In 1965, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was enacted to improve the education of low-income students. Since that time, the federal government has become increasingly involved in our nation's classrooms. The law was last reauthorized in 2002
In 1965, the Elementary and Secondary Education Actwas enacted to improve the education of low-income students. Since that time, the federal government has become increasingly involved in our nation’s classrooms. The law was last reauthorized in 2002 as No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The law made the most sweeping changes in federal law regarding public schools in nearly 40 years and set national goals for student achievement and prescriptive rules for state compliance.
No Child Left Behind (NCLB)challenged states to set a high bar for student achievement. It also provided parents with more information on the success of their local schools and the achievement of individual groups of students. Despite good intentions and some positive initiatives, student achievement has failed to improve, while the role of the federal government in local schools has dramatically increased.
Here’s a fact that jumps out: most Missouri schools did not meet the most recent Adequate Year Progress (AYP) targets that are required under the NCLB law. Based off the results from their 2010-11 standardized tests, the number of schools that were able to achieve the state’s AYP goals declined since last year from 35.3 percent to 18.1 percent, which means 81.9 percent of schools in Missouri failed to make AYP targets and were considered “failing.”
Barring revisions in the law, that number is likely to only continue to climb – and, as a result, most schools in the nation will be labeled as failing, and states will be forced to adopt rigid measures to address under-performing schools. The law attempts to impose a one-size-fits-all solution that has failed to work, and allows mandates and red tape handed down from Washington to block the way of local reforms. Paradoxically, it is possible for schools not to meet AYP goals while their district as a whole has been recognized by the state for outstanding performance.
Branding our schools failures isn’t making our schools any better. This is why House Republicans have been moving bills to rewrite the law, officially known as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). My colleagues and I want to improve ESEA and center on eliminating inefficient federal education programs; providing states and school districts more flexibility in the use of federal funds; empowering parents; supporting effective teachers; and reforming the law’s outdated provisions. For instance, the current manner in which funding is funneled through separate streams can severely limit states’ and school districts’ ability to apply funds toward local education priorities and initiatives that meet the unique needs of their students.
In the months ahead, Congress will consider a number of education-related bills, with the collective goal of reauthorizing ESEA. I have been actively seeking input from educators in the 9th District so that I can share those ideas with members of the House Education and Workforce Committee. For instance, as a member of Congress representing a district with rural schools, I want to stress to my colleagues that the policies of the last ESEA did not sufficiently account for the vast differences in school districts throughout the country, making it incredibly difficult for smaller school configurations with limited resources to meet the demands required under the law, particularly as they relate to highly qualified teachers and Supplemental Education Services.
It is my firm belief that we must reduce the size and scope of the federal role in education and return more of the decisions regarding education back to states and local boards. Of course, any effort to provide students with a top-quality education must include the involvement and support of a wide range of stakeholders -- association groups, school board members, superintendents, principals, teachers, parents, students, and many more.
As this process moves forward, I encourage you to share your concerns with me so that I can better understand the areas of the law that have failed our schools and communities. Together, we can continue promoting policies that provide states with more flexibility and ensure federal education dollars are dedicated to initiatives that lead to success in the nation’s classrooms.
