Committee on Education and the Workforce

WASHINGTON – The House today passed H.R. 2, the Student Results Act of 1999. The legislation renews Title I, the largest federal program to help disadvantaged students, as well as other programs in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). The House passed the bill 358-67.

"The passage of the Student Results Act confirms our commitment to improve public elementary and secondary education in our country, especially for our nation’s most disadvantaged children," said Rep. Bill Goodling, chairman of the House Education Committee. "This is not status quo legislation. We must reverse the failure of 30 years of federal education spending, and the Student Results Act begins that process."

Goodling said the bill was approved with four main principles in mind: quality, accountability, choice, and flexibility. "We have spent $120 billion on Title I since its creation, yet in that time we have failed to focus the program on quality," Goodling said. "With today’s bill, we usher in a new era of high expectations for the children served by this key program."

The Student Results Act contains several provisions, including:

• Public Choice. "For the first time, parents will have the option to participate in a viable public school choice option," Goodling said. "The public choice provision is a simple concept: Children should not be forced to attend failing schools." The bill allows children attending schools classified as low performing to be given the opportunity to attend a higher quality public school in their area and have their transportation costs paid by Title I funds.

• Academic Accountability. Modifies existing accountability standards to ensure that all students -- especially the most disadvantaged students -- show increased academic achievement at the school and state levels.

• School Reports for Parents. School districts receiving Title I funding will distribute information to parents and the public on the academic performance of each Title I school. If districts already provide this information for their schools, Title I can be included on those reports or provided by other means.

• Parental Consent for Bilingual Education and Testing for Students in the English Language – Title I. School officials would be required to seek the informed consent of parents prior to placement of their children in a native language instruction program for limited English proficient children funded under Title I. In addition, Title I students who have attended school in the United States for at least three consecutive years would be tested in reading and language arts in the English language.

• Bilingual Education Act Reforms – Title VII. The bill allows schools and communities to select the method of instruction to be used to teach English to children with limited English skills. In addition, reforms do not prohibit or support any one method of instruction for English language learners, which is different than current law. The provisions also encourage the transition of children into mainstream education classes within three academic years.

• Quality Instruction. One problem with Title I, Goodling said, is that the program was used as a "jobs program" for unqualified teacher aides, also known as paraprofessionals. H.R. 2 places a freeze on the number of teacher aides that can be hired with Title I funds. For those aides employed with such funds, the bill increases the minimum qualifications that must be met by all teacher aides within three years. The bill also ensures Title I teachers are more qualified and that parents are aware of the numbers of teachers and teacher aides that are hired with Title I funds.

• Rewarding performance. The Student Results Act rewards excellence by giving states the option of setting aside up to 30 percent of all new Title I funding to provide cash rewards to schools that make substantial progress in closing achievement gaps between students.

• Improving Rural Schools. Under the Title I provisions, the bill gives rural schools unprecedented flexibility to consolidate Federal funds with provisions similar to the Academic Achievement for All Act (Straight A’s). Also under Title I, districts with less than 1,500 students will be exempted from several burdensome requirements, giving them the flexibility to target Federal funds to best meet school districts’ needs.

In addition, H.R. 2 addresses the unique problems associated with educating non-Title I students in rural schools. Specifically, provisions address the different needs of small districts with less than 600 students and low-income districts with more than 20 percent of students living in poverty.

The Students Results Act provides more than $11.1 billion per year, with more than $9.8 billion per year going to Title I. The House passage of H.R. 2 represents the third step in renewing ESEA. The first step was the Education Flexibility Act of 1998, which was signed into law. The second was the House passage of H.R. 1995, the Teacher Empowerment Act.

"Today, we sent a message to states, school districts, and schools: you must produce results, you must report your results, and you must improve program quality," Goodling said. "Our nation’s children will benefit from these reforms."

###