Transcripts For CSPAN2 Hearing Focuses On Every Student Succeeds Act Implementation 20160520

Spent by Education Departments you are going to miss some services that are provided in a Community School concept, maybe by social services. You might not count some of the services that are provided by a boys girls club. Excuse me for interrupting. I want to make sure everyone has their five minutes. Go ahead and wind up. Winding up now. If you count dollars district make in teacher placement decisions based on specific salary or benefit costs so things look, you will worry about things looking equal, instead of saying are we actually giving services to our students, all were saying is why in the world would you want to cut off reasonable flexibility that a district might have in giving something creative and meaningful to it our students and discourage districts from finding those creative solutions. We hope you will make your intent crystal clear. And in closing i would just say we are ready, willing and able to find those creative solutions. Were excited being at the table and appreciate you giving us the chance to show you what we can do. Thank you. Miss weingarten. Thank you. Am i on now . You were. Thank you. Take as state superintendent to tell me that, thank you. So my name is randi winegarten. Im president of the aft and i am, it is my privilege to be here to talk about our views on the implementation of esea but i do want to start where my colleague said, Lily Eskelsen garcia started as well, i can not thank this committee, particularly senator alexander and senator murray enough for listening to parents and practitioners and helping to navigate this bill to law and to break the gridlock in d. C. To enact esea. We need to that you over and over again on that issue. What i wanted to discuss was the promise of esea but i will focus my comments on the regulatory pros ses on esea, not plant revisions and what we anticipate will be released on accountability systems. We at the aft view the policy details through the lens whether they both work in americas classrooms and reflect the voices of educators and i particularly today am speaking with two decades of experience in the Largest School district in the night where we actually had to deal and had to work through and make sure equity mattered in some of these provisions. I am particularly pleased that senator murray and representative scott, as senator murray has already referred, reiterated the priority that getting the voices of practitioners and parents in this implementation is absolutely critical. Unfortunately in its first regulatory action the proposed supply plenty, not supplant rules the Education Department demonstrated it was neither listening to stakeholders or following the framework of the legislation. Instead by conflating as senator alexander has already said the supplement not supplant and comparability policies the department seems to be pushing or pursuing an agenda that was rejected in the legislative process. Now the pursuit of both equity and excellence for our children is part of the afts dna and there are several ways to do this. One through full funding of title one. One we will keep citing for through the appropriations process. I would suspect almost anyone involved in education would fighting to level up spending rather than level down spending so that schools currently spending the least could be made whole. In addition esea continues important equity safeguards so states can not deny disadvantaged children that the federal government provided to level the Playing Field that includes maintenance of effort provisions as well as sns provisions as well as the way title i formula is structure as we all fought very hard as you all know. Why i disagree with the departments supplement, not supplant proposal. The department, as lily said, wants to make dollar per dollar comparisons rather than what happens right now. This is what that means in practical terms. Right now principals have number of people they can hire based on positions rather than exact dollar amount they can spend. That principal, if that changes, then a teachers salary and benefit is what will determine whether the teacher gets hired, whether the teacher gets retained or whether the teacher gets transferred, not anything else. Not what the school needs to run a program. Not what the schools particular programmatic focus is, not the needs of schoolchildren. So what will happen is that some schools will face cuts that will compel them to make nowin choices about which teachers they keep or they hire. Dollar for dollar comparisons, and i can talk about this for hours because i have lived this. Dollar for dollar comparisons in district can even be thrown off by something as simple how many teachers in each school have individual Health Coverage as opposed to family coverage. The difference between 5,000 for coverage and 20,000 for coverage. These type of unintended consequences are major disruptions have nothing to do with equity or opportunity. When you force districts to count exact spending in school the goals get lost in translation. We can not equalize spending that way. Finally, we are concerned that the Education Department will take the level of prescription proposed for supplement not supplant to the upcoming regulations on school and district accountability systems. This could strip the flexibility necessary to create accountability systems that envision new ways to define and measure learning as opposed to the current and far too restrictive and counterproductive focus on test scores. The promise of esea lies in the opportunity for states, excuse me, with broader Stakeholder Input to create robust systems of accountability that redefine how we measure learning so that learning is really about learning, not simply math and english test scores. Thaw very much, im sorry i went over by 34 second. But it was enthusiastic 34 seconds. Thank you, miss winegarten. Dr. Evers. Thank you chairman alexander and Ranking Member murray and members of the committee for allowing me to testify today. It is good to be back. Im back again. As i highlighted in previous testimony before this committee, states and local leaders are committed to making sure all kids achieve at the highest level. In no child left behind overly prescriptive federal mandates left states and local districts without the ability to taylor strategies to meet the needs of their kids. As a lifelong educator i believe we must learn from our mistakes. As we have every Student Succeeds act which gives us a chance to move our local Education Systems forward. Esessa is sees our challenges in the new eyes hoping to find a solution that makes difference for kids. I set invitation to convene primary advisory group, wisconsin equity and essa stakeholder council. I reached out to National Civil sites organizations and groups that had not traditionally focused exclusively on k12 issues. As i told prospective members of this council and in the invitation we need a diversity of experience and expertise if we are successful closing one of the nations largest achievement gaps. That is in the state of wisconsin. In addition to this council wisconsins broader outreach plan consists of three inperson facilitated listening sessions and two virtual sessions. We also use webbased feedback for anyone in the state who wants to provide us information and this information will be received and used with the to inform the Equity Council as they convene. So im proud of the work were doing in wisconsin and i believe the best solutions often come from places closest to the kids. To support states in doing that kind of local work, regulation and guidance has been said beveledded by essa should be limited to proking clarity on otherwise ambiguous and confusing areas, not implementing requirements that were not envisioned by congress. Flexibility has been a central element of essa. Because i believe there is recognitions that the states have very different systems and supports for k12 education. The flexibility currently provided in the law allows state to focusmost important and difficult work ahead to support each and every student in United States. In contrast the regulations that the Department Proposed in negotiated rule making process on supplement, supplement, not supplant, they were wellintended i will grant them that but it would have significant impacts on our students drawing focus away from Student Learning in service to unwieldy fiscal balancing acts. It is the responsibility of School Leaders to put the best teachers in front of kids who need them the most. They weigh qualifications, diversity, skillsets and in service to kids they contemplate optimal grade configurations, staffing patterns, facility needs, all with an eye towards increased student achievement for all kids. I worry that the proposed supplement not supplant rules reduce these complex decisions to an overly simplified financial calculation which at the end of the day does not actually guarranty Student Access to high quality educators. As a member of the negotiated Rulemaking Committee i understand the argument on both sides of this issue but it is clear that i also believe and it is clear that the proposed regulations on supplement supplant exceed the departments authority under the law. State and local schools absolutely have the responsibility to their kids to examine current federal funding and how it is used. They owe it to parents and families that they support, that they have discussions that are open and meaningful and transparent. And they need to be sure theyre reaching all the people that make up their School Community but that type of authentic discussion and problem solving simply can not be achieved through a federal mandate. I firmly believe that states should be held accountable for their students results, when comes to both funding and educational practices states are committed using Additional Fund flexibility found in essa to improve education outcomes for all kids. Let us lead the way and thank you so much again for allowing me to testify and i look forward to your questions. Dr. Ahart. Good morning chairman alexander, senator murray and the rest of the Health Committee and thank you for your leadership on finally achieving reauthorization of essa, long overdue. I am tom ahart, superintendent of the Des Moines Public Schools. With my seven member board of education im responsible for education of the Largest School district in the state of iowa. Were committing to meeting Educational Needs of each one of our students by recruiting and supporting a team of talented professionals in each of our 63 schools. Our 33,000 students were born in 106 different countries, speak over 100 languages, qualify and free and reduced priced meals at rate of 75 and 58 minority. That commitment is reflected in steady increase in our Graduation Rate and reading and math, science proficiency rates and success in closing achievement gaps. Des moines continues to operate under the antiquated no child left behind act which i was one of the few states without a lcb waiver. We welcome the every Student Succeeds act and were working closely with the state department of education on statewide implementation process virile allly all the representatives of the essa Negotiations Committee express expressed concerns about number of proposed regulations. Operational concerns relate to regulatory barriers to effective Instructional Services for students, student autonomy, unworkable criteria, unnecessary requirements additional costs and unrealistic administratively created obligations. While regulations are intended to clarify provisions statute and at sis, many conditions redefine and even expand essa. Im hardpressed to identify any regulatory additions offered by the Education Department that are necessary for effective implementation at the local level. The most troubling regulatory proposal as many others have mentioned was the departments draft regulation to impose per pupil expenditure comparability rights under supplement, not supplant provision of the act. Despite no changes in the current essa comparability provisions the Department Draft the supplement, not supplant would require accountability with title i schools and nontitle i schools. That would require salary equivalency between such schools. As senator exare lex already mentioned since the nations teacher salary system is based on years of experience and advanced he had education. Schools with lower higher paid more over current federal requirements insure same number of fulltime equivalent teachers are implied in title i as nonTitle One Schools. To comply districts would have to spend state and local fund to salary differential between higher paid and lower paid salaried teachers. Districts could potentially shift higher paid teachers to title i schools and lower paid teachers to nontitle i schools. Unfortunately another options correlate with student performance. Stated simply there is no relationship between schoolery level and teacher effectiveness. School districts clearly do not have the state and local fund to cover the salary differential costs of compliance nor should districts disrupt could not continuity by summarily transfer teachers. Moreover the teacher transfer option would violate most collective bargaining agreements. Many districts would be face with impossibility of performance of regulations which have no basis in the act and violate three statutory provisions in essa. I hasten to add none of the Solutions Even if possible to implement reflect best education practicetics. What is lost on the Department Many high poverty schools are not served with title i because frankly there is not enough to go around. 40 free and reduced rate can qualify for a school for time. I Services Just as Des Moines Public Schools we have multiple schools with over 70 free and reduced price lunch rate we are not able to provide with time. I services. Our ability to serve schools with concentrated poverty with time. I funds would you jeopardized under the regulations. If essa was fasted with broad sport at national and state and local levels. During the negotiated rule making process could undermined that broad support. No child left behind has demonstrated best intentions for improving achievement of at risk students can not be micromanaged from federal level. I would suggest state and local officials given the opportunity to get it under essa. On the other hand, the Education Department could be helpful issuing nonregulatory guidance that provides a nonexclusive, range of examples of implementation options for various provisions of the essa. There is no such thing as one size fits all. In iowa the broad range of individual district characteristics vary widely. The only hope for successful results from the essa rested in the states agencys ability to craft guidance that is meaningful to individual state and district contexts. Finally, i am proud of the progress that my district has made over the last four years he despite insufficient state funding and ever increasing student needs. The current supplement not supplant regulations focused on positions not funding have helped to make that possible. Dmps is becoming model for urban education in the United States. The proposed essa regulations will force us to dissome of the most Effective School Reform Efforts in the country and threaten progress ofour nations most disadvantaged students. We can do better if essa regulations align with the letter and spirit of the statute itself. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the new regulations with you. Thank you, dr. Ahart. Dr. Gordon. Thank you. Chairman alexander, Ranking Member murray and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. Im associate professor at georgetown universitys Mccourt School of Public Policy and Research Associate at the National Bureau of economic research. I conduct research on u. S. Education policies, School Finance and desegregation. In the course of my research on title i i analyzed finance data and also interviewed many state and district title i directors. I will describe how essa changes definition of supplement, not supplant and how the department of education proposes to regulate and discuss some unintended consequences from proposed regulation. The departments proposed rule as other witnessed testified is meant to support equity. This is laudable goal but when you look at the compliance incentives it generates and consider what districts might do in order to comply with the rule you could see how it could actually wind up hurting disadvantaged student both in title i schools and in nontitle i schools. Supplement not supplant is meant to insure districts do not reduce the amount of state and local money give 10 00 to title i school paired to what they would not give the school if they did not participate in time. I. This is Important Mission given past law and abuses. Under earlier versions of the essa, districts could comply with supplement not supplant based on what they bought with time. I dollars even if they give schools make you have the difference. Essa fixes that. Requiring districts how toe distribute state and local funds to each of their schools and their methodology disnot reduce a schools state and local funding because of schools participation in title one. Federal law still requires districts to spend funds in accordance with Program Goals and track their spending regardless how supplement not supplant is regulated. The department of educations proposed rule would require districts to use a methodology to allocate state and local funds as others have discussed, please one more time, that result in each Title One School spending an equal or greater amount per pupil than the average amount it spends per pupil in it es nonTitle One Schools. Current data dont permit to us generate reliable evidence how many districts would be in compliance with the proposed rule based on Current Resource allocations or how much they would need to spend in order to comply. Aside from these unknown costs the rule could trigger consequences that are bad for equity as districts are forced to consider compliance first and whats best for kids second. For example, the rule could penalize districts working to increase economic or racial integration and could incentivize districts to concentrate disadvantaged students in Title One Schools. The rule could penalize district efforts to increase teacher diversity in Title One Schools because increasing teacher diversity typically requires recruitment of new and therefore typically less expensive teachers. The rule could penalize districts that allocate state and local funds through weighted per pupil formulas that generate more money for low income, special education, or english language learner students. Such districts could nonetheless fail under the proposed rule if higherweighted students attend nonTitle One Schools. Importantly the proposed rule only compares funding levels in Title One Schools to nonTitle One Schools. This narrow focus penalizes other local approaches to equity and ignores the many low income schools that do not receive title one funds as we have just heard. This could punish districts that attempt to mitigate poverty effects in those poor but nonTitle One Schools. Stakeholders are absolutely right to want to insure federal funds are not used as substitute for state and local ones in Title One Schools. As the new statutory language does this by requiring districts to have allocation methodologies that do not reduce a schools access to state and local funds because its participation in title one. Alternative regulatory approach than the one thats been proposed would be to require districts to make their methodologies like their spending data publicly available. Then parents and voters would not only see how much is spent at each school but they would also see district priorities as revealed through their funding mechanisms. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this topic. Thank you, dr. Gordon. Ms. Marshall. Chairman alexander, Ranking Member murray and members of the committee. Im honored to be here today to represent copa, a national peertopeer network that protects students civil rights with disabilities. We say our kids count and achieve and what they need to a equal opportunity to succeed. Copa thanks you for the passing general education law, every Student Succeeds act. With our disabilities civil rights and business communities to insure that essa included critical provisions that would in fact buoy up the students it is intended to support. This includes 7. 7 million black students. 13. 1 million hispanic students, 25 Million Students from low income families, 4. 5 million english language learners and 6. 4 Million Students with disabilities. Essa gained copa support, although it has great focus on state flexibility which is important we were able to insure it had accountability key provisions that would protect all. Harsh to recall and unbelievable to realize that students with disabilities only had access to education in my lifetime but it took them 40 years prior to the passage of no child left behind, they were not counted, they were not included in the assessments in the state, local or district accessibility systems, and as a result they were all but invisible. Not including them in the count and not Holding Schools accountable for their learning limited access to the general education curriculum and created separate and often segregated instruction. Parents had no idea how their children were doing in school compared to the state standards. Now the requirements of essa give us clear information that can assist parents to insure the child can access regular classroom, access the regular curriculum and have a real shot at regular diploma. This is civil rights law. We fought hard for equal access. Our kids want in and our families deserve to have the same data about their childs i have a achievement as every other child in the building. Through the eyes and ears of copa network we know the importance of this law and regulations to keep expectations high. Coupled with the requirements of the idea and other federal laws protending rights of students in their families, provisions of es is a can change trajectory of a students life. I want to share a story about bruce, 19yearold from south carolina, suffered and struggled, bullied relept lessly and unable to keep up because of dyslexia. Because of efforts of parents and educators and right services for dyslexia, graduating high school, fulltime job and heading to college in the fall. Blair, young woman from pennsylvania and accomodations and support of service dog, graduated high school and currently a Public Relations major in college. We have a long way to go before we support the success of all students. But we know the possibilities for each to succeed are substantial and real. Today i focused on important provisions of essa for us. Creating that public transparency in the data which i know we all share and requiring School Leaders to do something about it when the data shows there is reason to act. Accountability equals stopsability. Essa no longer contains mandates and consequence of its predecessor, i think we were all dancing for that but the responsibility lies squarely with the school. Essa includes important principles and guardrails that require educational Decision Making and protect resources for students. Critical provisions are intended to insure and strong regulations must support the requirement for action whether out comes or lack there off demand it. We need state designed systems that interim goals and rigorous measures of progress and statistically valued ratings and. Clear requirements for identification and intervention in each of the three categories of law. Timely evidencebased intervention focused on raising achievement. We simply can not leave any childs language with no intervention. They need to have the intervention and services in a time frame that can have an impact in their educational lifetime. We also want title one regulations to provide for a range of statisticallyreliable and accepted end sizes and we want to insure state support is provided to districts to reduce bullying harrassment, discipline and use of restraint and seclusion all disproportionally used on students of disabilities and students of color and result not only in harm and trauma but make it impossible to learn. We need safe school climates. You passed essa to serve the interest and equity of all students. That is the measurement and test that counts. Implementation of essa of target policies and resources on urgent needs of students which is arguably the most important journey of their formative lives, their k12 education. I want to finally add i urge us to get past the tugofwar of control and figure out a way to invest equitiably in students and find innovative ways to assure that greater numbers of students including those of color, ell, and with disabilities are able to succeed. I thank you four this opportunity and i look forward to your questions. Thank you, ms. Marshall. Ms. Murguia. Thank you, chairman alexander and Ranking Member murray and want to thank all members of the committee for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss a subject so critically important to the Civil Rights Community this implementation of essa. For over a decade i have served and president and ceo of National Council of la raza and clr were the largest Civil Rights Advocacy organization in the United States representing hispanics and we represent over 250 affiliates which are community, localbased organizations serving latino and immigrant populations nationwide. I was very proud to stand with many of you behind the president when this important legislation was signed into law and again i want to thank you for your leadership. We know it has the potential to benefit 13 million latino students and five million English Learners across the country. For the first time english learner students will be included in states accountability systems and states mustardize entrance and exit criteria for these students of the that is a big step. My remarks focus on latino educational attainment. I will share ways appropriate implementation of essa can improve outcomes for communities of color. Last Year American schools reached a significant demographic milestone. A majority of students in our classrooms were students of color. As schools across the country have become increasingly diverse, latino students make up 25 of our k12 enrollments. The Second Largest Group of students in schools after white students. In part as a result of comparable standardized assessments, and, college and careeroriented curricula, latino students are now graduating at higher rates than ever an enhe roling in postsecondary institutions in record numbers. However, despite improvements in key areas, inequalities in access and achievement among latino and other students of color remain persistent. Still too many latino students are not college ready. According to the 2015 National Assessment of educational progress regrettably nearly half of latino fourth graders were reading at below basic levels compared to 21 of whites, a startling statistic given our changing workforce. As the department of education moves forward implementing essa, it is important to recognize the legacy of the original elementary and secondary education act in promoting equity for our nations most vulnerable children. It is imperative that federal funds are used to supplement state and local resources for those most in need. Students in highpoverty districts receive nearly 10 less than state and local funds per student than those in the lowest poverty districts, meaning students and districts most in need of extra services, staff or educational supports including english language instruction are being shortchanged. The future success of students of color and english learner students in large part depends on addressing this resource gap. In addition to furthering equity, essa mandates that the department of education issue regulations to hold schools accountable if groups of student are not meeting challenging academic standards. While states and districts have flexibility in designing their accountability plans, the federal government must play a role to insure progress for these student does not erode. To this end, the department of education should set clear parameters for state accountability systems and kindly interventions for students falling behind. Finally, we know that the department of education can not fulfill its mandate alone. Stakeholders from the business and civil rights communities have a role to play to insure states and districts faithfully implement the laws requirements. Already a nationalbased affiliate has organized Partner Organizations to jointly engage the Tennessee Department of education on the states accountability and equity plans making the case for needs of latino and immigrant students. In the months ahead these stakeholders will be closely monitoring the regulatory process to emphasize essas potential to promote an educational system that is transparent, accountable and equitable to further the achievement of all students. Thank you. I look forward to working with all of you as we implement this important law. Thank you very much. Well now move to round of five minutes questions by the senators and i will begin. Dr. Gordon, youre a scholar of Education Finance and legislation. Let me ask you this. The language in the law on supplement and supplant has as its goal to say, that is School District cant use title one money to replace state and local money, a fairly straightforward proposal. Why, the language we thought was pretty plain and clear. Why is there a need for regulation of that law . Is it possible just to read the law and know what to do without the department elaborating on it through regulation . Thank you for your question question senator. I will read the law there is a lot of questions about the law i only have five minutes. One sentence. The methodology used to allocate state and local funds each school receiving assistance under this part insures that such School Receives all of the state and local funds it would otherwise receive were it not receiving assistance under this part and this part is title one. To me that sentence is clear. I have read that sentence more times than most people. So i understand how clarification could be useful to some people but interestingly this part of the law already applied to schoolwide programs under no child left behind and the department of education issued extensive guidance in july of 2015 clarifying how to interpret this with types of examples. Let me interrupt because i have a short, only five minutes for questions. If the effect of the proposed regulation because it would require Title One Schools to spend on average, an amount that is at least as much or greater than nonTitle One Schools, that would seem to me, would you say that would be an attempt to equalize spending among schools in a School District . Wouldnt the effect of doing that attempt to equalize spending . Im not an attorney. Im an economist, so to me, yes. Well, theres a provision in the law, section 1605, that says nothing in this title shall be construed to mandate equalized spending per pupil for state, local Education Agency or school. I agree that the proposed regulation specifically attempts to equalize spending which could be a laudable goal. I think wyoming may do that it may be the only state that does that but the federal law says you may not do that. Let me move to miss winegarten in a moment. You mentioned in your testimony you were not only concerned about this regulation either contradicting or not following specific provisions of the law but what that might mean for future regulations. My understanding was that the whole discussion or most of the discussion fixings no chd left behind, the discussion we would keep federallyrequired test and expand the amount of data used to let people know what the results of the tests were, but what to do about the results of the test became the responsibility much those closest to the children, classroom teachers, the school boards, the governors, the legislatures and the parents. Thats called the accountability system. What about what the department is doing with this proposed regulation worries you about what might happen with future regulations involving the socalled accountability system . Well, thank you [inaudible] thank you for the question. I share janet murguias concern about the accountability system. That is where most of the real thought needs to go into what are the guardrails and what is the flexibility that states should have to actually think about what constitutes real Student Learning these days and how do we actually help kids get there, particularly our most vulnerable kids. And the fact that the department seems to be doing same old same sold in terms of overly being, doing, trying to rewrite history in terms of supplement not supplant, as opposed to really thinking about how do we insure that theres flexibility that really looks at what kids need through the lens of the practitioners is what is concerning all of us in terms of any number of issues like the weights, like the definition of significant, the definition of evidence, whats going to happen in terms of the 95 Participation Rate and sucking the will to succeed, particularly of our most vulnerable kids. Thank you. Senator murray. Essa is fundamentally a civil rights law, to have all children access to equitable high quality education. Essa maintains that requirement to classify any school where any class of student are consistently underperforming and districts to make meaningful action to achieve achievement without strong regulation, our nations most vulnerable students could be ignored or left behind. Miss marshal, i wanted to ask you, can you speak to why a regulation should focus on performance of individual groups of students rather than on comparing students to each other within the same school . And can you explain why that is particularly important for students with disabilities. Thank you, senator murray, for your commitment to equality and protection of the civil rights of students with disabilities. Students with disabilities are general education students first. It is imperative they be compared against same state standards that every other student is compared against. We want to make sure that they have a fair and equitable opportunity to both access and to benefit from their educations, and so in order to find out how theyre doing in that regard, as a compared to pierce of their grade level weve got to look at the subgroup or individual scores against the state standard. We have want to make sure that we know how theyre doing in regards to the possibility of getting the diploma. Research is very clear. High expectations equal being further in life. Having no diploma, basically equals lack of outcomes, no jobs, sitting at home. So i, stakes could not be higher for our students. Okay. For miss garcia and miss winegarten, just yesterday was the 62nd anniversary of the brown versus brown decision. Ngo released a report detailing the relationship between resegregation and resource equity in our nations schools. In particular gao found schools with high percentages of lowincome and minority students are less likely to have access to advanced course work and more likely to experience high rates of exclusionary discipline. Essa requires any school which one or more subgroups is performing at level bottom 5 to address resource inequities and include significant new reporting requirements related to resource equity. I wanted to ask both of you, how critical is the issue of resource equity and in particularly in light of how far we still have to go in terms of the promise of brown versus brown . I think for all educators resource equity is the gamechanger here. It is what we havent been measuring. And i think it is why so many of the comments today were on, lets not go back to a numbers game where we pretend that if we hit this number it must mean that we have equitable opportunity to learn. You can be measuring things on that dashboard. The dashboard is absolutely crucial for us because when you have that collaboration between the professional educator that knows the kids, the parents, the administrators, the elected school board members, saying heres what we believe will be the gamechanger, how many of our students are graduating from high school having already earned College Credit . You can measure that. Thats an opportunity to learn. Thats a program that could look very different if youre in a Rural Community or an urban community. If you have a community college, if you have ap classes, International Baccalaureate programs. We have want to actually have that dashboard measure the Real Services and supports that those kids have. And we he believe that, that that is how youre going to move the the needle. Miss winegarten, issue of resource equity. Resource equity is absolutely essential but i would go a step further which is not covered by the law, resource. Many, many times vulnerable kids need a lot more. That is baked into some of the title one formulas but what happens is we have to make sure that theres not counterproductive efforts here. So adequacy and equity are essential to leveling the Playing Field. But that includes a much broader view than just actual dollars. It includes, what are the programs, what do we need to do in dual emergent. What do we need to in terms of ap. What do we need to kids i taught at clara barton high school, a Title One School, could actually compete in debates against kids in scarsdale high school, a very wellfunded school . That require as lot of thinking about how do i actually contour schools to the needs of your students. Im out of time. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator murray. Senator enzi. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Id like to start by stating that the actions of the u. S. Department of education that they have taken over the last few months on a number of issues is a of great concern to me and to people that i represent. I want to thank all of you for, that have testified. You have provided some great information both in the printed testimony and what you said. I want to thank the chairman and Ranking Member for the tremendous leadership that they provided so that this committee could have an influence on changing the law and in a way that the president signed and that were now trying to get done. And now is not the time to implement the law differently. It is important that we implement it as it was written and were in charge of presiding over that and this is a good start. Its not the time to bring up things that were not agreed to and change the outcome through executive action. When i first got here i had a principal who wanted to see where all the reports went that he had to do and he got leave from his School District to come back an spend a semester here and he spent his time over at the department of education and when he reported back to me said, you know, they take a look at everyone of those forms. They make sure that every single blank has a logical answer. If it doesnt, they send it back. When it is completed they file it and nobody looks at it. We are in process of eliminating some of those but in the meantime this particular supplement, not supplant sounds like a new opportunity to get new reports that will contain a lot of information again may not be used or could be used detrimentally. So, i do know that the devastating effects that could be in proposed changes that it could have on states such as wyoming. Wyomings constitution as the chairman mentioned calls for complete and uniform system much public instruction, one mandates the etiquettable allocation of resources among all School Districts in the state. Wyoming doesnt need federal government to provide equalized education for all students. Weve been doing it since 1889 and taking to court to make sure that happens. Not just dollars but supplies an even School Buildings that have to be equal. And im hearing from my state that the proposed action by the department of education would cause the forced transfer of Public School teachers across our county and maybe even the state. Im father of a Public School teacher and grandfather of a Public School students and there is no reason that the federal government should be interfering with where my daughter chooses to teach or where my children get their instruction. So, dr. Evers, can you tell me how this will impact frontier areas such as wyoming . Were the least populated state in the nation. I have understand the forced transfer of teachers sounds okay to individuals in this administration who dont understand states like wyoming or wisconsin but seems to me that rural and frontier states will be hit the hardest with such an outcome. As former teacher of the year in rural, no, as superintendent of a rural state, can you tell me what kind of impact this will have . Absolutely and just as an aside, the, one of the major issues in rural wisconsin, and im sure in rural wyoming, is who is going to teach those schools . We were having a extraordinarily severe Teacher Shortage and can be blamed on whole number of issues. I have my own opinions on that but when we take the ability for local School Districts, rural or local, and confine the way they hire people in a way that isnt going to help kids, necessarily, and we try to, and i get the idea that it is important to have some, some transparency around equitable distribution of money. This just doesnt get it. That is not, that is the main thing. But what it would do is give rural districts who have very difficult time to begin with in hiring staff members, it would amplify that concern in that it would take away principals and superintendents and those that do the hiring to really conflate a number of different issues that really doesnt matter and that is equalness of the distribution. So it is going to make their jobs more difficult to find high quality teachers, that is the bottom line. For rural wisconsin, and wyoming that is a huge issue. In rural areas teachers are the main backbone of those communities and we have to make sure that we get the best people in those positions. Thank you. I will be providing you with some written, written questions regarding the negotiated rulemaking panel that you are on. I want to thank dr. Gordon for specificity of accounting consequences that you had in your testimony and what you said and ill be providing some more questions regarding that. I know that those have a tendency to put the awed wednesday to sleep but theyre really important to what were doing. Thank you. We have one accountant on the committee, which is senator enzi. Thank you, senator enzi. Senator bennet. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank the panelists for being here today and everything you do for our schools and our kids. It has been said this federal law is civil rights law and i believe that. What that means for me sitting here thinking about millions of children marooned in Public Schools, rural and urban in america today, that are schools nobody on this panel would ever send one of our own kids or grandkids and it is the reason i worked so hard to try to close the comparability loophole. We didnt get there. We dead get important reporting language on reporting actual salaries and other costs. I think that is important because it will equip teachers and parents with information they need to be able to make the case Going Forward about how to create a system of Public Education that actually will work in america for kids live in poverty. That wont be done by people on this panel. It will be done by all of you and the people you represent all across america. Let me start with one question, which is that we are one of three countries in the oecd who spend more money on wealthy students than we do on poor student. Is there anybody on the panel who will defend that system, in terms of closing the achievement gap in the United States . In other words, do you expect that if we continue to spend more money on wealthy kids than we do on poor kids we will have any hope of closing americas achievement gap . It was said today, there was testimony today, mr. Chairman, i think we spend 620 billion allin on education in america and if youre running a Decent School distribute, you know 80 of that ought to be spent on teachers or more in my view. Testimony from my fellow superintendent today was there is quote, no relationship between teacher, salary level and teacher effectiveness. Does anybody want to defend that . There is no relationship between the expenditure of 80 of what we spend and effectiveness of teachers. Randi . I mean what i of course there is relationship. I wont speak for, who is an amazing superintendent in des moines but there is much evidence that there is relationship between the experience of teachers and the stability of schools and frankly part of what were trying to do in schools that are struggling is how do we nurture and secure Great Teachers to stay at those schools. So obviously there is both on a macroand micro way there is a way, there are real, both correlations here and things like that. I think what my colleague was just saying that the dollar for dollar piece that the, that the department is proposing doesnt get you, doesnt get you to the equity issues that you have spent your life, senator and you as well. What im saying is, whether the department, you know, ends up with this rule or doesnt end up with this rule, the reality is, the way we are spending resources in this country, im the first to say, maybe i will be second or third because the two of you are here, the first to say we should pay teachers more in this country. It is a disgrace what we pay teachers in the United States but how we pay them really is important and i dont think we should, be having people come here 10 years from now, saying there is no correlation between how we pay teachers and their effectiveness. And i think we need to Work Together to make sure that is not the case because, then you cant make the case that we should have more resources. It worries me that we continue, we come here and we tinker around the edges and the reality is, if we dont have a solution to the kids that are showing up to kindergarten having heard 30 million fewer words than more affluent peers, if kids dont have a choice of school that any of us would send our kid, Higher Education continues to accelerate in the cost, youre in bottom quartile of income inners, it costs you 85 to go to college, where as top income, it is 15 , add all that together and our system of education is reinforcing income inequality we have and opportunity gap we have, rather than liberating people from it. And, that is an invitation from me to anybody on this panel to figure out how we go forward to 10 years from now were not sitting here having seen these kind of results. And that is going to happen in america, not here. Well, i would just, can i just comment on that, senator . Seven section left. But please. I would just say look, it took extraordinary amount of effort for us to sort of barely come together to get the law over the finish line. It required a lot of engagement of a lot of stakeholders. Honestly as we look timely meant this law, were going to have to do the same thing. Local district by local School District, state by state and, and, for us, those of us obviously who are very invested in seeing that equity outcome, that we know is so important consistent with our american values, you know, we believe that that flexibility is there, now that we have created this law. But it does not, in my view, undermined the importance of requiring appropriate, rigorous, federal oversight and striking that balance as we move forward is going to be the challenge and the charge for all of us. But i feel like in many ways our work has just begun as we look at how were going to try to do this with that flexibility in mind. But i want a guarranty of strong, appropriate federal oversight. As we move forward. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator bennet. Senator isakson. Senator murkowski. I made a mistake. Senator murkowski is next. Ive done that once before. I dont want to do it twice, johnny. Actually, mr. Chairman, i will defer to senator isakson as i just came back in and im just finding out what has already been discussed. So i will defer to senator isakson. Thank you. Senator isakson. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, lisa, i appreciate that. Ranking member murray, she left i guess. I want to commend the chairman and Ranking Member on their leadership on essa, and every Student Succeeds to the point where were at today. I think great empowerment for local boards of education and state boards of education to carry out the educational mandate in their state. Throughout the debate, im one of the last remaining people that wrote no child left behind. I readily admit that. It was great act for six years. Seven years it wasnt reauthorized because it became harder and harder to make adequate ceiling process. Ceiling got too low and people were put into nonperforming schools that shouldnt have been put in that category. Thing i focused most on children with disabilities as and assessment of children with is disabilities. Im married to a special education teacher. Our kids with learning disabilities to try to provide as much quality rules as we could and quality education. One of the things which had was 1 , 1 exception i guess you call it for kids with disability alternative assessment rather than man tate test under no child left behind. We rewrote every Student Succeeds act, it was overruled by regulation that said that the state board could not keep a local system or a from determining if a kid needed an alternative assessment based on the iep or individual disability education act to insure there was more flexibility. Although there is 1 cap it really doesnt apply because the state and local education agencies idea governs and iep is governing document to determine whether the all termtive assessment is necessary or not. As two superintendents, mr. Ahart and mr. Evers, would you tell me how that is working and how you intend to carry that out in your respective systems . Well, the, and that was an issue of lots of discussion if negotiated regulations were, and it is, its clearly the, essa has changed the, flipped the equation in that schools arent held to the 1 , states are and we have an obligation to, i think, its an obligation as a state to make sure that we dont as a state exceed that 1 . In addition when we negotiate a rules around that, there are, there are rules that asking for a waiver for any particular district, we have to go through relatively rigorous process to make sure it doesnt happen some it is going to be about providing Technical Assistance to those districts that exceed 1 and well do that. It is our responsibility. And in the past its been local responsibility but it is clear this committee determined that the state needs to be accountable for that which we will be. Something that we take verier is rusely. To set benchmarks that translate into an equitable measure at the state and local level. So one of the things that came up during regulations negotiations was just this issue. Certainly seems to be a bit of a paradox there. This day cant go over 1 but individual districts can. I would argue the district, districts another 4 of students without alternative assessment and what i have in my district and the no properly testing more students than i am because of the nature of the program that we offer. So again i think with good guidance from the state and the state offices working closely with the local education agencies, i dont see this as being particularly problematic. Thats good to hear because chairman alexander made a point of saying that we got out of the National School board business and empower the local and state school boards, and this is one of those areas where the federal agency decides to enforce that saigon it would be negative for the local system industry. We want to empower you to be in complete control of education and a porsche what you forge thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator warner. Thank you, mr. Chairman. We spent a lot of time talking about financial accountability provisions of the new education law. And about the department of education plans for enforcing these provisions. Weve heard concerns from witnesses who represent the professionals on the front lines implementing the us as they. I want to make sure that opportunity to clarify a few key points essa. Providing this provisions and why there in the law in the first place. Congress strengthen the financial accountability provisions in essa for a simple reason. To ensure that federal money is used to meet the purpose of title i. I dont have a poster but i believe it, to provide all children significant opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high quality education. And underline all, not just children in wealthy districts. So ms. Weingarten, let me start there. We do believe its important for federal law to require equity and adequacy in how education money is spent . Sorry, im having, ive been having a microphone problem all morning. The essa is a civil rights law and it is about trying to make sure that theres opportunity for all children. So if that is the case, the equity is actually essential or ticket to excellence. But as i was saying to senator murray earlier, that what we are seeing locally is that we have actually have a fight for adequacy, too. He does its not simply what is equal. In order to level the Playing Field we have to give our vulnerable kids more. And as senator bennet said, weve got to flip whats going on in this country. So what the law does is it starts us on the path, its at the end of that path and we need to be vigorous and rigorous in making sure that the kids who have had the least get the most. All right, thank you. I agree. Let me follow up on that by asking deeply the department has the authority to ensure that states and districts do not divert state and local funds away from Public Schools in low income neighborhoods . I am very glad, senator warner, you asked the question in that way. Because the entire testimony weve been talking about increasing as opposed to diverting. I believe that the federal government and the department of education has the authority to ensure that there is no diversion. They had that in three different ways. Its not just the title i funding formulas that focus on concentration of poverty, and i think doctor gordon is probably better at this than i would ever be, but its the names of effort issues. And provision. And its were clarified several months before them. So did you have the authority. They need that authority and part of what we are concerned about is making sure that it is not overreached so they can actually do their job. Good. Let me do turn to that part of the. To have the authority but how can the department enforced these provisions in a manner that doesnt result in the unintended consequences that you and others have discussed . So that is a really, that, frankly, should have been what was, what consume the time of the committee, with all due respect. As chavez said earlier, this is a very collocated law and there is a lot of complicated factors, because it is very much a law that is about human behavior. And about lots of different multiple parts as many of the senators and many of the witnesses have talked about. The law provides some very powerful new provisions including transparency. And that transparency provision as dr. Gordon said can be over methodology, not just over resources. So we need to actually see what the funding levels are. We need to see how those transparency provisions operate. That can be the first step up enforcement processes it and then after that one looks at what you do next. But right now to move to something that some one size fits all enforcement mechanism thats not even allowed by the law seems like, seems not wise. Not in the right direction. Thank you. And i will ask more unquestioned for the record, the Financial Accounting is about making sure that federal dollars are used to make sure that the money goes to the children who need it most. To our legitimate disagreements over how the department of education can best enforce financial accountability provisions, but these are not disputes over whether those accountability provisions should be enforced or whether the department of education has the power to enforce those provisions. On that issue i believe the democrats and the teachers are in very strong agreement your republicans, on the other hand, seem to be arguing the financial accountability provisions of the law should simply be ignored. The Department Needs to figure out how to enforce financial accountability in a way that doesnt have unintended consequences that disrupt schools. It is critical the Department Listen to our teachers and to our School Leaders, but ignoring accountability provisions is not an option. Financial accountability is essential to ensure that states, districts actually give our teachers the resources they need to do their jobs, and the states and districts use federal money to help our most vulnerable kids a decent education. That is the law. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator warren. Id like to say to the witnesses that i have an unavoidable conflict at 1140 time at and i will need to leave. Senator cassidy has agreed to chair the remainder of veering at a want to thank each of you for coming and for your excellent written testimony and for what you said this morning. Senator murkowski . Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you all for the discussions this morning. Very important and a lot of different levels. I come from a state where we spent a lot of money per pupil on our students, and yet the outcomes are not consistent throughout. Most particularly in our rural areas. Akin 2007, the case was heard before our state Supreme Court brought by stakeholders in three rural districts, and this is based on the concern that these districts were low performing because of the lack of funding equity. And considerable deliberation, longterm factfinding, but the judge came back and he said that the problem wasnt money. Because each rural district got about the same perpupil. But what they were seeing were aching very different outcomes among them and among the individual schools. And what the judge found was that the issue was the degree of state support and its effectiveness within different communities, or perhaps lack thereof within the communities. So it was local support for schools. It was Community School relationships. It was effective and culturally relevant curriculum. The teacher and principal effectiveness. The data really demonstrated this. This was what mattered. Not that money doesnt matter. You have to have the money in order to do these things, but the judge back in 2007 denied the move for more money and ruled that what the state needed to provide was more effective state support. And then back in 2012 there was a settlement because there still an argument about whether or not adequate Financial Funding was being provided. So in 2012 we see a settlement with the department of education in the state agreed to create programs to support prek, targeted resources grants, Teacher Retention branscum exit remediation. But it went specifically to the level of support that could be made available to these respective districts, rather than a dollar for dollar comparison. So i guess i would throw it out to anyone here on the panel. I noted, is garcia, i wasnt here when you made the comment, but you apparently made a comment that we want to measure Actual Service and support, not just the dollars. So can you all comment on the situation in alaska, and what our states courts found . I want to begin by saying i was a utah teacher but i was a fairbanks alaska student. I know would like to go to school with the stars are still out in the middle of the day. And i want to tell you that the best Teaching Assignment i ever had was salt lake homeless shelter. Because the surrounding support that i had asked the teachers that the district placed a better, they were social workers that worked with the family. The was a health clinic, a dentist who came in every few weeks. The nutrition programs that th had. I was never alone. I had the support i needed as the professional who could deal with sometimes Mental Health issues that the family had. So we understand when you say, you do indeed, every school needs that technology, the textbooks, the facility. You need the stuff, but you also need to deal with the reality of that childs life, and some children come to us with so many more needs that are not met in their home, in their community. They come from homes where they dont have disposable income sometimes come to take a child to the dentist. And so that child walks into our classroom in pain. And we have to do something about it. Whether or not weve been given the resources to do anything about it or not. And so for me it is more than just counting the dollars. The dollars are important, but you also have to say how creative can i be in seeing what kind of service and support, what kind of Community Organizations are out there that can help me. In utah we are the lowest perpupil funded School District in the nation. We can stretch a dollar until you can see through the. We are the most creative educators on the planet. Give us more money, that would be nice. But whatever we are different then we try and leverage that into something more meaningful and supporting those children. Thats why we want to say which is services, which supports, which programs. It may cost a Different Number of dollars in this community than in this community. But, for instance, i keep using support as how can we make sure our kids graduate from high school having already earned College Credits . What would that look like . It might look like something very different if youre in no than if youre in anchorage where you have a university right there. And another might look like something online. But what we want is that power of professionals working in collaboration in each community to design something that makes sense for that community. And if what you are measuring is do you have the ability, to these children have the opportunity to earn College Credit before they graduate from high school . How many of them are doing that . How may of them use graduation as a Supreme Court into Higher Education wrecks describe what youre trying to accomplish, and then be creative about designing something that meets the needs of a specific School Community. Senator murkowski, but i respond briefly . Is over my time if the chairman allows. What jumped out at me that you said this about the case was that the judge ruled the was already a perpupil equality in the expenditure, and i think for us that sounded like thats what you said. He said, it was said that wasnt the money that necessarily make a difference. But for us that equality is important because ive been in a lot of schools on both ends of the spectrums. When you walk in the front door and this darkness but the resources gets you in the face, i cannot imagine how adding some extra dollars of their actually equals supplement when the scale is so tipped. Thank you. I would just add a point. Book, we know right now that black and latino students are 1. 5 times more likely to be taught by novice teachers. You know, is there a dollar for dollar solution thats going to directly address that in every part of the country and in every district in every state . Im not sure. But i do know that he zip code should not dictate the Resources Available to students, and we need to make sure that there is an opportunity for the voices of those communities most affected and infected by the plans that are going to be set forth at the state level to be represented. And i think for us, having affiliates, and we have affiliates in alaska, to have that voice heard so that they can be represented in the state plans is going to be an important part of getting to an outcome that hopefully achieves that equity that is at the heart of the original legislation that i believe is still embodied in this legislation, but for me its a strong federal oversight role that is going to ultimately be the counterbalance to making sure that that in fact before any manner that is consistent with what we have intended. I didnt mean to cut you off. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Would like to add that within the alaska court, the Supreme Court, the funding may have been equally adequate. The problem was the results are not. So again we are trying to measure the dollar for dollar, this is where the discussion gets even more intriguing. I think you for the additional allowance of time for others to answer and opportunity to speak. Senator casey. Thank you, mr. Chairman. In the interest of time let me say first thank you to the panel for being here, for your good work on this legislation. I will submit a question for the record, which will focus on laurent is a. In my limited time only to direct my questions to ms. Marshall, the 1 cap on assessment for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. I guess maybe two if i can get to that. Its good we had this win, that we codified an important policy, made it law. And i just want to ask you, how do you think in terms of how is going to work, how will this policy, which is a continuation of prior policy, hope special education teams, help schools, help School Districts making that very critical decision about which children should take which test speak with think you senator casey. I want to thank you for your leadership on this issue. It was a huge win for us to keep his cap and we are the students that are represented around the table whose teams are making this decisions. And for all too often from the is a lack of presumption of competence, and before the was such a cap, we saw untold numbers of students taking off axis to the general education curriculum as early as second grade. Thats just unconscionable. We think this cap is important to have someone alluded to earlier or stated earlier. Its adequate. I think the negreg process was, put up some important guardrails to make sure that states and teams are asking the right question and that they are very careful not to put students on the on the basis of their disability or on the basis of the past test performance but as they push harder to make sure the students have what they need to succeed spent on when ascii because i know your work validates this principle. I think the policy would able to get done in this bill, dates that students with disabilities have a lot of ability your i think thats an important validation. I wanted to ask you, how can we ensure the districts and states implement this guidance to ensure all students are held tuesdays very High Expectations . Would you hope would happen . The clearer the guidelines the brighter the lines, the easier it is for the families to enforce the law. And it falls on their shoulder. And so thats why we appreciate the federal oversight. We have needed it repeatedly. We continue to need it to this day to ensure our kids have access to what they need. And in response to what senator enzi was saying before about the department of ed at the checkboxes, we rely on that data. We needed. Thats how we can show how our kids are being shortchanged in what they need to be able to get equitable access to receive the benefit they deserve from an appropriate an excellent education just like any other student. Thanks very much. Appreciate it. Thank you, senator casey. Well, heck, i may take a little contrary viewpoint to some. Ms. Marshall, you mentioned the 1 cap. Lets go back to those dyslexic children. Now, most children come in fact if anyone differs with me, im not sure of any school, i dont think theres any School District in the nation which screen for dyslexia in grade wonder if anyone knows of such a district please let me know. So you 20 of the population dyslexic, and at some point somewhere between third and fourth grade, a typical child begins to learn to read, whereas the dyslexic child is still learning to read. I think i get that right. So going to have a standardized test in fourth grade which assumes fluency, and yet the child who is dyslexic you still learning to decode and is not a fluent reader. So innocent we have program failure. At fourth grade were going to teach, we are going to 20 of the children in the way in which they are not yet ready to be tested by. Now, i suppose if you have a 1 cap, lets imagine that in the future some progressive School District would actually screen all the children and find that 20 . Would we still tested them with the same standardized test knowing that by great for they will still not be reading adequately . For some reason that doesnt make sense to me. Any thoughts on that . Well, i can just tell you in my home state is that we do screen for children entering school, and speeded for dyslexia . Its a more general screening but it has to do with understanding and decoding skills and skills relating to phonics and things like that. Im sure some of those children are caught, are captured by that screening. We have a state law in third grade that students are requiring additional help because theyre not at grade level in reading, that School District have to develop a plan for them, whether its special it or not. And so i think i can answer the question generally. I believe our state is working hard to address the needs of dyslexic children. But if your question is do we do a screening specifically for dyslexia . The answer would be no. I havent found one that does actually. Most rely upon a child not doing well, by great three the horses out of the park to the job is not doing well by great three typically that efficiency will persist. If we were able to screen these children, and knowing that have not yet learned to read fluently, would we say give them the same standardized test in grade four the other children are receiving, even if we know they have not yet learned to read fluently . Ms. Marshall, would you advocate doing so to speak was yes, i would actually cassidy, im sorry. My motherinlaw makes the same mistake. I dont have my glasses on. Without the accommodation im in trouble. That actually gets to my point. We actually agree that students with dyslexia are not being screened are not being taught and the teachers dont have the training they need. I will broaden that to say that all students with disabilities who this law protects as well as every other student have trouble reading and are not getting the services that they need to succeed. We often hear the argument that you put forth around not taking the test, but it is our belief again that we need to know where students are against the standard we should not throw them into without the accommodations and we should i have limited time. What would you say is an accommodation . For the child who is it different for each job of the need to have the accommodations that supports the use in the classroom to learn when they take the test. That is of great concern to us right now. We find students are not having that accessibility. Lets go back to lets get granular but if the child has not learned to decode and the child does not read fluently, taking a test which presumes fluency, that child is going to fail, period. Do we really want to make that child take that particular test as opposed to another test which, given test which may indeed adjust for the fact that the child has not yet learned to read fluently speak what i cant make those decisions on individual basis with each student. But as a general principle we want our kids to count, and wanting to be part of a test that all kids are taking to see where they are on grade level according to the state standards. That we would know at least 20 of the kids, despite whatever the iq is, they are going to be blessed by definition. Dyslexics, theres a disconnection between the two. They will read less well. Weve gotten rid of the punitive nature, the intention of the test, the recently taken is to know what the students are and given the appropriate services and supports to move them forward. Im not sure that we came to a common mind, but im out of time. And i think it is now senator murphy. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Thank you for all of the panelists time today. I just have one general comment and then one specific question to i guess our favorite target today, ms. Marshall. Heres my general comment. I think ms. Weingarten got a right when she made it clear that this law is a civil rights law, first and foremost the federal government is in the use of education policy because we are in the business of civil rights. No business for us to write federal education policy if its not. Is an equal opportunity for disabled kids and for kids and minority kids. I thought your answers to senator warrens questions were spot on. But thats a real uncomfortable thing for us to talk about, especially when were sitting in front of a bunch of educators and superintendent and state officials. What we are saying is without federal requirement, that kids of color or poor kids or disabled kids we treated fairly, that local political dynamics are going to accrue to the detriment of those kids, that if you dont have a federal requirement, that ultimately those kids are not going to get a fair shake. So becomes a difficult thing for us to talk about. Its been at the foundation of our federal commitment to civil rights and that the foundation of our federal education law for decades. So i do think its important, and i have since the beginning of the drafting process for this law to have some strong accountability requirements and some High Expectations for schools and for kids. I dont think that it ends at the text of the law. I think theres a very important and appropriate role for the department of education to play in setting the guide rails for the financial accountability, or this accountability system. I understand, dr. Gordon, the ways in which up require but to spend more money on poor kids may occasionally not work to their benefit, but i think in aggregate if youre spending more money on title i schools thats going up students in title i schools, even if maybe provide some perverse disincentives here and there. And on accountability i think weve got a good accountability section in this bill. But weve got to make sure that the interventions that are being used to try to turn around schools are not just whitewashed. If a school is failing, its not enough just to paint the front of the school going. Youve got to do something thats meaningful. I can, its uncomfortable because i dont doubt the willingness of School Districts and states to try to be partners in this, but the regulations are important to make sure we got some basic guardrails to make sure that what is happening to make the schools better for these populations is based in what we know works. And what we know doesnt work. So i appreciate the conversation he, but im interested in the department of education containing to move forward on regulations that are in the spirit of the accountability sections of our bill. I dont think theres a lot of disagreement on the. Heres my specific question to you, ms. Marshall. And its on a narrow issue that is a passion of mine, and thats the use of seclusion and restraint in our schools. So according to the department of educations latest Civil Rights Data collection and 20112012, 70,000 students across the country are physically restrained. 37,000 of them was secured. I think thats the tip of the iceberg. I dont think we understand how deep this problem is. Ill take ownership of it. In connecticut we have a problem. Screening rooms being used, through kids into so they can screen out their problems. So theyre not a disruption to everybody else. We include language in this bill, bipartisan language that would require state plans to address the use of what the bill calls adverse of behavioral intervention which remains seclusion and restraint. What you want to see from the department of education when it comes to the guidance they give to schools on how to attack this issue of the overages of seclusion and restraint speak with thank you very much, senator murphy for asking me this question because its also a passion of mine and also for your leadership in ensuring that clause is added to the law. There were many tears and dances of joy when this portion of the law was included to make sure that there are positive school climate, and that we need to take steps, schools need to be unequivocally stop this abuse of students in our schools. Seclude invested in a locked room from which they cannot escape is known to be one of the most tortures of things you can do to another person. Why are we doing that to our kids . Restraint can only be used in emergency situations. The research is clear that is used for power and control. On little, tiny kids. That must start. Id be happy to submit more comics for the record but i would just like to say one more thing, which is i spent years as a positive behavior support specialist in the school did with the kids with the most challenging behaviors to keep them in school and keep them learn. I can come if youre in a seclusion or you have for a dull sitting on top of you, what are you or the other students who are watching this learning . This green rooms in connecticut were called that by the other students screaming rooms. Thats what they heard, kids in the room screaming. Imagine that effect on a little child when youre trying to learn. Thats a life lesson no child in this country should be subjected to. So what i know has made a difference is not money. It is not, it is about training. It is about the belief in the confidence of the teacher to keep our kids safe. The support of the principles and the other people in the building to make sure they have kind of those services around the kids who challenge the most. But it can be done positively and it can be done without those are baric practices. No teacher and wants to engage in that kind of practice. And so you are right, this is about supporting plans to create the climate and atmospheres in schools to make sure that the situations never arise. Mr. Chairman, is what additional, could i just want to make the point this conversation about a candidate is uncomfortable because we often place the burden on accountability. Simply on the superintendents and the demonstrators and the teachers. When you look at the difference in educational outcomes, it still persists amongst different groups. It also has to do with all sorts of factors that exist outside of schools. And so this conversation about accountability that, of course, i think is important is not a conversation. Its just about what happens inside the school. Its a conversation about what is happening in systems writ large that are controlled by frankly folks what about the pay grade of teachers and administrators on the superintendents. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator whitehouse. Thank you, chairman cassidy. I would like to guess first to make the point that under title i we said quite clearly that a school bus get, and if i quote the text correctly, the funds that would otherwise receive under title i. We did not say it should get the same funds as of the schools receive. We could have said that but it would not have been agreement on it, and the law i think is fairly clear. What worries me is that if we get into a rangel over this regulation, reading the law as the latter statement rather than the former state which seems to me as alert every simply clear statement, they were going to start to get distracted from all of the areas that we take into were with was common agreement that there is a great opportunity for a form of innovation. One of the keys was to open up curriculum. We had curriculum gets slaughtered in title i schools because everything that didnt teach to the test got thrown overboard for fear that the boat would sink if the testing came back poorly. That was a terrible disservice to the students in those schools. We have set up innovative dashboard opportunities for people to report and much more effectively on how schools are doing so that it can be real accountability, weve opened up the room for interventions in failing and struggling schools so that theres a lot more opportunity to bring different perspectives, different opportunities to. Weve opened up the opportunity for Innovation Schools to exist. That are Bright Green Lights in this bill saying lets do this better, and to insist on driving down the street that has a red light on it doesnt seem to me to be constructed. I hope that it does not take us into a place where we are not taking advantage of all the green light that this bill clearly lays out. Teachers, school administrators, pretty much everybody is very excited about the new tool that this bill gives us. If we can avoid driving into this ditch and instead focus on areas where there really is i think very, very significant a partisan solid and legally founded opportunity for reform and innovation, boy, id like to encourage that. That said, it is i think absolutely clear and bipartisan, and has always been the case that nobody wants to see federal title i money come in and provide an excuse to School Districts or states to quietly the use of money out of those schools and out of those districts to the favored and wealthier districts knowing that title i money is going to come in and make up the gap. So if the equality of expenditure rule is not the one that we should be following, i would ask that each of the witnesses let us know what rule they would recommend the department of education to follow. Because its to a degree, i do want to end up in a situation in which no regulation, nobody would agree with any regulation of this because people are waiting back to be against anything and everything, no matter what he does. So i think it is important that the be some affirmative statement from folks who are. About what they think the revelation should look like, not just what it should not look like. Soil have so ill have about a minute. And let me make it a question for the record. I know what my nda members think is the standard. Theres one thing about interdistrict equality and equity. Its much more dramatic when you look across district lines within a state. If you were to ask anyone with two eyes to go into the best school, the best Public School in that state, anyone can think about what Public School that would be. In utah you go to park city. You would say lets do an inventory of the services, the school nurses, the professional librarians can do programs, the International Baccalaureate programs, the art classes, the theater classes, field trips. If you were to go in and take an inventory of the service supports and programs in the best school in your state, make that your standard. Make that the dashboard. Why not . And then say we are going to compare every Single School in our state by how well it measures up to do you have a school nurse . You have a professional librarian . What your counselor to student ratio . How are you serving the special ed kids . What is your dll program of . Do you have clubs after school . If you were to do that, and the federal government either way, is not the same, and if you dont, you know, if you dont have perfect equality, somebodys head rolls. You were saying that role at the federal government is to be transparent to give good information to people like advocates sitting at this table. To say put that information in our hands so we can go back and we can fight for the students that are being shortchanged. I appreciated and i think the panel very much for very helpful conversation. This hearing record, first, i also think you all. Put a little Southern Touch there, yall. So thank you for being you. Hearing record will remain open for 10 business days. Members basement Additional Information and questions for the record within the time that they would like. Thanks for being here today. The committee will stand adjourned. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] booktv as 48 hours of nonfiction oaks and authors every weekend. Here are some of programs to watch for. For me the worst thing ive ever done was committed an act of murder in 1991. I was charge with the mans death and it was by far one of the worst things you can do. I made the unfortunate decision at the age of 19. And devastated the family, you know, took somebodys husband, a son, brother, a father from the family. Is one of the things that stays with me to this day. Its larger to reside to some of the work that i do it in the city because i never want another child to grow up with that type of burden. One of those burdens that never goes away. Shaka senghor, author of writing my roskam discusses of 19 years in prison and his life after. Go to booktv. Org for the complete weekend schedule. Next a forum on history of the Federal Reserve and the evolution of its policies since its 1913 founding. The American Enterprise institute hosted economists and other financial scholars for the discussion. It is one hour 35 minutes. Im kevin hassett, director of Economic Policy studies at the American Enterprise institute. I have been here for going on i guess 17 years and when i first came after being a senior economist at the Federal Reserve i was placed in an office next to allan meltzer, who was at that moment