On January 15 and 16, 1999, the American Association of School Administrators Committee on Federal Policy and Legislation met at AASA headquarters in Arlington, Virginia to develop its recommendations for the AASA Executive Committee regarding the 1999 AASA Legislative Agenda.

The members of the Federal Policy and Legislation Committee are as follows: Paula Butterfield, Chair; Lavinia Dickerson; Barry Furze; G. Larry Miller; Larry Pedersen; Maree Sneed; Mary Barter; Karl Hertz; and Bruce Hunter, AASA Senior Associate Executive Director. The Chair of the Resolutions Committee, John Jordan, joined the Federal Policy Committee to bring the views of that committee to the discussion. Also present, David Wolk, a member of the Resolutions Committee, Randell Rayburn, the Executive Director of the Oklahoma Association of School administrators, George Hatfield, the President of the Oklahoma Association of School Administrators, Brian Talbott, Executive Director of the American Association of Educational Service Agencies. In addition, Legislative Corps member William Adams of the AASA Executive Committee and Legislative Corps member Glenda Brown attended the meeting.

The Committee and guests addressed issues raised by the staff or by guests from Congress or the administration.

The recommendations of the AASA Committee on Federal Policy and Legislation regarding the specified issues follow:

I. THE ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT

A.  What recommendations does AASA have regarding the structure of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)?

1. Build ESEA around improved instruction aimed at promoting equal educational opportunities for disadvantaged children through Title I.
2. Bring coherence to ESEA by consolidating like programs into the same titles.

   a.   Title II- Consolidating all staff development proposals into an Eisenhower staff development program that distributes 100% of funds to LEAs through the current formula;

   b.  Title III- Providing technical assistance by identifying and using research-based approaches for improving student results in achievement;

   c.  Title IV- Safe and Drug-Free Schools;

   d.  Title V- Reducing paperwork and improving achievement for Rural Schools;

   1. Purpose of the program would improve targeted student achievement in reading and math;
   2. Targeted small, rural school districts. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Beale Codes would define "rural." School districts falling in Beale codes 6,7,8,and 9 would qualify;
   3. Small is defined as an enrollment of 599 or less;
   4. Participation would be voluntary, but if elected LEAs could not apply for formula funds under Titles II, III, and IV;
   5. Funds would be allocated by districts size: 1-49=$20,000; 50-150=$30,000; 151-300=$40,000; 301-450=$50,000, and 451-599=$60,000;
   6. Funds would flow to LEA’s through SEAs;
   7. SEAs would retain 2% for monitoring and compliance review.

   e.  Title VI- Consolidating all technology programs and distributing funds through methods identified for each program in current law;

   f.  Title VII- Consolidating all vehicles for educational research and development to improve achievement and promote equal educational opportunities for disadvantage children. Such vehicles include the comprehensive technical-assistance centers and the regional labs, and other technical research and development centers in ESEA or OERI;

   g.  Title VIII- Reducing paperwork and program compliance review and monitoring through grants to SEAs. All funds for SEA monitoring and compliance review regarding ESEA programs would come through this title. SEAs would be encouraged to use the federal regulations as the basis for compliance review and monitoring;

   h.  Title IX- Programs to improve educational opportunities for special populations;

   i.  Title X- Impact Aid for federally impacted school districts.

B.  What specific recommendations does AASA have regarding Title I?

1. Concentrate on the large concepts establishing Title I.
2. Increase the emphasis on best practices in Title I by:

a. Requiring clear, local expectations for student achievement that meet or exceed state standards;
b. Using student results on state and local tests and achievement measures to drive decisions regarding curriculum, instruction and materials;
c. Encouraging use of instructional strategies that have a firm base in research and a track record of success;
d. Encourage the use of certified teachers and certified paraprofessionals.

3.  Promote accountability and responsibility for results.

1. Make planning for instruction and professional development a site- based responsibility;
2. Provide parents clear learning expectations and regular feedback on progress;
3. Use student results as a primary tool for evaluation of teachers, principals and central office staff associated with ESEA programs;

4. Increase efficiency of Title I, II, and III.

a. Drive 100 percent of funds from the U.S. Department of Education to LEAs;
b. Focus local distributions per site plans;
c. Focus local distribution on concentrations of poverty;
d. Drive at least 95 percent of funds to school sites.

5. Improve parent understanding of expectations and progress.

1. Encourage family involvement for improved achievement;
2. Encourage two-way communication about expectations and progress;
3. Require plain language reporting of test results; and
4. Revise the parent compact to avoid insult to parents and unnecessary bureaucracy.

II. FUNDING PRIORITIES

A. AASA used the following process to determine its funding priorities:

1.  Each member of the Federal Policy Committee filled out a funding prioritiesmatrix (Appendix 1), indicating his/her preferences for FY2000 appropriations. After all of the members’ answers were compiled, it became clear that the programs can be divided into three tiers, each tier representing a varying degree of support.

2.  The numbers on the right represent how many times, out of a possible 112, the program was designated as the highest priority.

B.  AASA’s three tiers regarding funding priorities

1.  Tier 1- AASA’s Top concerns for 1999:
a.   Title I  - 94
b.  IDEA - 87
c. Technology for ED - 81

2.  Tier 2- Second level priorities:
a. Title VI 73 b. Reading Excellence - 71
c. Eisenhower  - 70
d. Vocational Education - 69
e. Title I Concentration - 65

3.  Tier 3- Programs supported by AASA but not actively pursued in 1999:
a. Goals 2000 - 52
b. Safe & Drug Free - 51
c. 100,000 New Teachers - 50
d. Even Start - 48
e. School to work - 40
f. Impact Aid - 32
g. Bilingual - 27
h. Migrant - 19
i. Immigrant - 17

III. DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS

A. Should AASA support or oppose Goals 2000 during its reauthorization?

1. AASA should support Goals 2000.
2. SEA should give grant writing help to poorer districts.

B.  Should AASA support or oppose making Goals 2000 funds to school districts with a sub-state formula, rather than based on competition as it is in current law?

*AASA supports maintaining Goals 2000 as a competitive grant program within states.

IV.  KERRY-SMITH PLAN TO EDUCATE AMERICA’S YOUTH

A.  Should AASA support or oppose the Kerry-Smith Plan to Educate America’s Children?

*In general, AASA will support Kerry-Smith, but we do oppose or have reservations about some of the provisions.

B.  Which title and provisions of Kerry-Smith does AASA support?
AASA supports the following provisions or titles of Kerry-Smith, with exceptions noted:

1. AASA supports the portion of Title I aimed at enlarging the Comprehensive School Reform Demonstration Program (Obey- Porter), and recommending the full funding of Title I of ESEA.
   *However, AASA opposes the goal of making every school a charter school. The decision about how to organize and finance public education is a state or local decision because state and local taxpayers pay, on average, 93% of the cost of public education.
2. AASA supports the plans’ Title II, Ensure that Children begin School Ready to Learn, which provides grants for preschool programs;
3. AASA supports the plans’ Title III, the Excellent Principals Challenge Grant, with the proviso that the term "principals" should be broadened to "school-site leaders," because persons with titles other than principal are the CEOs at some school sites.
4. AASA supports the plans’ Title IV, Second Chance Schools for Troubled Students, once the title is changed to "Alternative Education Settings for Students."
   1. However, AASA opposes forcing school districts to have a common discipline code. School districts must maintain the flexibility to have disciplinary codes for specific conditions in each school site.
   2. AASA also calls for 100% of funds for this title to be distributed to local school districts, unless the state operates such a school. There is no need for additional bureaucracy in establishing or supporting alternative schools.
5. AASA supports the plans’ Titles V and VI regarding improving professional practices and improving the quality of the teacher work force;
6. AASA supports the plans’ Title VII calling for investment in community schools and promoting community service;
7. AASA supports the plans’ Title VIII providing stipends for teachers sitting for certification by the National Board for Professional Teacher Practices.
8. AASA supports the plans’ Title IX encouraging public school choice, with the following qualifications:
   1. Open enrollment remains under the control of local boards of education;
   2. Receiving districts have the right to refuse admission based upon space availability;
   3. Parents electing an out-of-district enrollment must provide transportation to a bus stop in the receiving school district;
   4. The cost of enrolling special education students must not fall unfairly on receiving school districts. Either the sending district or the state must make up the difference in cost between student cost and state reimbursement.

V.  E-RATE

A.  Should AASA support or oppose proposals that call for the elimination of the Schools and Libraries Corporation, SLC?

*This is a moot issue since the SLC has been disbanded and reformed as a division of USAC. AASA strongly supports maintaining the SLC, now the SLD, as the vehicle for governance of the E-Rate.

B. Should AASA support or oppose maintaining FCC oversight of the E-rate program?

*AASA strongly supports maintaining FCC jurisdiction over the E-Rate.

C. Should AASA support or oppose proposals to sunset the E-Rate?

*AASA strongly opposes establishing a termination date for the E-Rate. Sunsetting the E-Rate would make it difficult to stay up with fast moving technology and skew school planning for technology integration.

D. Should AASA support or oppose W.J. "Billy" Tauzin’s proposal for the funds to be block granted to the State, with the SEA keeping 2% for administrative purposes?

*AASA strongly opposes the proposal to block grant the E-Rate to SEAs.

E. Should AASA support or oppose the funding proposal contained in Representative Tauzin’s proposal to block grant the E-Rate?

*AASA opposes the block grant and therefore the funding formula proposed in the block grant. AASA strongly opposes any proposal to flow E-Rate funds through SEAs.

VI.  SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION AND MODERINIZATION

A.  What proposals regarding school construction and modernization should AASA support or oppose?

1. AASA supports the administration’s proposal to pay the interest on school bonds or other debt instruments through tax credits for investors.
2. AASA supports the proposal by William Archer, R-TX, to extend the amount from $10 million to $25 million of debt that can be arbitraged for construction, and the time from two to four years.

B.  AASA proposes three initiatives to spur school construction or modernization through the federal tax code:

1. Eliminate the provisions of the tax code regarding construction of school facilities, except that school districts would have four years to complete construction after incurring debt through sale of bonds, lease purchase, or sale of other legal instruments to finance construction such as certificates of participation.
2. If the arbitrage provisions are retained, then AASA urges that the limit for arbitrage be raised from $10 million to $25 million and the period for construction be extended from two years to four years.
3. If the limit on debt that can be arbitraged is not raised then we support extending the period for completion of construction from two years to four years.

C.  AASA also proposes initiation of a revolving, no-interest loan fund in the Department of Energy to make school facilities more energy efficient. This fund could be modeled on the Schools and Hospitals program of the 1970’s and early 1980’s that helped hundreds of schools to become more energy efficient.

D.  AASA proposes a second revolving, no-interest loan fund through the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, to improve indoor environments for students and school employees. AASA opposes any new federal mandates regarding indoor environment and health issues without:

1. Complete concurrence from scientists through the National Academy of Science and the American Medical Association that the problems exist and are a real hazard for students and school employees;
2. Funding that will completely cover the cost of needed repairs; and the human and technical infrastructure to plan and implement needed repairs and additions.

VII.  ADDING FLEXIBILITY AND REDUCING PAPERWORK

A.  What federal regulations, policies or statutes are hampering flexibility at the local level, and what does AASA recommend to avoid and resolve such problems?

*AASA members report unfunded federal mandates are the greatest problem in hampering local operations. AASA supports the current unfunded mandate legislation, but the legislation must be consistently enforced. And, federal education programs in existence prior to passage of the Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995, which were left out of the law, must be included in it.

B.  What recommendations does AASA make to reduce paperwork?

1. AASA urges Congress to require states to implement federal laws and regulations, not state variations of the federal law. States should be required to identify where they have added additional regulations to the federal regulations for every program in ESEA, as well as IDEA and Vocational Education. Where states add to the federal regulations, school districts should be permitted to challenge those regulations to USED, and receive timely decisions regarding the appropriateness of the state decisions.
2. The state role in ESEA formula-based programs should be limited to compliance reviews of local applications and monitoring for compliance with federal regulations.
3. States should be discouraged from adding to federal regulations for programs that distribute funds through sub-state formulas.

C.  Should AASA support or oppose extending the provisions of "Ed-Flex" to all school districts in all states?

*AASA will support extending the provisions of the current Ed-Flex program to all school districts in all states.

VIII. BLOCK GRANTS

A.  Should AASA support or oppose block grant approaches like "Dollars to the Classroom"?

1. In general, AASA will not support block grants that result in reduced federal funding and/or dilution of services. Block grants lack a clear focus on specific students for specific purposes, which means that proving the funds are effective is impossible, leading to long-term loss of funds. Block grants also frequently result in local school districts losing control over programs to either state or federal agencies.
2. AASA may support block grant proposals, if the proposals include at least the following provisions:

1. Neither IDEA nor Title I are included in the proposal;
2. One hundred percent (100%) of the funds must be driven to LEA’s;
3. AASA supports the notion of 95% to the classroom within the concept of 100% to the local level;
4. The block grant must contain a provision that either insures the funding will continue to grow, or that if the funding fails to grow at least by inflation, the block grant will terminate and revert to the antecedent programs;
5. The block grant must have a specific purpose and serve specific students, with clear accountability provisions, so schools can easily demonstrate program effectiveness;
6. The funds from block grants should be structured to meet local needs, giving flexibility about methods to school districts; and
7. To the extent that other funds from other titles of ESEA involve SEA’s in block grants, the state role should be monitoring and compliance review based on federal regulations, without amendment by state action.

B.  If federal teacher training and professional development programs are consolidated or block granted, should any professional development approach or teacher training methodology be "required or pushed." Or, would it be better to not push in any particular direction, but list allowable uses?

*AASA supports local control over professional development decisions, with clear accountability regarding the effectiveness of professional development. School districts must have the flexibility to determine which training is best. Thus, AASA recommends listing broad allowable uses, not specific to a particular program.

C.  Should AASA support or oppose consolidating education technology programs within ESEA?

*AASA believes that local districts need flexibility regarding education technology because every school district, indeed every school, has different and changing needs regarding implementing and using technology to improve student achievement and make the teachers and principals more efficient and effective. Training must be included as an allowable expense because some districts have equipment, but no training.

IX.  VOUCHERS AND TAX CREDITS TO USE PUBLIC FUNDS IN PRIVATE AND PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS

A.  Should AASA support or oppose vouchers to permit federal funds to be used to defray the cost of attendance at private or parochial schools?

*AASA strongly opposes the use of federal or any public funds to pay the cost of attending private or parochial schools.

B.  Should AASA support or oppose using federal tax credits to pay the cost of attending private or parochial schools?

*AASA strongly opposes the use of federal or any public funds to pay the cost of attending private or parochial schools, directly or through the tax code.

X.  CHARTER SCHOOLS

A.  Should AASA support charter school provisions that encourage state chartering authorities, rather than depending on local school boards to charter schools?

*AASA will support federal charter school legislation that leaves the chartering decision to local school boards. Local school boards should be mindful of the need to provide educational alternatives to parents and students.

B.  AASA, through its resolution process, supports public school choice and charter schools that operate under the auspices of local public school boards. We believe that there should be a level playing field. Therefore, the same regulations and accountability should apply to all public and charter schools.

XI.  PARENT/FAMILY INVOLVEMENT

What does AASA recommend to improve parental/family involvement?

*AASA recommends that parent or family involvement be strongly encouraged to improve student learning and to build family interest in school and learning. However, methods of family and parent involvement should be left to local school districts and the school sites served by federal programs.

XII.  ENCOURAGING THE USE OF RESEARCH BASED PRACTICES

A.  Should AASA support or oppose the Obey-Porter Comprehensive School Reform Demonstration Program?

*AASA should support the CSRDP. However, AASA adds the strong admonition that since the data to support most programs mentioned regarding whole school reform have little independent, juried data to support program effectiveness claims, that local plans should not be limited to an approved list by USED or the states.

B.  Should we support federal programs that specify certain instructional or organizational approaches, on the basis of either the federal or state "feelings" that the approaches have a basis in research?

*AASA will support legislation that encourages the use of research-based approaches, but does not support federal programs that specify which programs can be used by local school districts because the research is not adequate to support such restrictions.

XIII.  MANDATORY SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE COVERAGE

Should AASA support or oppose legislation intended to include all public employees in social security and Medicare?

*The decision to include school employees in social security and Medicare is a state or state and local issue depending on state decisions. Therefore AASA opposes federal legislation to force state decisions.

Does AASA support or oppose the administration’s proposal to expand 21^st Century Learning Centers?

*AASA strongly supports efforts to expand, with the help of federal funds, after-school activities for children with no place to go because parents are not home when school gets out. Such learning centers will not just warehouse youngsters, but will offer food under the William F. Goodling Child Nutrition Act, and learning activities under the 21^st Century Act.

XV.  SCHOOL DISCIPLINE

A.  Does AASA support or oppose current federal laws that address student discipline?

1. AASA opposes current federal laws that address student discipline because they create a contridiction that Congress must address.

   a.  Section 14601 of the Gun Free Schools Act of 1994 (Elementary and Secondary Education Act) and Section 615 of the reauthorized Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 contradict one another.
   b.  The Gun Free Schools Act calls for mandatory expulsion for one year when any student carries a firearm to school, while Section 615 of IDEA only permits schools to move students to alternative settings for up to 45 school days for possession of firearms, but expressly forbids expulsion that would cease services.

2. AASA would support legislation that would address this contradiction and provide funding for alternative settings for all students.

B.  What are AASA’s recommendations regarding school discipline?

1. AASA is opposed to a dual code of discipline and believes that all students should be subject to the same disciplinary code, with three exceptions. Students who commit infractions and do not know right from wrong, cannot understand the consequences of their actions, or are incapable of controlling their behavior should be extended extra protections.
2. AASA supports the development of alternative settings for students who commit infractions that merit expulsion or long-term suspensions.
3. AASA believes that local school officials must be empowered to preserve a productive and safe learning environment free of undue disruption and violence.

   4. AASA supports consistent discipline requirements and procedures.