IRA Director of Government Relations, in a live audio-conference on Wednesday, September 19, at 8:00 pm EDT, as he discusses the Congressional Legislative Agenda for the fall of 2007 and its impact on reading education. Dr. Long will brief callers for about 20 minutes and then answer questions.

This will be a free service, but registration is limited. Participants are asked to register by September 14 with btierney@reading.org to receive the call-in number and a Power Point set of slides.

Participants are asked to e-mail their questions in advance to btierney@reading.org. We cannot guarantee that all questions will be answered during the call. We will try to answer all questions by e-mail. Concise questions are encouraged.

Please be sure to include your name and affiliation when posting your questions.

IRA Legislative Update for July 1, 2007

2007-06-29T13:22:00.000-04:00

Introduction

This report will cover legislative actions that reflect a wide range of issues that are “in play.” This means that they are in different parts of the legislative process, some at the committee level and others going to the floors of various chambers. Specifically this report will cover: Appropriations, NCLB, Head Start, Higher Ed, and Workforce Investment.

Appropriations – FY 08
Cuts to Reading First
Increases for Title I

The House and Senate Appropriations Committees have both met and made decisions about education spending. Both have proposed increases for education but differ in their amounts. The House education subcommittee is $4.2 billion dollars above last year’s spending level, while the Senate proposed a $2 billion dollar increase. Both have recommended cuts to Reading First (House by $629 million and the Senate by $229 million) due to their concern with how the US Department of Education managed the program. In contrast both chambers proposed significant increases to Title I, programs for teachers, ELL programs and others.

Of note is that the House full appropriations committee will be meeting the week of July 9 to take up the bill with floor action now expected the following week. Congressman Obey (D-WI) chair of the committee has met with representatives of the education community to ask their support of his bill. He is not planning on accepting any amendments as he hopes to hold a bi-partisan coalition together to support these increases.

Head Start Reauthorization

On Tuesday, June 19, 2007, the Senate passed its version, S. 556, of the Head Start Reauthorization Act which would authorize the program for another 5 years. The Senate bill authorizes increased funding of $7.3 billion in FY 2008 to expand Head Start. This is $400 million more than FY 2007. The bill calls for funding to grow to $7.5 billion in FY 2009 and $7.9 billion in FY 2010. The Senate bill would expand Head Start eligibility for children up to 130 percent of the Federal Poverty Line (FPL), a 30 percent increase from the current eligibility standard. It would also improve program quality, and give Head Start officials a larger role. The House version, HR 1429, was passed in May. Both bills add language detailing use of training funds to support enhanced early language and preliteracy development of children in Head Start programs. The bill now goes to a House-Senate Conference who will negotiate the bill's final version before it is sent to the White House for President Bush's signature.

Higher Education Act (HEA) Reauthorization

On June 20, 2007, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions approved the Higher Education Amendments of 2007, S. 1614, and the Higher Education Access Act of 2007, S. 454. Both bills would combine current grant programs into a single initiative which would enable colleges to partner with high-needs school districts in order to provide extensive field experience for prospective teachers and to establish induction programs to provide extra assistance and training for first- and second-year teachers.

The Senate approval came one week after the House education panel approved its version. The Senate bill would cut subsidies to lenders by $18.3 billion; the House version would cut subsidies by about $19 billion. Both bills would direct up to $1 billion to deficit reduction and put the rest of the money into student aid. The proposals would have borrowers pay no more than 15 % of their discretionary income for federally backed student loans which would be forgiven after 25 years. The Senate measure would gradually boost the maximum Pell grant, the nation's main aid program for low-income students, from $4,300 to $5,400 a year. The House plan calls for a smaller grant increase but would cut in half the interest rates on federally backed student loans, to 3.4 %.

Senior Democrats predict that the bills could come to a vote by the end of July and would be reconciled without significant difficulty.

Workforce Investment Act Reauthorization
Adult ed programs
National Institute for Literacy

The Department of Labor submitted a Workforce Investment Act Reauthorization proposal to Congress on June 7, 2007. The “Workforce Investment Act Amendments of 2007” would reauthorize and reform title I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA). The initiative is designed to improve the effectiveness and competitiveness of American workers by increasing education and training opportunities. The plan would provide greater flexibility to states and local areas, and strengthen the One-Stop Career Center system. Funds appropriated for the WIA Adult, Dislocated Worker and Youth Programs and the Employment Service would be consolidated and allocated to states – and through states to local areas – as a single funding stream for Career Advancement Accounts (CAA) and employment services for job seekers and employers.

No Child Left Behind Reauthorization
Key Issues Still To Be Resolved
Movement in July??
Reading First

The president on June 26th made a statement calling for the rewriting of NCLB this year. Both the House and Senate education committee chairman continue to push for the reauthorization. Several times we have heard that each committee will have a bill drafted in July. What isn’t clear is how comprehensive these drafts will be. The House may move a bill that is almost a placeholder. This means that the committee will have a bill but that the decisions will be negotiated between the committee meeting and going to the floor, this type of “managers package” is often done to keep the process moving. Currently we believe that both the House and Senate are working to change how the accountability system is conducted to allow for use of growth models, but specifics haven’t been finalized. Among the questions are how to hold school accountable yet be realistic in working with ELL and handicapped populations. The question is how to balance the idea of maintaining a high level of attention on specific populations while at the same time not treating every school that has some challenges the same as a school that has many challenges.

Reading and literacy programs are also in the mix of the discussions. Both House and Senate education committees are interested in middle and high school literacy. IRA has been pushing the Striving Readers legislation but others are suggesting that a more comprehensive program of high school reform would be more productive. In addition, we are also expecting changes in Reading First – with explicit ethics requirements and perhaps a wider scope for the program.

Conclusion

While many observers are saying NCLB will not be reauthorized this year, the process is still moving forward. IRA leaders need to be aware that many political and education leaders want to see changes in NCLB that will reduce the number of schools that are identified as “in need of school improvement.” The problem is achieving a consensus as to what changes are needed – political leaders are hearing a wide range of opinions from educators and civil rights leaders with little convergence.

The appropriations process shouldn’t escape attention, the House overall funding level is most likely the “high-water mark” for money this cycle. IRA members should review the attached chart and decide whether or not they want to send a letter to their house member to ask them to support the spending plan.

FY 2008 House Labor, HHS, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriation

2007-06-11T13:47:00.000-04:00

FY 2008 House Labor, HHS, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriation

On Thursday the House education subcommittee drafted their spending plan for FY 2008 with $61.7 billion proposed education. This is a $4.2 billion (7.4%) increase above last year (FY 2007) levels.

Proposed PROGRAM CUTS:
Reading First $618 million cut
Early Reading First $3.1 million cut

Proposed LEVEL FUNDING:
Striving Readers FY08 $31, 870
NIFL $6,583 million

Proposed INCREASED PROGRAM FUNDING
Title I Grants to LEA’s + $1.5 billion
Even Start +16,717 million

Link to full appropriation detail:
http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/08LHDetail_HouseSC_WEB.pdf

Full committee action is expected on Thursday June 14

Government Relations Update

2007-06-04T13:17:00.000-04:00

The Congress is moving quickly on two critical sets of issues, the rewriting of NCLB and the funding for literacy programs. This update is going to provide you with information on what is happening and suggest that you take action.

Budget and Appropriations
Federal spending on education programs could increase significantly next year under the plan laid out in the budget resolution. The resolution sets the discretionary spending for the federal government. The process is directing that over $ 9 billion additional dollars – above the president’s plan be spent on education programs.

IRA is requesting the following spending levels for federal literacy programs:
Title I Grants to LEA’s $14 billion
Even Start $250 million
Early Reading First $120 million
Reading First $ 1,041 million
Striving Readers $200 million

Other Literacy Programs:
Literacy through Libraries $25 million
Reading is Fundamental $30 million
National Writing Project $25 million
Adult Basic and Literacy Education $700 million
National Institute for Literacy $7 million

Contact you Senators and ask them to support increased funding for literacy instruction.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Senate:
Majority
Senator Tom Harkin (Chairman) (IA)
Senator Daniel Inouye (HI)
Senator Herb Kohl (WI)
Senator Patty Murray (WA)
Senator Mary Landrieu (LA)
Senator Richard Durbin (IL)
Senator Jack Reed (RI)
Senator Frank Lautenberg (NJ)

Minority
Senator Arlen Specter (Ranking Member) (PA)
Senator Thad Cochran (MS)
Senator Judd Gregg (NH)
Senator Larry Craig (ID)
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX)
Senator Ted Stevens (AK)
Senator Richard Shelby (AL)

NCLB reauthorization
The House Education and Labor Committee could begin considering a draft reauthorization bill as early as mid-June. In the Senate, Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Chairman Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) also hopes to have a reauthorization bill ready for consideration by late July. These base introduction bills will provide the main framework of the reauthorization.

On May 16, members of the House Education and Labor Committee held a bipartisan meeting to hear recommendations and concerns from other members of Congress on ways to improve the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Chairman Miller’s press release about the meeting is available at: http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/edlabor_dem/RelMay16NCLB.html .

Look for prospective changes to current law in the following areas:
• Teacher quality
• Teacher preparation
• AYP
• Sanctions
• Assessments
IRA’s recommendations for NCLB can be found on the IRA website.

Striving Readers S.958 and H.R. 2289
IRA has been working for several years to create an adolescent literacy initiative. We have been working with the National Association of Secondary School Principals and the Alliance for Excellent Education has worked for the past year to expand the Striving Readers program. This Act will authorize adolescent literacy grants to be awarded to states on a formula basis according to poverty levels and 8th grade NAEP reading scores. Local districts will be able to use these funds to develop schoolwide literacy plans and provide professional development in core academic subjects.

Striving Readers Bills have been introduced in both the Senate (S. 958 on March 22) and House (H.R. 2289 on May 14)

Has your Representative become a House co-sponsor?
Sponsors to date Representatives John Yarmuth (D-KY) Todd Platts (R-PA)
Boyd (D-FL), Chandler (D-KY), Hínojosa (D-TX), McGovern (D-WA), Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rogers (R-AL), Bonner (R-AL), Regula (R-OH), Grijalva (D-AZ), Altmire (D-PA), Hirono (D-HI), Davis (D-IL), Payne (D-NJ), Hare (D-IL), Clark (D-NY)

If not please contact them and urge then to become a cosponsor. House website:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.shtml

Has your Senator become a co-sponsor?
Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Senator Patty Murray (D-WA)
Cosponsors: Senators Kerry, Cochran, Akaka, Lott, Dodd, Burr, Bingaman, Lincoln, Domenici, Isakson, Durbin, Harkin, Murkowski, Brown and Bayh

If not please contact them and urge then to become a cosponsor.
Senate website: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

The Teach Act H.R. 2204 S.1339
Introduced by Chairman Kennedy in the Senate and Chairman Miller in the House to improve recruitment, preparation, distribution and retention of teachers and principals. This is an important initiative that can make a big difference. Please write your member of Congress to ask for their support.

TEACH Grants Undergraduate grants up to $16,000 and graduate grants up to $8,000 for teachers who teach for 4 years within an 8 year period in the following fields:
Math, science, foreign language, bilingual education, or special education or a reading specialist or another field documented by the federal government. Reading is considered a high need subject.
• Graduated loan forgiveness for Reading Specialists
• Career ladder Teacher Program Grant to LEA’s
• Federal augmentation of pay ($4,000 - 10,000) for mentors, coaches, school leadership teams
• Teacher Centers
• Provide intensive professional development and support to improve instruction
• Tax relief on added compensation for high needs subject teachers and principals.

Portions of this bill are expected to be included in Title II of NCLB reauthorization, Title II of HEA reauthorization and a tax bill.

To support this bill contact your Senator or Representative:
Senate: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
House: http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.shtml

Adult Ed – Higher Education – Head Start
In addition the Congress is working on several other reauthorizations that will impact the literacy community. Congress is currently considering legislation to reauthorize and improve the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, Title II of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998. This act is important to family literacy because the law specifies family literacy as an option to meet adult education and literacy needs. One of the purposes of the act is to "assist adults who are parents to obtain the educational skills necessary to become full partners in the educational development of their children." Family literacy programs are eligible providers under this law. The provisions of the act are administered by the U.S. Department of Education.

The "Improving Head Start Act of 2007" passed the House with a bipartisan vote of 365-48 on May 2, 2007. H.R. 1429 will help more children arrive at kindergarten ready to succeed by improving program quality and expanding access to more children. The bill:
*Improves Classroom and Teacher Quality –Requires each Head Start agency to ensure that all of its teachers receive ongoing training in language and emergent literacy.
*Expands Access – Authorizes $450 million in new funding for fiscal year 2008 which would provide up to 10,000 more children access to the program.
* Strengthens the Focus on School Readiness – Ensures all programs use research-based practices to support the growth of children’s pre-literacy and vocabulary skills.
* Ends Inappropriate Testing of 4-Year Olds - Prohibits further use of the National Reporting System.
*Promotes Stronger Accountability
* Ensures Parental Participation in Program Governance
*Fortifies Comprehensive Services – Places greater emphasis on early identification of child and family mental health needs

The reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (HEA) was last renewed in 1998. Many of the law’s provisions were set to expire in 2003, but Congress has passed renewals to extend the measure to June 30, 2007. The legislation authorizes many federal higher education programs, including Pell Grants, student loans, and initiatives in teacher education.

Title II of HEA provides funding to improve the quality of teacher education programs and to recruit teachers to serve in high-need schools. Title II of the No Child Left Behind law provides grants to states to improve teacher quality and reduce class sizes. The reauthorization of the two laws provides Congress an opportunity to consider whether they are aligned with respect to teacher preparation.

In closing... a call to action….
This update contains several requests for action. Please look to see which committee your member of Congress is on and write them on the issue that they are addressing this month.

If you have only one issue to write on, choose the Teach Act. It is unique in that it makes reading specialists an area of national need – for the first time - and provides resources that can be built on. Calling a Congressional office can be as easy as 202-225-3121 and asking for your member of Congress or Senator. It takes only a few moments. Each call or letter counts.

If you have any questions, please feel free to call the Washington Office of IRA at 202-624 -8800 or irawash@reading.org.

Write your Congressman to cosponsor the Striving Readers Act

2007-05-15T12:06:00.000-04:00

Write your Congressman to cosponsor the Striving Readers Act
In February, IRA asked you to contact your senators and urge them to become cosponsors of the Striving Readers Act (S. 958), and your efforts have truly paid off. The legislation now has 16 bipartisan cosponsors in addition to the bill’s original sponsors, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA).

On May 14, Rep. John Yarmuth (D-KY) and Rep. Todd Platts (R-PA) introduced similar legislation (H.R. 2289) in the U.S. House of Representatives, and IRA is again asking you to reach out to your members of Congress.

In the past year, IRA, along with the National Association of Secondary School Principals, and the Alliance for Excellent Education, has advocated for an expansion of the Striving Readers program. Initiated by President Bush in 2004, Striving Readers aims to enhance the overall level of reading achievement in middle level and high schools through improvements to the quality of literacy instruction across the curriculum, improve the literacy skills of struggling adolescent readers, and help build a strong scientific research base around specific strategies that improve adolescent literacy skills.

Although never authorized by Congress, Striving Readers received more than $30 million in FY 2007. However, this funding level only supports grants in eight school districts and is not nearly enough to address the more than 8 million students in grades 4–12 who read below grade level. In fact, the U.S. Department of Education received 148 applications for those eight grants, showing that there is a clear need for an additional investment. Although the federal government allocates more than $1 billion annually for the Reading First program ($72 per child in grades K–3), only 13 cents is provided for each middle level and high school student.

The Striving Readers Act would authorize $200 million in FY 2007 with annual increases up to $1 billion in FY 2011 for grants that would be awarded to states on a formula basis according to poverty levels and eighth-grade reading scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Local districts could then use these funds to develop schoolwide literacy plans and provide professional development for school leaders and teachers in core academic subjects to create “a culture of literacy” within the schools.

Please contact your representative and encourage him or her to cosponsor the Striving Readers Act (H.R. 2289). Although a draft form letter has been provided for you, it is suggested that you personalize the message with stories from your own school.

If your Reprsentative has already sponsored H.R. 2289, please send them a thank you note.

H.R. 2289: Sponsored by Rep. John Yarmuth (D-KY) and Rep. Todd Platts (R-PA)
Cosponsors as of May 15, 2007: Boyd (D-FL), Chandler (D-KY), Hínojosa (D-TX), McGovern (D-WA), Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rogers (R-AL), Bonner (R-AL), Regula (R-OH), Grijalva (R-AZ), Altmire (D-PA), Hirono (D-HI)

Personalize areas in bold

Date
The Honorable NAME
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr/Mrs. NAME:

I am a (Fill in your title/occupation) working at (your school) in (city/state). I ask you to become a co-sponsor of H.R. 2289 The Striving Readers Act of 2007 which was introduced on May 14, 2007 in the United States House of Representatives by Congressman John Yarmuth and Congressman Todd Plats.

This bill will vastly expand the capacity of schools to help older students who struggle with reading by establishing adolescent literacy initiatives aimed at increasing high school graduation and college readiness.

As a teacher I see everyday the need for additional reading instruction for my students. (Give very short personal example of how funds could be used to)
• increase the number of student receiving instruction
• increase the number of middle and high schools in your district who could implement adolescent literacy into their curriculum.
• increase the number of teachers in professional development courses
• any other ideas

This legislation will expand and authorize the current Striving Readers Program that funds only eight grants. The Striving Readers Act of 2007 (H.R. 2289) will make funding available to every state to implement school wide adolescent literacy programs, support statewide initiates, and allow data collection and rigorous evaluation to document program success. In addition, this bill will prepare teachers to incorporate literacy strategies in core academic classes and will assist parents by training them to support their children’s literacy development.
Every child has the right to quality reading instruction by a qualified reading professional. Please support the Striving Readers Act of 2007 (H.R. 2289).

Thank you,
Name
School
Address
Phone

First Lady Endorses Yarmuth's Striving Readers Act

2007-05-14T15:14:00.000-04:00

Congressman John Yarmuth

Representing Kentucky's 3rd Congressional District

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday May 14, 2007

MEDIA CONTACT

Stuart Perelmuter 202.225.5401

First Lady Endorses Yarmuth's Striving Readers Act
Legislation, Introduced Today, Focuses on Youth Literacy

(Washington, DC) Today, Congressman John Yarmuth (KY-3) introduced legislation that, by 2012, will work to improve lagging literacy levels for students in grades 4 - 12. The bill, which Congressman Yarmuth hopes will be a key piece of the reauthorized No Child Left Behind law, received an unexpected endorsement at the 'National Summit on America's Silent Epidemic' from First Lady Laura Bush.

"[No Child Left Behind] will expand the Striving Readers program, which uses research-based instruction to help middle and high school students read at grade level or better..." the First Lady said from the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center last week. "By learning to read well, these students were preparing for every other subject -- for history, for math, for science, for language, for art. They were building a strong academic foundation for high school and college, and for the rest of their lives."

Seventy percent of America's middle and high school students read below their grade level, putting them in danger of dropping out of school. Research shows that the Striving Readers pilot program makes great strides in bringing students up to speed and helping them master college preparatory material.

The program would create a 5-year grant program to help states and local education agencies establish literacy programs. States and schools would use these funds to create school literacy teams, provide adolescent literacy training for teachers and school leaders, improve reading curriculum, and involve parents in adolescent literacy instruction. The legislation is modeled after the Striving Readers pilot program, which serves eight districts nationwide, including one in Danville, Kentucky.

Currently, nearly $4 billion is spent annually on remedial education, but Yarmuth's legislation would reach children earlier, ensuring that they have the resources, personal attention, and parental involvement they need to address the problem early.

"The Striving Readers pilot program has been very effective, right here in Kentucky, at helping students, who are on the verge of dropping out of high school, graduate and become legitimate candidates for a full college education," Congressman Yarmuth said of the bill which has already received broad bipartisan support and has been endorsed by the National Education Association, the Kentucky Reading Association, the National Association of Secondary School Principals, and dozens of other education organizations and professional associations.

Brenda Overturf, President of the Kentucky Reading Association recently presented Congressman Yarmuth with a stack of letters from educators in the community, thanking him for his commitment and initiative in the area of education. "This bill will make a tremendous impact in literacy nationwide, and I am so thankful to be represented by Congressman Yarmuth, who has taken the initiative to make it happen."

The bill will be referred to committee and Congressman Yarmuth is hoping to include the bill in the No Child Left Behind reauthorization this summer.

###

FY 2008 Senate Budget Resolution: Education

2007-03-15T14:30:00.000-04:00

The FY 2008 Senate Budget Resolution rejects the President’s proposed cuts in education and training and adds significant new resources for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), No Child Left Behind Act, and Pell grants. It provides an increase for discretionary funding for the Department of Education of $6.1 billion (including $2 billion in additional 2009 advance appropriations) above the President’s request.

From: SUMMARY, FY 2008 SENATE BUDGET RESOLUTION
PREPARED BY: DEMOCRATIC STAFF, SENATE BUDGET COMMITTEE
March 14, 2007, http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/documents/2007/BudRes08summary031407.pdf

NCLB update

2007-03-08T11:39:00.000-05:00

NCLB
Reauthorization hearings are scheduled for March and April. A bi cameral (both Senate and House) hearing on NCLB issues is scheduled for March 13th. Witnesses: Roy Barnes - Aspen Institute Commission on No Child Left Behind; Elizabeth Burmaster - Council of Chief State School Officers; Mike Casserley - Council of Great City Schools; Wade Henderson - Leadership Conference on Civil Rights; Ed McElroy - American Federation of Teachers; Arthur J. Rothkopf - Business Coalition for Student Achievement; Reg Weaver - National Education Association

Future Hearings Topics: High school reform, AYP, teacher quality, special education, ELL. Field Hearings throughout the country are expected in the spring. The Senate and the House hope to have NCLB reauthorization bills introduced before the August recess.

Funding
On March 13, Secretary Margaret Spellings will testify before the House Labor, Health & Human Services and Education (L, H&HS&ED) Appropriation sub committee. The Secretary will testify on the President’s budget proposal for education for FY08. The budget was released in early February. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/pdf/appendix/edu.pdf

Since no appropriations bill for L, H&HS&ED has been passed, a continuing resolution* (CR) will fund education programs for FY07. The suggested levels for FY07 are based on continuing funding at FY06 levels. The Department of Education is expected to release program funding levels within 30 days.

Higher Education
The Senate hopes to introduce the higher education reauthorization in early summer with the House to follow in late summer. The Higher Education Act governs all federal policy concerning teacher preparation programs.

Head Start
The Senate has reported out of committee its Head Start reauthorization S556 which calls for more prewriting, prereading skills and prenumeracy skills to be included in Head Start curriculum. A summary will be posted to the blog, when completed. The House is expected to introduce its version of Reauthorization within the month.

House to move NCLB in 2007

2007-02-22T14:13:00.000-05:00

February 22, 2007 – Today the Democratic staff of the Education and Labor Committee of the House of Representatives met with representatives of the education and civil rights communities to talk about their plans for the upcoming reauthorization of NCLB. The tentative hearing schedule has three hearings in March – looking at topics such as AYP, special education and NCLB, and ELL and NCLB. While the dates and topics are subject to change the first one may be on March 21st at the full committee level. The staff said that the chairman is interested in several core elements of NCLB being retained – closing the achievement gap and universal proficiency among them. The chairman has been visiting schools around the nation and is well aware that there are statutory and implementation issues that need to be addressed in reauthorization. He is hoping to get a bill through the House by the end of this calendar year.

Sample letter to your Senator re Striving Readers (S.958)

2007-02-21T19:16:00.000-05:00

IRA, along with the National Association of Secondary School Principals and the Alliance for Excellent Education has worked for the past year to expand the Striving Readers program. This bill will authorize adolescent literacy grants to be awarded to states on a formula basis according to poverty levels and 8th grade NAEP reading scores. Local districts will be able to use these funds to develop schoolwide literacy plans and provide professional development in core academic subjects.

Striving Readers Act (S.958) was introduced March 22nd by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA). IRA helped draft this legislation and IRA’s Legislative Action Team made Hill visits on February 16th seeking support for this bill. To follow-up the efforts of IRA’s LAT, we need you to send letters to your Senators asking them to sign on as co-sponsors to the Striving Readers Act today. Please see sample letter below.

IMPORTANT
Adapt this to make it your own.
Be sure to personalize the areas in bold.

The Honorable Senator ???
address
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator ?????:
On behalf of the (fill in number of IRA members in your state) members of the (your state’s name) Reading Association we ask you to sign on as a co-sponsor for the the Striving Readers Act of 2007 (S. 958). Senators Jeff Sessions and Patty Murray crafted a bill that will help improve student achievement in adolescent literacy for middle level and high school students by establishing adolescent literacy initiatives aimed at increasing high school graduation and college readiness. The legislation will expand and authorize the current Striving Readers Program. Senators Sessions and Murray have already sent you a "Dear Colleague" letter requesting your support. We urge you to sign on to the Striving Readers Act of 2007 (S. 958).

The (fill in your state’s name) Reading Association represents a community of 90,000 reading professionals that include reading specialists, university professors, literacy coaches, classroom teachers, reading researchers, and librarians. As educators we experience first hand the results of students with inadequate reading instruction at the secondary level.

(Fill in number or percentage) of 8th graders in our state read below basic standards according to state assessment tests. This means they can’t (Fill in a short example of insufficient skills).

(Then give a short example from your state or district re how funds could be used if you were awarded a grant. This should be very short. The entire letter should be one page.)

We know that given the right instruction and opportunity every child can learn to read and achieve at his or her highest level. We hope that you agree that this investment in the future of millions of young Americans is critical to the economic future of our country. Please support the Striving Readers Act of 2007 by signing on as a co-sponsor.

Sincerely,
Your name
The (fill in your state’s name) Reading Association
Address and contact information

President's FY08 budget request

2007-02-05T11:11:00.000-05:00

President Bush released his budget request for FY08. Below is a summary of the request.

SUPPORTING NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND REAUTHORIZATION
The request would provide $24.5 billion to support the Administration's reauthorization proposal for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This proposal would provide additional resources at the high school level, encourage more rigorous instruction and coursework in our middle and high schools, make available more meaningful choice options to students in low-performing schools, and significantly increase the resources available to States and LEAs to support school improvement efforts, particularly through a stronger emphasis on fundamental staffing and governance changes in schools undergoing restructuring. These and other reauthorization changes are discussed in more detail in the section on Elementary and Secondary Education. Key parts of the request that support the reauthorization include:
• $13.9 billion for Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies, an increase of $1.2 billion, or 9.4 percent, primarily to drive more Title I funding to high schools so that they have the resources to implement the reforms and interventions that are working to improve achievement at the elementary level.
• $500 million in first-time funding for Title I School Improvement Grants to support strong and effective State leadership in helping to turn around low-performing schools and school districts. Funds would be evenly split between building State capacity to lead LEA and school improvement efforts and additional resources for LEAs working to turn around low-performing schools.
• $411.6 million for State Assessment Grants to maintain support for strong State assessment systems and support the development and implementation of 2 years of high school assessments that would be required by the Administration's reauthorization proposal for Title I.
• $300 million to expand private school choice and tutoring options for America's students and families, including $250 million for Promise Scholarships, a new formula program to give low-income students in restructuring schools the opportunity to transfer to private schools or public schools in other districts, or to obtain intensive tutoring; and $50 million for Opportunity Scholarships, which would award competitive grants to a broad range of entities, including municipalities, non-profit organizations, and other entities, to carry out innovative programs that give students in low-performing schools the opportunity to transfer to another public or private school or obtain intensive supplemental services.
• A $365 million increase to support the American Competitiveness Initiative by strengthening the capacity of our schools to improve instruction in mathematics and science:
o $125 million for the Math Now for Elementary School Students initiative, modeled after Reading First, to implement proven practices in math instruction, including those that will be recommended by the National Math Panel, that focus on preparing K-6 students for more rigorous math courses in middle and high school.
o $125 million for a new Math Now for Middle School Students initiative, based on the principles of the Striving Readers program, to support research-based math interventions in middle schools.
o A $90 million increase for Advanced Placement to provide a new emphasis on training teachers and expanding opportunities for students, particularly in high-poverty schools, to take high-level Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses in math, science, and critical foreign languages.
o $25 million for the Adjunct Teacher Corps to create opportunities for qualified professionals from outside the K-12 educational system to teach secondary-school courses in the core academic subjects, with an emphasis on mathematics and the sciences.
• A $68.4 million increase for the Striving Readers program, funded for the first time in fiscal year 2005, to significantly expand the development and implementation of research-based interventions to improve the skills of teenage students who are reading below grade level.
• $1.0 billion for Reading First State Grants and $117.7 million for Early Reading First to maintain support for comprehensive reading instruction, grounded in scientifically based reading research, that enables all young children to read well by the end of third grade. The request for Early Reading First, which consolidates this program with the Early Childhood Educator Professional Development program, would also help strengthen partnerships between preschool providers and institutions of higher education that provide professional development to early childhood educators.
• $2.8 billion for Improving Teacher Quality State Grants to help States ensure that all teachers of core academic subjects are highly qualified and to strengthen teachers' subject-matter knowledge and teaching skills.
• $199 million for the Teacher Incentive Fund to expand support for State and local efforts to develop and implement performance-based financial incentives for teachers and principals. This program helps close the equity gap in access to the best teachers and principals by rewarding those who raise student achievement, close achievement gaps, and work in hard-to-staff schools.
Link to Department of Education budget request:

http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget08/summary/edlite-section2a.html#title1lea

NCLB NEWS

2007-02-05T11:08:00.000-05:00

NCLB “Insiders” Forecast Delay in Reauthorization, Minor Tweaks to Legislation
In January, the Thomas B. Fordham foundation released the results of a survey of “Washington insiders” on No Child Left Behind reauthorization. According to the survey, those often considered to be “in the know” on NCLB don’t believe its reauthorization will occur until at least 2009. 11 out of 12 respondents chose “2009 or later” for the timing of NCLB reauthorization, but one did predict it would occur this year. Additionally, most respondents believed that the law would only undergo relatively minor changes based mostly on ongoing NCLB related initiatives at the Department. For more information:http://www.edexcellence.net/doc/CrystalAppleNCLBBrief.pdf

Commission on Civil Rights to Examine SESThe U.S. Commission on Civil Rights announced it will convene three expert panels on the implementation of the supplemental education services (SES) provisions of NCLB. The panel discussions will take place on February 26 and the Commission is seeking public comment until that date. Each panel will feature experts, school officials, and parents. A number of experts and stakeholders in NCLB will speak at the event, including Eugene Hicock, former deputy secretary of education, superintendents from Detroit, Camden, NJ, and Newark, NJ, and parents from New Jersey, Texas, and Michigan. For more information: http://www.usccr.gov

Business Roundtable, US Chamber Form Coalition for NCLB Reauthorization
The Business Roundtable and U.S. Chamber of Commerce have formed a coalition in order to facilitate the reauthorization of NCLB this year. The Business Coalition for Student Achievement is co-chaired by Craig R. Barrett, Chairman of Intel; Arthur F. Ryan, Chairman and CEO of Prudential Financial, Inc.; and Edward B. Rust Jr., Chairman and CEO of State Farm and promises to use its resources and connections to push for a timely reauthorization of NCLB. For more information: http://www.biz4achievement.org

Bush Ready to Sign Off on Spending Bill

2007-02-01T11:57:00.000-05:00

By ANDREW TAYLOR

The Associated Press
Wednesday, January 31, 2007; 2:42 AM

WASHINGTON -- The White House has signaled its embrace of a $463.5 billion omnibus spending bill, removing doubts that the measure will soon be on President Bush's desk.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/30/AR2007013000391.html

$2.3 billion increase for important health and education programs

2007-01-30T12:19:00.000-05:00

The FY 2007 Joint Funding Resolution filed tonight in the House includes a $2.3 billion increase for important health and education programs over the previous year’s funding level.

The President’s FY 2007 Budget proposed an almost $5 billion cut for programs under the jurisdiction of the Labor, HHS, Education appropriations bill. During the budget resolution debate, the deeming resolution debate, and eventually the markup of the FY 2007 Senate LHHS bill, Senators Harkin and Specter fought not only to restore those funds but to add the additional monies needed to bring those programs back to the FY 2005 level – an increase of $7 billion over the President’s budget. The 109th Congress adjourned without completing the FY 2007 discretionary appropriations bills; as a result those programs need to be funded through this joint funding resolution. This Joint Resolution for FY 2007 includes the funding level requested by Senators Harkin and Specter – a full $2.3 billion above the 2006 continuing resolution level and $7 billon above the President’s FY 2007 budget.

The Joint Funding resolution will include a number of important program increases compared to the FY 2006 funding levels.

Department of Education
• Pell Grants: $13.6 billion, an increase of $615.4 million to increase the maximum Pell grant by $260 to $4,310. This increase – the first in four years – will help over 5.3 million students pay rising college expenses.
• Special Education: $10.7 billion for IDEA Part B state grants, an increase of $200 million to help school districts serve 6.9 million children with disabilities.
• Title I K-12 Grants: $12.8 billion, an increase of $125 million to provide approximately 38,000 additional low-income children performing below grade level with intensive reading and math instruction. This would reverse the decline since 2005 in Title 1 support for elementary and secondary schools – at a time of record enrollments (55 million students in 2006) and pressures for more accountability from No Child Left Behind requirements.
• Title I School Improvement Fund: $125 million for this new program to target assistance to the 6,700 schools that failed to meet No Child Left Behind requirements in the 2005-2006 school year, enabling them to implement improvement activities, such as teacher training, tutoring programs, and curriculum upgrades. The Education Department reports that 80% of high-poverty districts cannot afford these improvements.
• Head Start: $6.9 billion, an increase of $103.7 million to help prevent a drop in Head Start enrollments. Since 2002, Head Start has been cut by 11 percent in real terms, which has forced centers across the country to cut hours, transportation, and educational instruction in order to sustain enrollments.

Subcommittee Chiefs Named for House Education Panel

2007-01-24T14:07:00.000-05:00

Subcommittee Chiefs Named for House Education Panel
Ed Week
Published: January 24, 2007
NEWS IN BRIEF: A WASHINGTON ROUNDUP
Rep. George Miller, D-Calif, the new chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, announced his subcommittee chairmen last week, including those whose jurisdiction includes education. A few subcommittees were also given new names. Meanwhile, Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon of California, the ranking Republican on the committee, announced the ranking members of the subcommittees.
Rep. Dale E. Kildee, D-Mich., will lead the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education, which has jurisdiction over federal K-12 education policy. The panel was called the Education Reform Subcommittee under the Republican majority. Rep. Michael N. Castle, R-Del., will be the ranking member.
Rep. Rubén Hinojosa, D-Texas, will lead the Subcommittee on Higher Education, Lifelong Learning, and Competitiveness, which was known as the 21st Century Competitiveness Subcommittee in the last Congress. Rep. Ric Keller, R-Fla., will be the ranking member.
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., will oversee the Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities, known before as the Select Education Subcommittee. The ranking member is Rep. Todd R. Platts, R-Pa. The panel handles juvenile justice and homeless youth, among other issues.

President's State of Union Speech: Education Policy

2007-01-23T15:24:00.000-05:00

(Read more at http://www.whitehouse.gov/stateoftheunion/2007/initiatives/education.html)

"We Must Help Teachers Close The Achievement Gap Through Incentives For Effective Teachers And Research-Based Instructional Tools.

We Will Expand The Teacher Incentive Fund. The Teacher Incentive Fund supports State and local efforts to reward teachers who raise student achievement and work in needy schools.
We Will Retain The Successful Reading First Program And Expand The Striving Readers Program To Ensure Students Have The Literacy Skills They Need To Make Academic Progress. Reading First is the largest, most focused, and most successful early reading initiative ever undertaken in this country. To date, more than 5,600 schools in 1,600 districts nationwide have participated in this program. The Striving Readers Program funds targeted, intensive intervention and quality literacy instruction in school curricula for grades 6-12."

IRA signs on to anti-voucher letter

2006-12-07T13:51:00.000-05:00

The National Coalition
for
Public Education

December 6, 2006
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator:

This week, legislation to expand or dramatically alter the District of Columbia private school voucher “pilot” program may be attached as a part of other year-end legislation, such as a Continuing Resolution to fund government agencies or a tax-extenders package. The undersigned education, civil, labor, civil rights, and religious organizations that comprise the National Coalition for Public Education (NCPE) strongly oppose any efforts to expand the program or to increase the income cap for participation in it. We urge you to reject any such change or expansion to this pilot program.

As previously passed by Congress, the D.C. voucher program is open to students whose family income does not exceed 185 percent of the national poverty level (NPL). Students are allowed to continue in the program if their family income does not exceed 200 percent of NPL. The fact that the program is fully subscribed demonstrates the emptiness of claims that any modification to the cap – or outright elimination of any income threshold – is needed. Furthermore, such a modification would undermine the purported objective of this five-year pilot program: to serve low-income students. We also believe that altering the income cap could damage the integrity of the pilot program that currently is under a Congressionally mandated evaluation.

The undersigned organizations appreciate your attention to these concerns and strongly urge you to oppose any efforts to raise, or eliminate, the income cap for the D.C. private school voucher program.

Sincerely,

American Association of School Administrators
American Association of University Women
American Civil Liberties Union
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
American Federation of Teachers
American Jewish Committee
Americans United for Separation of Church and State
Association of Education Service Agencies
Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty
Council of Great City Schools
International Reading Association
Hadassah, the Women's Zionist Organization of America
National Alliance of Black School Educators
National Association of Elementary School Principals
National Association of Secondary School Principals
National Association of State Directors of Special Education
National Education Association
National PTA
National Rural Education Advocacy Coalition
National School Boards Association
People For the American Way
The Interfaith Alliance
Union for Reform Judaism
Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations
United Auto Workers
United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries
Women of Reform Judaism

Congressional Appropriations Action - Postponed

2006-11-21T16:16:00.000-05:00

The Associated Press reports that Senate leaders have decided to push back consideration of remaining FY 07 spending measures until the 110th Congress convenes in January. This leaves the Department of Education funded at current year levels until further consideration.
This means that all of the current programs will maintain their funding at last year’s level. When the 110th Congress convenes on January 3rd, the Democrats will be responsible for completing the appropriations process.

Funding Amendment - call for sign ons to a Dear Colleague

2006-09-30T10:16:00.000-04:00

The overall education funding for the fiscal year (FY) 07 is slated to be cut – but we are hoping for a Specter – Harkin amendment to restore funding to FY05 levels.

Contact your Senator’s Office ask him/her to sign the Specter-Harkin “Dear Colleague” letter requesting an additional $7 billion for the Labor, Health & Human Services and Education appropriations bill (the federal education funding bill). A “Dear Colleague” letter is a request by a member to other members asking for their support.

Capital Switchboard 202-225-2121 Tell them your members name, they will connect you to the office.

The following Senators have already signed the Dear Colleague letter, call and thank them for supporting additional funding for the appropriations bill.
Republicans
DeWine
Snowe
Lugar
Collins
Chafee
Smith
Coleman
Roberts
Hatch
Burns
Murkowski

Democrats
Harkin
Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Cantwell
Carper
Clinton
Dayton
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Menendez
Mikulski Murray
Nelson,
Nelson
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sarbanes
Schumer
Stabenow
Wyden

Higher Education Act

2006-09-26T11:32:00.000-04:00

The House will extend the Higher Education Act until June of 2007. The Higher Education Act, last fully reauthorized in 1998 (PL 105-244), governs all federal aid to students and their colleges, including student loans, Pell and other grants, and campus-based aid such as Perkins loans and work-study programs. The extension is the fifth to be considered during the 109th Congress. The current extension expires Sept. 30.

Call Washington Week

2006-09-20T10:49:00.000-04:00

September 18 - 22, 2006

IRA is a member of the Committee for Education Funding (CEF), a group of over 100 national education groups urging members in the House and Senate to support a $7 billion increase in the education funding. The $7 billion increase would bring FY07 to FY05 levels. (Programs affected: Title I, IDEA, research and other reading programs)

Federal spending on education has been declining since FY05. In 2005 total federal education spending was $56. 5 billion and Title I was $12.739 billion.

In FY06 total federal spending (excluding hurricane relief ) was $55.9 billion. Title I spending was $12,713 billion, a funding loss of $26.4 million to the largest federally funded program to disadvantaged schools.

The proposed education budgets for 2007 call for less education spending than for 2006. That is why IRA and CEF members are joining together to highlight the need for additional funds. Education groups from all over the country will be participating in “Call Washington Week.”

A final vote on the appropriations bill is not expected until after the November elections.

CEF has designated September 18 – 22 Call Washington Week.

Toll-free 1-800-459-1887*

During the week of September 18 – 22 calls can be made to 1 – 800 – 459-1887.
Ask to speak to your Representative or Senator. This number will allow you to contact both the House and Senate. (If you don’t know who your representative is, the people at the switchboard can tell you. Or visit www.congress.org where you can insert your home address and identify your member.)

Placing a call
State your name and where you live including your zip-code.

Ask the Senator to support an increase of $7 billion in the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and related Agencies Appropriations bill S.3708 (Senate funding bill number)

Ask your Congressman in the House to support an increase of $7 billion in the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and related Agencies Appropriations bill HR. 5647 (House funding bill number)

Email
www.house.gov
www.senate.gov

* The toll-free number is provided courtesy of the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker organization whose work for social justice, peace and humanitarian service includes campaigns for a moral budget and a fair minimum wage. AFSC welcomes groups to circulate and use the toll free number in support of non-partisan budget goals and without linking the alert to a website soliciting donations or actions which may support partisan lobbying or work.

Senate Cuts Reading First.

2006-08-02T13:09:00.000-04:00

Read details below. We will keep you informed.

On July 20th, the Senate appropriations full-committee approved the FY07 Labor-HHS-Education funding bill (HR 5647) by voice vote with $55.8 billion for education.

Senator Byrd (D-WV) offered the only amendment which would have increased Title I funding by $6.1 billion. The amendment failed by voice vote.

Chairman Specter (R-PA) indicated his great disappointment with the funding levels, “constituting what I view as really the disintegration of the appropriate federal role of health, education and worker protections.”

Senator Harkin (D-IA), ranking member, stated that he would work with Senator Specter to add $2 billion more to the bill later in the process.

All numbers are in millions.

Program Increase

Striving Readers +$5.3

Title I- School Improvement +$100

Math and Science Partnerships +$12.8

Advanced Placement Fees +$7.8

Arts in Education +$1.2

Elminated Programs:

Even Start -$99

Comprehensive School Reform -$7.9

State Grants for Innovative Education Programs (title V) -$99

Credit Enhancement for Charter School Facilities -$36.6

Dropout Prevention -$4.9

Smaller Learning Communities -$93.5

Programs Cuts

Reading First State Grants --$29.2

Early Reading First -$3.1

Improving Teacher Quality State Grants -$140

Javis Gifted and Talented -$4.6

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities, national programs -$10.0

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities, state grants -$36.5

Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants -$2.9

Reading First - US Department of Education Report

2006-08-02T11:41:00.000-04:00

July 24, 2006 US Dept. of Ed. Press Release- New Report Shows Progress in Reading First Implementation and Changes in Reading Instruction:
Children in Reading First classrooms receive significantly more reading instruction and schools participating in the program are much more likely to have a reading coach, according to the Reading First Implementation Evaluation: Interim Report, released today by the U.S. Department of Education. The report shows significant differences between what Reading First teachers report about their instructional practices and the responses of teachers in non-Reading First Title I schools, which are demographically similar to the Reading First schools.
"The goal of Reading First is to help teachers translate scientific insights into practical tools they can use in their classrooms," Secretary Spellings said. "The program is helping millions of children and providing teachers with high-quality, research-based support. As we push towards our ultimate goal of every child reading and doing math on grade level by 2014, Reading First is a valuable help to our efforts."
The report shows Reading First schools appear to be implementing the major elements of the program as intended by the No Child Left Behind legislation. Reading First respondents reported that they made substantial changes to their reading materials and that the instruction is more likely to be aligned with scientifically based reading research; they are more likely to have scheduled reading blocks and spend more time teaching reading; they are more likely to apply assessment results for instructional purposes, and they receive professional development focused on helping struggling readers more often than non-Reading First Title I schools in the evaluation.
The report is based on data collected from surveys completed in spring 2005 by 6,200 K-3 teachers, 1,570 principals and 1,320 reading coaches in nationally representative samples of 1,090 Reading First schools and 540 non-Reading First Title I schools and from interviews with Reading First state coordinators and reviews of states' applications for Reading First awards. As of July 2006, states have awarded sub-grants to approximately 1,600 local school districts, and these districts have provided funds to 5,300 schools nationwide. A final report in 2008 will include data on changes in student reading achievement in Reading First schools.
Highlights of the report include:
· Teachers in Reading First schools reported, on average, they spent significantly more time on reading than did teachers in non-Reading First Title I schools—a difference of about 19 minutes per day, or about 100 minutes per week.
· Reading First teachers were significantly more likely than their counterparts in non-Reading First Title I schools to place their struggling students in intervention programs.
· Reading First schools were significantly more likely to have a reading coach to support teachers in the implementation of their reading programs than were non-Reading First Title I schools.
· Teachers in Reading First schools were more likely to report applying assessment results for varied instructional purposes (e.g., for planning, grouping, progress monitoring and identifying struggling readers) than their non-Reading First Title I counterparts.
The full text of Reading First Implementation Evaluation is available online at http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html#reading.

Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act

2006-08-02T11:40:00.001-04:00

Passage Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act:
Secretary Spellings on July 29th, 2006 made the following statement on the reauthorization of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act:
"Congress deserves credit for making some needed reforms to the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education program. For the first time, Career and Technical Education [CTE] programs will be held accountable for continuous improvement in performance, measured by the academic proficiency of CTE students. Success will be determined through valid and reliable tests, including No Child Left Behind assessments in reading, math and science. These changes will help ensure that students graduate with the academic skills valued by employers and colleges alike. We now look forward to working with Congress to promote accountability, high standards and rigorous coursework in our high schools, essential to staying competitive in the global economy."

Title I/ELL

2006-08-02T11:40:00.000-04:00

U.S. Department of Education Regulations on Title I (ELL flexibility:

U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings today (July 27, 2006) announced a partnership with states to improve and develop fair and accurate testing designed for limited English proficient (LEP) students.
"The goal of No Child Left Behind is to give every child in America a great education and a successful start in life. This new initiative will increase the visibility of limited English proficient students and enable schools to more accurately measure their progress," Spellings said. "The 5.4 million LEP students in U.S. schools are our fastest-growing student population and are expected to make up one out of every four students by 2025. Our schools must be prepared to measure what English language learners know and teach them effectively."
Testing is the lynchpin of the No Child Left Behind Act, created to bring every child to grade level in reading and math by 2014. The best tools for this effort are valid and reliable content-based assessments in every state. The U.S. Department of Education will bring together experts from around the country to help states address the challenges of developing high-quality assessments for LEP students. The LEP Partnership with states will improve accommodations and content assessments in reading and mathematics for LEP students.
The Department is immediately inviting approximately 20 states to participate in intensive work on these assessments, but all states are welcome to participate in the LEP Partnership. These states submitted evidence for the Department's 2005-06 peer review of state assessment systems, focused on tests tailored to LEP students. In most cases the tests designed for LEP students have not yet met with full approval under NCLB.
A fact sheet on the LEP Partnership Initiative can be found at: http://www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/english/lepfactsheet.html.

Response to Intervention

2006-08-02T11:38:00.000-04:00

RTI
IDEA final regulations- which include information on RTI - will be released on Thursday, August 3, 2006. These regulations will hopefully be available on the U.S Department of Education webpage that afternoon. Details to follow.

Senate Labor/HHS/ED appropriations

2006-07-19T17:32:00.000-04:00

The Committee for Education funding is reporting the following. Virtually all education programs are funded at the same level as FY06. No programs are eliminated.

The FY07 spending bill provides:
· $12.7 billion for Title I grants to local education agencies.
· $10.6 billion special education grants to states
· $2.7 billion to support state and local efforts to hire and retain "highly qualified" teachers, which is a cut of $140 million from FY06
· $1.1 billion Reading First state grants
· $669 million for English Language Acquisition state grants
· $100 million for states to provide funds for School Improvement grants under NCLB
· $35 million for Striving Readers

The bill includes more than $530 million for programs intended to promote American competitiveness globally, including:
· $195 million for Math and Science Partnerships
· $40 million for Advanced Placement Programs
· Restoration of $272.3 million for Educational Technology State Grants
· $26.2 million for Foreign Language Assistance programs

June 26, 2006 funding report

2006-06-26T13:01:00.000-04:00

June 26, 2006
Budget
The Senate appropriations full committee approved its funding including almost exactly $5 billion more than the President’s requested level for Labor-HHS-Education.

FY06 FY07 President Senate FY07 allocation
$141,200 $137,798 $142,800

The L-HHS-ED appropriations subcommittee has scheduled its “mark up” for July 18 and full committee for July 20.

Budget Reform
House passed H.R. 4890, Legislative Line Item Veto Act, giving the President the authority to cancel certain discretionary, mandatory and tax expenditures subject to congressional approval within 45 days of passage.

The Senate Budget Committee approved Senator Gregg’s comprehensive budget reform bill, including a line item veto provision.

Definitions:
Mark up – process in a committee of analyzing a piece of legislation and making changes.

June 21, 2006

HEA Reauthorization
(Higher Education Act dealing with teacher preparation, college costs, loans, and grants.)
Both Senate and House voted to extend HEA until September 30, 2006. The Senate version of the legislation (S 1614) was approved by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee last summer but has not advanced. A HELP spokesman said Democratic and Republican staff is still negotiating the bill. Sen. Kennedy (D-MA) would like to offer amendments on the floor that would reopen debate on student loan programs, which Democrats say were cut too deeply as part of the budget-cutting law.

Perkins Reauthorization
(Career and technical education with stronger focus on academics.)
The long-stalled Perkins reauthorization bill could see action in the summer of 2006. In early June 2006, Senate and House leaders said they planned to appoint a conference committee to hash out differences between the HR 366 and S 250 within the next two weeks, a House committee chairman and congressional aides said.
Education and the Workforce Chairman Howard P. "Buck" McKeon, (R-CA) discussed the legislation on June 8 with his Senate counterpart, Michael B. Enzi, (R-WY) chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, and said in an interview the next day that he expected conferees to be appointed soon.

Head Start Reauthorization
(Early education program with goal to help children from low-income families enter kindergarten ready to succeed.)
No word on timing.

Workforce Investment Act (WIA)
(WIA superseded the Job Training Partnership Act, offers range of workforce development activities through statewide and local organizations to benefit job seekers, laid off workers, youth, incumbent workers, new entrants to the workforce, veterans, persons with disabilities, and employers.)
Rumor mill has it this won’t see floor action this year.

Funding
(Approval of federal taxpayer dollars for various undertakings.)
President signed the emergency supplemental. Sen. Specter (R-PA) was the only ‘no’ vote on the emergency supplemental that had a “deeming resolution”* attached ($873 billion). He is unhappy with the funding. There is talk that an additional $5 billion will be available for L, HHS & ED on the Senate side. (The House included $4.1 Billion.) Budget authority 302 (b) allocations are expected next week.
The House budget committee approved a line item recession bill (HR 4890) 24-10. In the Senate Sen. Gregg (R-NH) is proposing budget changes in the Stop Over Spending (SOS) bill. Including:
Budget caps with across the board cuts to enforce the caps starting 2012
A commission to study entitlement growth
A sunset commission
Two-year federal budget

*(Deeming resolution [definition adapted from statement by Sen. Reid, D-NV, 6-14-06]: A deeming resolution is a mechanism for setting the total level of discretionary spending for the upcoming fiscal year, totally apart from the normal budget. It's used only when the normal budget process completely breaks down. The figure provided for the Appropriations Committee is substantially below the amount provided in the Senate budget resolution after significant debate.)

June 14th funding report

2006-06-14T11:27:00.000-04:00

The House Committee on Appropriations passed the Labor, Health & Human Services, Education and related agencies (L-HHS-ED) and related agencies appropriations bill on June 13. Education funding remains unchanged from the amount previously passed by sub-committee on June 7th.

Click here for more details...

Complete tables L-HHS-ED

June 7, 2006 funding report:

2006-06-13T14:47:00.001-04:00

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Committee agreed to a bill that sets total discretionary spending at $141.930 billion. The Department of Education’s budget is $400 million dollars less than FY06, a decrease of 0.7%.

Highlights of the bill: (B=billions, M=millions)

Programs that are funded at the FY06 level
Title I grants to LEA’s $12.7B
Reading First $1.02B
Early Reading First $103M
Striving Readers $35M
Impact Aid $1.2B
National Writing Project $21.5M
Head Start $6.7B
Regional Education Laboratories $65.5M
Vocational Education $1,296B

Programs that received an increase from FY06
IDEA state grants +150.1M making FY07 $11.753B
Title I, School improvements grants +$200M (new funding)
Title V-innovative state grants +$51M FY 07 $150M
Striving Readers +$5.3M FY 07 $35M
Pell Grant Maximum Award +$100 $4,150 (maximum award)
Math and Science Partnerships +$42.8M FY07 $225M
Advance Placement of +$47.8M FY07 $80M

All other higher education programs are level funded, including Trio, Gear Up, LEAP, College Work Study and Perkins loans cancellation.

Programs that received a decrease from FY06
Even Start -$29M FY07 $70M
Smaller Learning Communities -$43.5M FY07 $45.3M
Safe and Drug Free Schools state grants -$36.5M FY07 $310M
Teacher Quality state grants -$300.4M FY07 $2,587B
Comprehensive School Reform -$4.9 M FY07 $3M
School Counselors -$12.65 M FY07 $22M

The bill completely eliminates:
Education Technology State Grants -$272.3M
Drop Out Prevention -$4.5M
Arts in Education -$34M

The bill does not fund the President’s $1.5 billion high school initiative, the opportunity scholarship program, or the competitiveness initiative.

House Budget Resolution Passed

2006-05-19T09:50:00.000-04:00

Early Thursday morning (1 am) May 18th, House Republicans adopted the Fiscal Year 2007 (FY07) House budget resolution by a vote of 218-210.

The House budget resolution sets total discretionary spending at $873 billion, the same as the President’s request. The Senate budget resolution sets the amount at $883.3 billion (includes Specter- Harkin increase of $7.1 billion for L-HHS-ED and $3 billion for home heating).

House moderate republicans have made assurances that the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill will include an increase of $4.1 billion, with an additional $3 billion added when the two Houses meet to finalize a budget resolution bill.

Education Funding - House Action

2006-05-10T10:53:00.000-04:00

The House Budget process has become a battle ground of conflicting priorities. Congressman Mike Castle (R-DE) had been fighting for a $7 billion amendment to the budget process to move money to the Labor-HHS-ED spending committee to bring their allocation up to what they had two years ago. It is unclear if this amendment will move forward when the House votes on its budget resolution Thursday, May 11th.

However, the House appropriation’s committee has voted its own allocation plan without the budget processes guidance. They increased the allocation to the Labor-HHS-ED spending committee by about $4.1 billion over last year’s level.

The next steps are two fold. First the budget resolution will need to move forward in the House and then to work out a joint resolution with the Senate. Parrallel to this, the House appropriators will be moving their spending plans from the overall allocation levels to making decisions about the line-by-line spending on programs.

Full House Budget Action - Support Needed

2006-03-30T15:35:00.000-05:00

Congressman Mike Castle (R-DE) will offer an amendment the week of April 3rd in the House, when budget debate takes place. The Castle amendment will mirror the Specter – Harkin Amendment. The Senate passed the Specter-Harkin amendment restores those cuts by providing an additional $7 billion over the President’s budget request – allowing Congress to fund the FY07 Labor-HHS bill at the level enacted two years ago, in FY05.

Castle told Education and Health advocates Tuesday morning (March 28th) on Capital Hill:

“I will attempt to amend the budget resolution on the House Floor to include $7 billion the Senate added to domestic discretionary and to have 302 2 (b) allocations included in future budgets. My message is clear: I will not vote for a House Budget Resolution that would result in real cuts to critical federal investments in education, health care, housing, veterans’ services, social and community block grants AND encourage my colleagues who share these priorities to do the same.

Please call your House member by April 4th at 202-225-3121 and ask your representative to support the Castle initiative.

House Budget Committee Action

2006-03-29T10:47:00.000-05:00

This is from the Committee for Education Funding (CEF)

Representative DeLauro (D-CT) will offer a $7 billion amendment for increased funding for education, health, and social services at today’s House budget committee mark-up of the FY07 House budget resolution. A vote is expected sometime around 1pm. The amendment is the same as the Specter-Harkin amendment that passed on the Senate floor two weeks ago. See attached talking points.

· Yesterday Rep. Michael Castle (R-DE) held a standing room only rally at the Capitol with education and health advocates to demand $7 billion more in funding for discretionary programs in the House budget resolution.

· Castle is leading an effort, among moderate Republicans to make sure the House budget resolution contains a $7 billion increase for education and health. If it does not, he publicly announced he and other moderates will work to defeat it on the floor.

2006-03-24T16:01:00.001-05:00

House Budget Amendment Pending

2006-03-24T16:01:00.000-05:00

The House Budget Committee is expected to begin working on their spending/revenue plan starting March 29th. It is anticipated that the following week will see the measure on the House floor. Represenative DeLauro (D-CT) has said that she will offer an amendment to restore cuts to education, health and labor programs.The Labor-HHS- ED appropriations bill funds the federal programs that keep America competitive and provide health, education, and job opportunities to those who need it most. But those programs are in danger under the President’s proposed FY07 budget, which would slash $4.2 billion from the FY06 Labor-HHS-ED bill and is $7 billion below the level in the FY05 bill. Just as in the Senate the Specter-Harkin amendment, the DeLauro amendment restores those cuts by providing an additional $7 billion over the President’s budget request – allowing Congress to fund the FY07 Labor-HHS-ED bill at the level enacted two years ago, in FY05. Funding is provided by increasing the cap on FY08 advance appropriations by $7 billion.Key Labor-HHS-ED programs that are endangered by the President’s budgetEducation Programs: The President’s budget eliminates 42 programs, including all the vocational and technical education programs, Educational Technology State Grants, GEAR UP, Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities State Grants, TRIO Talent Search and Upward Bound.Student Financial Aid: The President’s budget freezes the maximum Pell Grant award at $4,050, the same amount as four years ago, while tuition costs have risen dramatically.National Institutes of Health: The President’s budget cuts funding for 18 of the 19 institutes at NIH. Funding for cancer research would be cut by $40 million.Human Services for the Poor: The President’s budget cuts the Social Services Block Grant by $500 million and completely eliminates the Community Services Block Grant.The Senate budget resolution says it has more funding for health and education than the President’s budget does. Yet it includes the same total amount for discretionary spending. Therefore, there is no guarantee that the alleged health and education increases will ever materialize in the Labor-HHS-ED appropriations bill. The only way to ensure more funding for Labor-HHS programs is to add money to the total spending level.Every health, education, and job training program will benefit under this amendment. If Congress has to write a Labor-HHS-ED appropriations bill that’s $4.2 billion lower than last year, as the President has proposed, every program is in danger of being reduced or eliminated. Restoring funding to the FY05 level will make it possible to save programs that are on the President’s chopping block and provide increases for key health, education and workforce initiatives.

Senate Vote on Specter-Harkin Amendment

2006-03-16T16:14:00.000-05:00

Adopted by a vote of 73-27:
Republicans
28-27
Democrats
44-0
Independents
1-0

YEAS (73)
REPUBLICANS (28)
Alexander, L. (TN)
Frist (TN)
Smith, G. (OR)
Bennett (UT)
Grassley (IA)
Snowe (ME)
Burns (MT)
Hagel (NE)
Specter (PA)
Chafee (RI)
Hatch (UT)
Stevens (AK)
Cochran (MS)
Hutchison (TX)
Talent (MO)
Coleman (MN)
Lott (MS)
Thune (SD)
Collins (ME)
Lugar (IN)
Voinovich (OH)
DeWine (OH)
Murkowski (AK)
Warner (VA)
Dole (NC)
Roberts (KS)

Domenici (NM)
Santorum (PA)

DEMOCRATS (44)
Akaka (HI)
Feingold (WI)
Mikulski (MD)
Baucus, M. (MT)
Feinstein (CA)
Murray (WA)
Bayh (IN)
Harkin (IA)
Nelson, Ben (NE)
Biden (DE)
Inouye (HI)
Nelson, Bill (FL)
Bingaman (NM)
Johnson, Tim (SD)
Obama (IL)
Boxer (CA)
Kennedy, E. (MA)
Pryor (AR)
Byrd (WV)
Kerry (MA)
Reed, J. (RI)
Cantwell (WA)
Kohl (WI)
Reid, H. (NV)
Carper (DE)
Landrieu (LA)
Rockefeller (WV)
Clinton (NY)
Lautenberg (NJ)
Salazar, K. (CO)
Conrad (ND)
Leahy (VT)
Sarbanes (MD)
Dayton (MN)
Levin, C. (MI)
Schumer (NY)
Dodd (CT)
Lieberman (CT)
Stabenow (MI)
Dorgan (ND)
Lincoln (AR)
Wyden (OR)
Durbin (IL)
Menendez (NJ)

INDEPENDENTS (1)
Jeffords (VT)

NAYS (27)
REPUBLICANS (27)
Allard (CO)
Craig (ID)
Kyl (AZ)
Allen, G. (VA)
Crapo (ID)
Martinez (FL)
Bond (MO)
DeMint (SC)
McCain (AZ)
Brownback (KS)
Ensign (NV)
McConnell (KY)
Bunning (KY)
Enzi (WY)
Sessions, J. (AL)
Burr (NC)
Graham (SC)
Shelby (AL)
Chambliss (GA)
Gregg (NH)
Sununu (NH)
Coburn (OK)
Inhofe (OK)
Thomas, C. (WY)
Cornyn (TX)
Isakson (GA)
Vitter (LA)

Win on the Senate Budget Amendment

2006-03-16T15:56:00.000-05:00

Thank you for all your support, your voice made a difference.

The Specter-Harkin $7 billion amendment has passed on the Senate floor by a vote of 73-27.

Senate Budget Amendment to increase ED and Health

2006-03-14T15:26:00.000-05:00

Sometime between Tuesday afternoon and Thursday afternoon the Senate is likely to vote on an amendment to increase funding by $7 billion for discretionary programs with the plan that this money will go to education, health and labor programs. The $7 billion would bring funding back to the FY 2005 levels!

Please contact your Senators and ask them to support the Specter/Harkin budget amendment to increase education, health and labor programs by $7 billion.

You can call 202-224-3121 - the capitol switchboard and ask for your senator -by name or your state.

The following is a list of Senators who are up for re-election this year.

US Senate - Up For Reelection in 2006
Akaka, Daniel - (D - HI)
Bingaman, Jeff - (D - NM)
Byrd, Robert - (D - WV)
Cantwell, Maria - (D - WA)
Carper, Thomas - (D - DE)
Clinton, Hillary - (D - NY)
Conrad, Kent - (D - ND)
Dayton, Mark - (D - MN)
Feinstein, Dianne - (D - CA)
Kennedy, Edward - (D - MA)
Kohl, Herb - (D - WI)
Lieberman, Joseph - (D - CT)
Menendez, Robert - (D - NJ)
Nelson, Bill - (D - FL)
Nelson, Ben - (D - NE)
Sarbanes, Paul - (D - MD)
Stabenow, Debbie - (D - MI)

Jeffords, James - (I - VT)

Allen, George - (R - VA)
Burns, Conrad - (R - MT)
Chafee, Lincoln - (R - RI)
DeWine, Mike - (R - OH)
Ensign, John - (R - NV)
Frist, Bill - (R - TN)
Hatch, Orrin - (R - UT)
Hutchison, Kay - (R - TX)
Kyl, Jon - (R - AZ)
Lott, Trent - (R - MS)
Lugar, Richard - (R - IN)
Santorum, Rick - (R - PA)
Snowe, Olympia - (R - ME)
Talent, James - (R - MO)
Thomas, Craig - (R - WY)

Senate Budget Action

2006-03-13T12:52:00.000-05:00

Sometime in the next two days we will be asking you to contact your senators concerning an amendment being put together by Senators Harkin (D-IA) and Spector (R-PA).

Sens. Harkin and Specter are likely to co-sponsor a bi-partisan floor amendment to the FY07 budget resolution when it goes to the Senate floor this week. The amendment may offer $7 billion over the President’s proposed discretionary cap in an effort to get the overall budget for function 500 back to the FY05 level. The amendment is not likely to include an offset.

Please monitor this blog for a request for action on Tuesday afternoon, March 14th.

The Budget Process - background

2006-03-04T10:03:00.000-05:00

The Federal Budget Process
The Federal Budget process begins the first Monday in February of each year and should be concluded by October 1, the start of the new Federal Fiscal Year. In some -- make that many -- years, the October 1 date is not met. Here is how the process is supposed to work.

The President Submits a Proposed Budget to Congress
Following the procedure required by the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the President presents a proposed budget for the coming Fiscal Year to Congress on or before the first Monday in February.
Based on the input of the Federal Agencies, the President's budget projects estimated spending, revenue, and borrowing levels broken down by functional categories for the coming fiscal year to start October 1.
The President's budget serves as a "starting point" for the Congress to consider. Congress is under no obligation to adopt all or any of the President's budget and often makes significant changes. However, since the President must ultimately approve all future bills they propose, Congress is often reluctant to completely ignore the priorities of the President's budget.

House and Senate Budget Committees Report the Budget Resolution
The Congressional Budget Act requires passage of an annual "Congressional Budget Resolution", a concurrent resolution passed in identical form by both House and Senate, but not requiring the President's signature.

The Budget Resolution is an important document providing Congress an opportunity to lay out its own spending, revenue, borrowing and economic goals for the coming fiscal year, as well as the next five future fiscal years. In recent years, the Budget Resolution has included suggestions for government program spending reforms leading to the goal of a balanced budget.
Both House and Senate Budget Committees hold hearings on the annual Budget Resolution. The committees seek testimony from Administration officials, Members of Congress and expert witnesses. Based on testimony and committee deliberations, each committee writes or "marks-up" its respective version of the Budget Resolution.

The Budget Committees are required to present or "report" their final Budget Resolution for consideration by the full House and Senate by April 1.
The full House and Senate now debate, amend, and take action on the Budget Resolution as reported to them by their respective Budget Committee.
While the Budget Act sets no deadline for this phase, it does require that a final, single version of the Budget Resolution, agreed to by both House and Senate be approved by April 15.
House and Senate Work Out Differences in Conference

Since the versions of the Budget Resolution passed by the House and Senate will always differ, each body appoints conferees -- negotiators -- to meet and resolve the differences. The "conference committee" works to come up with a single, agreed version of the Budget Resolution that must be agreed to by at least half of the conferees from both the House and Senate.
Full House and Senate Consider Conference Agreement

The Budget Act requires that by April 15, both the House and Senate approve by majority votes the final version of the Budget Resolution reported by the conference committee.
The terms of the final, approved Budget Resolution govern the remainder of the budget process for the year.

Discretionary Spending Allocations Set by Congress
As a vital part of the Budget Resolution, Congress must agree on "spending allocations" or limits on how much money can be spent on discretionary programs during the coming fiscal year and at least the next 5 fiscal years. "Discretionary" funding refers specifically to money provided each year through the allocations process. Congress exercises control over how and how much money is spent, hence the term "discretionary". Discretionary spending usually represents about one-third of total annual Federal spending. Funds for programs to which the government is pre-committed to paying, like interest on the national debt and long-term entitlements are called "uncontrollable".

These spending allocations establish aggregate totals of money that cannot be exceeded by the House and Senate Appropriations Committees during the upcoming annual spending process.
The House and Senate Appropriations Committees now take the total aggregate spending allocations from the Budget Resolution and divide the amount into thirteen "sub allocations". Quite literally, they take the total discretionary "money pie" and cut it in to thirteen pieces.
Each slice of the discretionary "pie" funds a different government function as follows:
1. Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and related agencies
2. Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies
3. Department of Defense
4. Operations of the government of the District of Columbia
5. Energy and water resources development
6. Foreign operations, export financing, and related programs
7. Department of the Interior and related agencies
8. Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and related agencies
9. Legislative Branch
10. Military construction, family housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department of Defense
11. Department of Transportation and related agencies.
12. Treasury Department, the United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, and certain Independent Agencies
13. Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices

The Budget Act allows the Appropriations Committees from May 15 until June 10 to finalize the 13 spending bills and forward them to the full House and Senate.
House and Senate Consider 13 Annual Spending Bills
By June 10, the full House and Senate should begin consideration of the 13 annual spending bills. Other than some special rules of debate, the 13 spending bills follow the same legislative procedure as other bills. Current Status of the FY 2000 Spending Bills
House and Senate work out differences in Conference
Since the spending bills are once again being debated and amended separately, House and Senate versions will have to go through the same conference committee process as the Budget Resolution. The conferees have to agree on one version of each bill capable of passing in both the House and Senate by a majority vote.
Full House and Senate Consider 13 Conference Agreements
Once the conference committees have forwarded their agreements to them, the House and Senate must both approve them by a majority vote.
The Budget Act stipulates that the House should have given final approval to all 13 spending bills by June 30.
President May Sign or Veto Any or All of the Appropriations Bills
As spelled out in the Constitution, the President has ten days in which to decide: (1) to sign the bill, thereby making it law; (2) to veto the bill, thereby sending it back to Congress and requiring much of the process to begin again with respect the programs covered by that bill; or (3) to allow the bill to become law without his signature, thereby making it law but doing so without his express approval.
The Government Begins a New Fiscal Year
If and when the process goes as planned, all 13 spending bills have been signed by the President and have become Public Laws by October 1, the start of the new Fiscal Year. Most years, this happens.
Right Now in the Budget Process
As you can tell by looking at the table showing the current status of the 13 spending bills, the budget process was not completed by the October 1 deadline. The government is currently operating under H.J.Res. 110 - a "Continuing Resolution" authorizing spending through Oct. 14, 2000.

The Budget Calendar Summary
Before the 1st Monday in February:
President transmits proposed budget to Congress
Six Weeks Later:
Congressional committees report budget estimates to Budget Committees
April 15:Action to be completed on congressional budget resolution.
May 15:House consideration of annual appropriations bills may begin.
June 15:Action to be completed on conference committee reports.
June 30:Action on appropriations bills to be completed by House.
July 15:President transmits Mid-Session Review of the budget.
October 1:New Fiscal Year begins.

IRA statement on ACT report on Reading

2006-03-02T13:47:00.000-05:00

Embargo to 2:30 pm March 1, 2006
Media contact:
Beth Cady, Public Information Office
Telephone 302-731-1600, ext. 293
Fax 302-731-1057
E-mail bcady@reading.org
Website www.reading.org
Teens Gain Support for High School Reading Instruction

NEWARK, DELAWARE, USA— ACT joined a growing number of policymakers and education professionals concerned about adolescent literacy with its new report, Reading between the Lines: What the ACT Reveals about College Readiness for Reading. “The ACT report demonstrates how critical literacy experiences are for high school kids—particularly with regard to assigning them and instructing them in demanding texts in all subjects,” commented Timothy Shanahan, professor of urban education and director for the Center of Literacy, University of Illinois, Chicago. Shanahan, who will become president of the International Reading Association in May 2006, sees the need for a comprehensive adolescent literacy agenda that emphasizes reading instruction throughout middle and high school and that provides added support for struggling students.
Richard Allington, IRA’s current president and professor of education at the University of Tennessee, concurs. “Federal and state governments must invest more in middle and high schools,” Allington comments. “If we hope to graduate high school students with reading levels appropriate to postsecondary pursuits, there are several steps we need to take.” Allington’s short list of actions is focused primarily on teacher preparation and continuing professional development:
§ A federal grant program to fund professional development of middle and high school reading specialists and coaches.
§ State education agency review of certification requirements for high school teachers to ensure that all content teachers are being well prepared to meet the challenges of high-level reading instruction and the reading of complex texts.
§ Expansion of Title I funds to high school level.
Efforts to build collaboration among content and reading specialists have already resulted in Standards for Middle and High School Literacy Coaches, jointly released in 2005 by IRA, the National Council of Teachers of English, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, National Science Teachers Association, and National Council for the Social Studies. With poor reading skills contributing to the high rates of high school dropouts and growing enrollment in college-level remedial reading classes, reading instruction may finally find its place in the education of older students. For more information about adolescent literacy, visit www.reading.org.
###

Report on Federal Funds to Improve Schools by CEP

2006-02-15T11:54:00.000-05:00

A SHELL GAME: FEDERAL FUNDS TO IMPROVE SCHOOLS This report by the Center on Education Policy describes how funds are made available under the No Child Left Behind Act specifically for activities in schools identified for improvement. CEP found that because of inadequate NCLB appropriations and because of a "hold harmless" provision in the law that prevents school districts from losing Title I funds as a result of the reservation, improvement funds are insufficient in many states to do the job of assisting schools. CEP also found that to meet the reservation without violating the hold harmless, many states must take money away from school districts that were slated to receive increased Title I allocations because of their larger numbers of low-income children.

Report: http://www.cep-dc.org/titlei/TitleISchoolImpFundJan2006.pdf
Press Release:
http://www.cep-dc.org/titlei/TitleISchoolImpFundPressReleaseJan2006.pdf

Calendar of Upcoming Events

2006-01-18T09:25:00.000-05:00

January 31, 2006 State of the Union

February 6, 2006 The President submits his FY 2007 budget request to Congress

February 7, 2006 8:00 PM ET - Audio Conference re Congressional Agenda for 2006

This will be a free service, but registration is limited. Participants are asked to register by February 3rd with btierney@reading.org to receive the call-in number and a set of Power Point slides.

February 22, 2006 - IRA Global Perspectives 2 - 4 PM -- Washington, DC Call 202 624 8800 for Agenda

February 23 - 25 - IRA Legislative Workshop for information and regislation Go to: http://www.reading.org/association/meetings/legislative.html

Audio Conference of FY 07 Budget impact on reading

2006-01-05T15:48:00.000-05:00

How will the President's new FY 07 budget impact reading education?

Join Richard Long, IRA Director of Government Relations, in a live audio-conference on Tuesday, January 17, at 8:00 pm EST as he discusses the new federal budget and its impact on reading education.

This will be a free service, but registration is limited. Participants are asked to register by January 12 with btierney@reading.org to receive the call-in number and a set of Power Point slides.

Dr. Long will brief callers for about 20 minutes and then answer questions. Participants are asked to e-mail their questions in advance to btierney@reading.org. We cannot guarantee that all questions will be answered during the call. We will try to answer all questions by e-mail.

Concise questions are encouraged. Please be sure to include your name and affiliation when posting your questions.

Appropriations for FY 06 after 1% across the board cut

2006-01-04T10:26:00.000-05:00

Selected ED programs and appropriations in thousands of dollars

Program ..........................FY 05 .....................FY 06

Title I Grants to LEAs...... 12,739,571................. 12,713,125
Reading First .......................1,041,600.................. 1,029,234
Early Reading First................ 104,160..................... 103,118
Striving Readers .......................24,800...................... 29,700
Even Start................................ 225,095 .....................99.000
Compr School Reform............ 205,344........................ 7,920

Thursday, December 22, 2005 3:00 PM

2005-12-22T15:42:00.000-05:00

The House will be voting tonight on the spending bill for the U.S. Department of Education and the bill containing the Hurricane Katrina relief spending. Both will be voted on without amendment. The Senate did vote a 1% across the board cut last night, thus reducing spending for all education programs. The overall impact on NCLB is estimated by NEA to be $1 billion. Funding for schools and children impacted by Hurricane Katrina includes monies for displaced students attending both private and public schools as well as school re-start funds for private and public schools.

Letter to Senator Frist from IRA 3:00 PM 12/21/05

2005-12-21T14:53:00.000-05:00

December 21, 2005

The Honorable William H. Frist
Majority Leader
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Senator Frist:

Several policy changes that will harm public education are included in the important legislative agenda the United States Senate will be considering over the next several hours. I urge you and your colleagues to act in the best interests of America’s neediest children as you consider Department of Education funding, and funding for students displaced by Hurricane Katrina.

In particular, the International Reading Association is concerned about two proposals.

* The proposed across the board cut to education will do further damage to the ability of schools to close the achievement gap, which persists as the recent National Assessment of Education Progress demonstrates.

* Students displaced by Hurricane Katrina will be best served through limited use of public funds for private school students. The most equitable approach to rebuilding the education infrastructure is a public-private fund for the development of long-term support. Private schools should not be rebuilt before all public school construction has even begun.

As Alan Greenspan said in February 2004, “….one critical element in creating those opportunities (for an effective economy) is to provide rigorous education and ongoing training to all members of our society. This proposal is not novel; it is, in fact, the strategy that we have followed successfully for most of the past century and a strategy that we now should embrace with renewed commitment.”

Please urge your colleagues to ensure that children who are the most in need of a high quality education have schools that have the resources that they need.

Sincerely,

Alan E. Farstrup
Executive Director

Monday, December 19, 2005 10:00 PM

2005-12-19T21:42:00.000-05:00

The House has adjourned but the funding for the Department of Education, budget issues, and funding for Katrina are still not finished. The Senate has to act. The Senate leadership has decided to try voting on a funding plan for ED as their last vote, most likely because they don't have the votes. Many are calling the Senate and still pushing for higher funding levels for critical programs like Title I and others. Even Start, for example, is still on the chopping block.

The Katrina issue is also still pending. The House put significant funds into supporting private schools, while the earlier compromise was to provide support to students. This is a big change and one many are calling their Senators about.

If you want to voice an opinion, call 202-224-3121 – the Capitol Switchboard – and ask for your Senator's office.

Monday December 19, 2005 11:50 AM

2005-12-19T11:52:00.000-05:00

Early this morning, the House voted on the Defense Appropriations bill, which contains a one percent across-the-board cut to all domestic programs in the appropriations system (ED got cut by about $500 million). The bill also included funding for displaced Katrina students and $750 million to restart school operations. This provision sends funds to private and religious schools as well as public schools. The bill passed by a vote of 308–106.

Saturday 9:00 AM Update

2005-12-17T09:04:00.000-05:00

This is an update to the earlier report:

An agreement has been reached in the House and Senate to support a program to provide public and private schools funds to repay the costs of accommodating displaced students. It will be offered by Senators Enzi (R-WY) and Kennedy (D-MA). Private schools would have to apply to local schools for funds. Attached to the budget reconciliation bill, the amendment was passed in the Senate by voice vote. BUT, and this is important, it hasn't been agreed to by the House of Representatives AND it will need to be added to the Defense Appropriations Bill – which may be voted on as early as Sunday night (12/18), or as late as Tuesday (12/20). The funding for the U.S. Education Department is expected to be put on the Defense bill as well.

Aid to Katrina impacts schools and children

2005-12-16T15:27:00.000-05:00

Hurricane Katrina had a devastating and unprecedented impact on schools and students. Over 700 schools have been damaged or destroyed affecting over 372,000 students. As of December 16, there is a proposed amendment being considered in Congress on Hurricane Katrina Relief for displaced students and impacted schools. This amendment could be attached to the Defense Appropriations Bill HR 2863 which is considered a must pass bill.

This amendment would offer School Impact Aid through ED to the SEAs in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Texas. The funds would be dispersed equitably to LEA’s and non-public schools for instruction, services, and assistance of displaced students in public and eligible non-public schools. Payments would be made on a quarterly basis for each student enrolled in a given quarter for a maximum payment of $6,000 and $7,500 for students with disabilities. Each SEA receiving funds emergency impact aid would provide to parents notification of the option of enrolling in a public or non-public school.

IRA is concerned that this measure may become a vehicle for the unrestricted use of federal funds by private schools. This would be a voucher that would be not be supported by IRA. Several members of Congress are pushing for this type of funding. Please contact your member of Congress and tell them to support funding using estblished principles and not turn this into a voucher.

IRA has issued the following statement:

“The Congress needs to act quickly to vote funds to support the needs of children and schools hit by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.” According to Alan Farstrup, executive director of the 90,000 member International Reading Association, “There is no reason to change long standing federal policies that focus support on children in-need and on public education. “Farstrup comments were prompted by an on-going Congressional debate, which seems to be without resolution, as to how best to provide federal funds to help schools in hurricane impacted areas.

“This catastrophe must be viewed as a unique event that requires exceptional and timely intervention to help students and schools in need. We shouldn’t change the fundamental principle that public monies flow through public agencies to help children and schools. Government must continue to provide support in ways that are non-ideological, non-sectarian, and that respect the civil rights of all. We should move forward based on our long standing and established principles.” Farstrup concluded, “We know how to do this. Now is not the time to delay sending funds where they are so badly needed. The children hit by these hurricanes are counting on us!”

###

Adding a new post

2005-12-16T12:37:00.000-05:00

To add a new post, you'll need to sign in. Once you've signed in, a new page will appear that contains a "Create New Post" button. Click on this, and another new page will open where you can enter your message. At the bottom you'll be asked whether you want to let other members post comments to your message or not. Finally, you'll choose either to save your message as a draft (if you or someone else needs to look it over before you publish), or publish immediately.