House passes bill aimed at raising quality of the teaching force

The biggest debate during the floor action dealt with the class-size issue. The House rejected an amendment by Rep. Matthew G. Martinez (D-Calif.) calling for a separate $1.5 billion program to expand the Clinton Administration's initiative to support the hiring of more teachers to reduce class sizes in the early grades. The amendment also included another $1.5 billion for teacher training activities.

The President had threatened to veto the bill if the Martinez amendment failed, and the final vote, 239 to 185, indicates that supporters of the measure have enough votes to override a veto.

The teacher empowerment bill originally was sponsored by Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-Calif.), and the house passed a substitute version offered by Rep. William F. Goodling (R-Pa.), chair of the Education and the Workforce Committee.

The updated version would require states to submit a plan to the Education Department for employing a fully qualified teaching force by 2003.

As passed by the House, H.R.1995 would provide $2 billion over five years, with funding coming from the consolidation of Title II of ESEA (the Eisenhower Professional Development program), Goals 2000, and the class-size reduction program. States and schools could use the funds to:

• improve recruitment of teachers through signing bonuses and expanding alternative routes to teacher certification;

• improve retention of teachers by establishing mentoring programs and incentives for high-quality teachers to stay in the classroom;

• implement innovative programs, such as tenure reform, merit pay plans, teacher testing, alternative certification, and in-service academies;

• reduce class size; and

• provide "teacher opportunity payments," or vouchers, for teachers to obtain the professional development of their choice.

The Administration had opposed the bill because it included class size reduction as just one option for using the funds, rather than maintaining the program in a separate funding stream.

NSBA did not oppose the bill but urged Congress "not to retreat on Congress's commitment to reduce class size."

In a July 16 letter to Goodling, NSBA President Mary Ellen Maxwell said the legislation "implies that America's school board members must make the unfortunate choice between access to high-quality teachers and access to an effective learning environment with a teacher ratio that research has proven is ineffective."

The House bill also requires schools to set performance standards and goals related to state goals to increase student achievement and increase the content knowledge of teachers.

During the floor debate, the House passed an amendment to create a competitive program, based on the Troops-to-Teachers program, to recruit qualified math and science teachers for high-need school systems. Also passed were amendments to allow funds to be used for programs to train teachers in technology and character education.

Congress is expected to begin consideration of Title I before the August recess, but is not expected to complete action on it this year.

The $8 billion Title I program, which provides school districts with funding aimed at improving the academic performance of the neediest children, is the largest federal education program and also is the biggest component of ESEA, which expires at the end of the fiscal year, Sept. 30. With that date fast approaching, Congress likely will simply extend the existing act for another year while the reauthorization debate continues.

So far, the only Title I legislation that has been introduced is the Clinton Administration's proposal. Goodling plans to introduce a bill within the next few weeks.

Rather than address ESEA in a single piece of legislation, the House will deal with it in separate pieces. Following House passage of the teacher component, Goodling has promised to take up Title I next, followed by the education technology components of ESEA, then the other ESEA programs, including bilingual and immigrant education and other smaller programs.

The Senate, on the other hand, is expected to introduce a single, comprehensive bill covering all of ESEA, including teacher quality. The staff of Sen. Jim Jeffords (R-Vt.) says a draft might be ready for internal review in September.

Reggie Felton, NSBA's director of federal programs, says that although the Republicans are supporting legislation to give school districts more flexibility in using federal funding and have proposed a measure to include Title I in a vast block grant, "the Republicans are still committed to students in poverty and are expected to support legislation targeted to the poor."

The Administration's Title I proposal, which has been introduced in Congress, would take the opposite tack by imposing more rules to ensure accountability. For example, the measure would require states and districts to take corrective measures if low-performing schools fail to show improvements, issue report cards to parents on how schools are doing, adopt discipline codes, and end social promotion.

According to Felton, "NSBA would have problems with the excessive reporting requirements in the Administration bill and would be more inclined to support provisions to give local districts more flexibility."