A new series of bills, proposed by Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., the chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee, to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) proposes to offer significantly more leeway to states and districts in distributing education funds. In other words, instead of directing states to spend money on certain programs, such as Title I grants for disadvantaged students, districts could spend the money on English Language Acquisition Grants or Teacher Quality State Grants.
More specifically, states would be allowed to shift money out of the following programs: School Improvement Grants (state administration); Title I administrative funds; Migrant Education; Neglect and Delinquent programs; Teacher Quality State Grants; English Language Acquisition Grants; 21st Century Community Learning Centers; and the Education Jobs Fund.
And school districts could transfer funds from Title I grants for disadvantaged kids; Migrant Education; Neglected and Delinquent programs; Teacher Quality State Grants; English Language Acquisition Grants; Indian Education; and the Education Jobs Fund.
These funds could be transferred to the following programs: School Improvement Grant program; Title I grants to districts; Reading First; Migrant Education; Neglect and Delinquent Programs; Teacher Quality State Grants; Math and Science Partnerships; English Language Acquisition Grants; 21 Century Community Learning Centers; Innovative Programs; Grants for State Assessments; Rural Education; Indian Education; and services for early intervention under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Under the new ESEA (which is currently known as No Child Left Behind), districts would be held accountable to tell the states ahead of time how they will use the funds and states would be held accountable to inform the Department of Education of its spending plans. Districts and states would be required to fulfill all the reporting requirements for all the programs, even if they shift all the money out of them. However, states and districts would not have to fulfill an application and approval process to distribute the funds.
The proposed ESEA has prompted strong reactions from supporters and critics. Supporters such as the American Association of School Administrators (AASA) laud the measure for empowering school administrators with additional flexibility in school decision-making. Critics include Education Secretary Arne Duncan and civil rights organizations such as Council of the Great City Schools, which represents urban districts, argue that the bill will have adverse impacts on minority and disadvantaged children.
Regardless of the political arguments, education policymakers generally agree that accountability is essential to assess the effectiveness of any education measures. Therefore, evaluators and policymakers should have great interest in how these policies are developed and implemented for it informs how they can develop the accountability measures to assess if the policies are achieving their goals. I am hopeful that great attention continues to be placed on the importance of evaluation in significant policy debates such as those in education.
