The Senate committee has passed its version of the new federal aid to education bill, originally named the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Now the House of Representatives has passed its version of the new rules for federal funding.
Passage fell narrowly along party lines on a vote of 218-213, with 27 Republicans joining all Democrats in opposition to nearly derail it on the floor.
For most of the roll call, the bill had more votes against it than in favor. Many Republicans either held out their votes until the last minute or changed their votes under pressure from GOP leaders.
Conservative lawmakers had pushed for the adoption of several amendments allowing schools to opt out of No Child Left Behind requirements. Only one of those amendments, from Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.), was adopted, with lawmakers voting 251-178 to allow parents to exempt their children from testing….
The Senate is currently considering a more bipartisan version of legislation to renew No Child Left Behind. If it passes, it will have to be reconciled with the more conservative House bill, which gives states more authority over education policy.
But even if Congress manages to negotiate a compromise, there’s no guarantee that President Obama will sign it, as the administration has expressed opposition to both the House and Senate bills.
The 2002 No Child Left Behind law, which included a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), expired in 2007. Congress has not passed legislation to extend it since then.
Since 2011, the Obama administration has been issuing waivers from No Child Left Behind in response to demands from governors and school districts.
Both the House and Senate bills prohibit the Department of Education from exerting control over state academic standards. The provisions would apply to Common Core, which establishes English and math standards for all grade levels through high school.
“Parents are becoming increasingly fed up with such constant and onerous testing requirements, as well as the teachers,” Salmon said during floor debate.
When Congress passed federal aid to education in 1965, the law was simply called the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Period. Now, whenever the law is reauthorized, it is given an ambitious and absurd title, that claims impossible results. In 2001, it was No Child Left Behind. Almost 15 years later, can anyone claim that “no child was left behind?” Now the Senate bill is titled Every Child Achieves Act, as though something in the bill will miraculously insure that every child will achieve. Sorry, Virginia, there is no tooth fairy. And the House bill is as rhetorically nonsensical, called the Student Success Act. Please, someone, call it the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Its original purpose was to send money to schools and districts enrolling impoverished students, where materials were obsolete and class sizes bulged. Nothing in the act of 1965 said that it was guaranteed to raise test scores, to leave no child behind, to make students achieve or succeed.
Rhetorical candor would be refreshing.

Rhetorical candor would be refreshing indeed as would bringing Piaget back to the early childhood curriculum.
LikeLike
Well said, Alabama teacher.
LikeLike
What Diane and Mercedes are also glossing over is that the original ESEA had NO mandates for measuring “outcomes” at all. This NCLB 2 monstrosity should never be called ESEA 2, because corporate accountability horrors just keep accumulating in it.
Instead, we could pass a powerful law by the name ESEA 2, tracking and remediating the real and documented inequality in RESOURCES and OPPORTUNITY available to low-income children and communities. It is a tragedy that the leaders we raised up for this fight have abandoned it in a preemptive surrender to corporate reform’s supposedly irresistible juggernaut.
There is a whole movement to kill this law, but AFT gets money from the Gates Foundation to support it, and passes that on to NPE along with their lack of candor. So, opposition to the renewal hasn’t been covered on this site. Shame on you sniveling cowards for this spectacle, of supposed progressives demanding the imposition of 7 more years of corporate abuse.
Let’s look at this summary by another Gates grantee pretending progressive support for passing the house bill as a necessary step.
ASCD is demanding now a provision for “whole child accountability”, which would allow corporate vendors to assess whole children and supply data-driven, individualized wrap around whole child control in every district they take over.
http://inservice.ascd.org/house-passes-nclb-replacement-bill-but-more-work-to-be-done/
LikeLike
Chemtchr, I never “glossed over” the purpose or content of the original ESEA. As u have written many times, its purpose was equity: to provide funding to the schools enrolling the neediest kids.
LikeLike
Diane, what you have glossed over is that this bill has nothing in common with that original ESEA. It is a carry over of NCLB.
Your slippery argument that we can’t kill it and start over because the corporate lobbyists would never support that has damaged our movement beyond repair. Opportunity to Learn’s Justice campaign has been here all along, and you effectively cut it off from the people who trusted you and NPE to raise a banner.
We are still leading a vigorous opposition, with the democratic backing of the actual American people who overwhelmingly want the regime of corporate control ended once and for all. You are leading a rear-guard action, along with Randi Weingarten, to defend the indefensible extension of “accountabillity”-based disempowerment of low income target communities from outraged popular disgust.
LikeLike
chemtchr,
You are not making any sense. ESEA was passed in 1965 as federal aid to education, with funds flowing mostly to schools and districts serving poorest students. It has been reauthorized many times since then, and each time it is reauthorized, the Congress has added new programs and mandates. When the Clinton administration reauthorized it in 1994, it was called “Improving America’s Schools Act,” and it encouraged states to set standards and assessments for accountability. I have repeatedly written that the law should be focused on its original intent, which was to send money to poor kids. I have repeatedly said that the federal government should not mandate testing and accountability. It does not belong in ESEA. But that is what both parties wrote into the ESEA in 1994 and made far more prescriptive in 2001-02 with NCLB.
No, you can’t kill ESEA without also killing every aspect of federal aid to education. Yes, you can oppose testing and accountability. Annual testing without punishments attached is a small step away from NCLB. Grade span testing would be better, because it would reduce the burden on students, teachers, and schools and kill VAM. Getting a testing mandate out of federal law would be best of all. Continue working for that. It is an uphill battle because almost every member of Congress has been conditioned by nearly 15 years of NCLB to believe that schools must have federally-mandated tests. Even Elizabeth Warren believes that. I am not your enemy.
LikeLike
If Obama vetoes this bill then he essentially declares ownership of The Common Core. In the years to come as it fails and creates a travesty out of education then he too will own its failure. Any person with common sense and sound judgement can see the tests are unfair and are a form of mental torture. Where is his common sense? Where is his consideration of children with different developmental abilities?
LikeLike
“Where is his consideration of children with different developmental abilities?”
I guess that you missed the memo.
It is not fashionable to speak of the individual talents or individual needs of children.
LikeLike
(from a Va. mom) Didn’t you hear? Different abilities don’t matter. All that matters is passing these tests, and if you have different abilities you can just take them over and over and over and over and remediate and remediate and remediate and do after school review after school review after school review. And if you still don’t pass you can just give up your dream of getting a high school diploma.
LikeLike
What is it they want? They got annual testing and they doubled charter funding.
That’s the whole Obama public school agenda right there.
They should be thrilled.
LikeLike
Obama thinks that his exceptional childhood-single mom who was a graduate student and able to get support from her parents, remarry and have the ability to rise at 5 am to help him with his studies, to eventually get him into a private school-is the norm for not only him but for all minority children. He credits his mother-rightfully. But what would his policy have been on education if he had been one of the poor, minority children from a single parent home in NYC?
LikeLike
I might add that his wife came from an intact family with an employed dad and a full time stay at home mom. She was a bright child with a supportive and nurturing family- exactly the kind of student from low- income districts that get cherry picked by charters-in fact, Michelle attended a magnet school.
Is his policies about saving the Baracks and Michelles and to hell with the kids from dysfunctional families (mainly due to povert) with special needs, and ELL’s- then blame the public schools and their teachers?
LikeLike
If the house and senate actually agree on and pass a bill, and then Obama vetoed it, he would get the obstructionist of the century award.
LikeLike
Yes, we expect compromise, and government to function and make some small progress. That’s its job.
LikeLike
I, for one, would be thrilled to see it derail in a squabble among the vultures. What is wrong with you people?
LikeLike
Waivers may be fine for a Hawaiin King, but they have no place in a democracy.
We’re done with waivers.
LikeLike
How much money is Pearson laying out to congressmen to make testing mandatory?
Are the countries around the world laughing their heads off at the mockery of our educational system? I’m sure they are finding this a great reality show.
But to children it is the reality.
This has to go to the courts to be settled as illegal once and for all.
And let’s go back to ensuring the education of our children and not the ensuring of profits for companies lined up to get federal funds.
LikeLike
Tonight in Kansas City, Missouri, a child with special needs had run away. (“The family said he has autism, bipolar disorder and ADHD, and takes off when he gets angry.”) Six hours missing, and with officers, police helicopter and K-9 Unit—-AND…at the end of the video report, you’ll hear: “It was actually his school teacher who found him” after she’d learned he was missing and joined the search. http://www.kmbc.com/news/police-ask-public-to-help-find-missing-12yearold-boy/34062116 Yes, for teachers it IS all about the kids! Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 00:30:42 +0000 To: khomfeld@hotmail.com
LikeLike
Didn’t Obama back in 2008 say that NCLB has significant flaws that need to be addressed, and, that it needed to be fully funded?
What happened to THAT Obama?
If he vetoes this, even if it isn’t the perfect restoration to a commitment to equitable public education and continues choice (which let’s face it, is inevitable right now), he will officially own NCLB and also demonstrate his commitment to the power that he and Arne Duncan wield over schoolhouses across America.
Even if it divides us into 50 states waging 50 battles, at least we’ll be working on the local level with some autonomy where there are markets that battles can be won in and generate a tide of change.
The DOE wields a broadsword, not a scalpel. Someone should tell them that you can’t use a sword to perform surgery on your school system anymore than you’d use it in an operation.
As it is now, Arne Duncan doesn’t prescribe per se what he wants, but he just keeps sending states back to the drawing board or threatens them until they produce a plan that he can accept – it would be a lot more straightforward in some ways if Duncan just said what he was looking for since it often seems he has particular solutions in mind to all problems everywhere.
NCLB is a zombie law. It needs to be killed before it infects more school children with a bad childhood and squandered educational opportunities.
LikeLike
That Obama got a lot of teachers to vote for him — and then tossed them casually under the bus he let Duncan drive.
LikeLike
“. . . and continues choice (which let’s face it, is inevitable right now). . . ”
NO IT ISN’T INEVITABLE.
DEFEATIST
LikeLike
your thoughts are so great and helpful for everyone
LikeLike
Only one of those amendments, from Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.), was adopted, with lawmakers voting 251-178 to allow parents to exempt their children from testing….
Does this mean every state has to allow parents to opt-out?
LikeLike
I wrote Pres. Obama and told him what I thought about the new ESEA and incessant testing. It could not hurt to bombard him with letters from educators. https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
LikeLike
I have a question about the Senate bill and about charter-school legislation in general. Why are there special tax breaks for donating to charter schools, special grants for starting/expanding charter schools, and now, special grants for innovating financing of charter school construction? (Sounds like creative accounting to me — we have enough of that here in Illinois without going out of our way to encourage it.) Why not just give the same tax breaks for any donations to public K-12 schools or school districts, whether or not they are charter schools? Why no grants for general school construction, which we badly need in my overcrowded district? Where’s the level playing field, here?
LikeLike
Sorry, should say “innovative” financing.
LikeLike
I think that would be a disaster for public schools. To have truly “public” anything you need broad support and ownership, not just for abstract reasons but because the public will just be able to walk away from schools they don’t personally use or care about.
Nothing is free. Nothing. These grants and donations come with strings, they come with a downside. One of the downsides is if “the public” didn’t build the school then “the public” has no continuing stake in it.
The pitch is deceptive because it offers the freebie up front and then shifts the ongoing duty of support to the public. But if they didn’t participate in the decision to invest in building he school in the first place, they’ll be less likely to fund it going forward. Would you be happy to put a new roof on a house you didn’t have any say in building and don’t own?
I know it’s a pain in the neck to get people to fund public education, but it is well worth it long term. They have to own it, it has to be more than current parents of current students. I think charter schools will come to regret the end run around the public. It’s efficient and it gets the quick growth they want but the more they exclude the public in these decisions the less the public will feel they are invested and responsible for ongoing funding.
LikeLike
That’s a very good point. I think the problem is always how to persuade rich people anywhere to fund the education of children living in poverty, because impoverished towns and neighborhoods cannot adequately fund schools on their own. And you’re right that often the charter schools’ solution is to give a select few rich people what they would like to see — whether that’s “data-driven” instruction, “no excuses” discipline, or exclusion of high-needs or transient students (no losers in my charter school!). So maybe my real question should be: why on earth should the government give these people added incentives (in the form of tax breaks, which in effect cost the government money to provide) to fund their pet projects, instead of making public funds equally available to all schools?
LikeLike
Mercedes Schneider’ summary of
House (Student Success Act)
and Senate bills (Every Child Achieves Act):
LikeLike
You might enjoy this on Cuomo. It’s also the first time I’ve seen his ed agenda bluntly described as “privatization” by someone outside ed circles:
http://justice.gawker.com/andrew-cuomo-twists-the-knife-he-inserted-into-bill-de-1716351990
LikeLike
Thanks. The curtain is being pulled back on this shameless political bully. What we see is a very, very, small, little man.
LikeLike
We have so many politically savvy zealots with way too much money who think they know how to fix society, and specifically education. And they think that this is their time, their moment. Though it’s been about 15 years. What would Warhol say?
Then he have the crusaders, like John White, Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee who think they are on a mission for these powerful folks. And then there are all of the privatizer-gentrifier-yuppifiers who do anything that smacks of profit or progress or efficiency or clearing space or steamrolling over communities and concerns over lack of oversight or other precautions. And there is just so much corruption going on between the unearthly ideologues and the robotic vermin.
I don’t think they’re following any singular playbook. Together I don’t think they’re following anything but the road to ruin.
Obama picked Duncan. They are a pair crusading idiots, not much different from the rest.
LikeLike
If Congress had wanted to rein in Arne Duncan Congress wouldn’t have waited until near the end of his term to draft a new law.
The waiver situation worked out very well for them. Both Republicans and Democrats got the policy they supported with none of the political risk. Now they can run against Arne Duncan on the Democratic side and Obama on the GOP side. Everyone involved is protected from political accountability.
LikeLike
The FACTORY Model is well and alive in America’s public schools … at least that is what the DEFORMERS want … no thinking … just scripts to read, then evaluate the students to see how much GRIT they have. OY. OY. OY!
LikeLike
“scripts”, oy indeed.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
LikeLike
“Rhetorical candor would be refreshing.”
But that would go against the marketing and propaganda principles involved in calling BS “excrement of bovine origin”.
LikeLike
I am sick and tired of our school being a priority school and Pearson Learning they can turn it around by re-spouting strategies we all know, but are now the perfect strategies because they are labelled by Pearson. Everything with Pearson is online so one must have plenty of working hardware to access it, assessments are pre-formed and has to be done weekly. Whatever happened to teaching children? Our children are losing out and we teachers are beginning to lose it altogether!
LikeLike