After six weeks of floor debate, the Senate on June 14 passed its
version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), by a
margin of 91- 8. (The House passed its ESEA bill by a 384-45 vote on
May 23.) The next step for this bill, which reauthorizes the majority
of the Department of Education's K-12 programs, is a House-Senate
conference, but conferees have not been named yet. Reportedly, the
change of majority in the Senate and ensuing negotiations over Senate
organization have caused some delay.
The House and Senate versions of ESEA are similar in many important
respects, setting the stage for a final compromise in conference. Both
bills incorporate President Bush's proposal for annual testing of
student achievement in reading and math in grades 3-8, with monetary
disincentives for schools that do not perform adequately. Neither bill
would authorize private school vouchers. Both would allow some states
and local school districts added flexibility in the use of federal
funds, but not to the extent sought by Bush and conservative
Republicans.
On issues relating to science education, under Title II: Teacher
Quality, the House and Senate bills include slightly different forms
of a new Mathematics and Science Partnerships initiative. These
partnerships would enable local school districts to partner with
university science and math departments, state education agencies, and
possibly other partners, to seek funding for activities to improve
science and math education.
Congressional support for this initiative is evidenced by the fact
that in both the Senate and the House, amendments were passed that
allowed increased funding for the partnerships. Under the Senate bill,
the partnerships would be authorized at $900 million in fiscal year
2002, with some matching funds required. The Education Department
would award competitive grants directly to the partnerships for a
broad array of allowable activities, including teacher recruitment,
curriculum and professional development, summer workshops, master
teachers, distance learning programs, and scientific research
opportunities for teachers.
The partnership program is designed differently under the House
bill: Of the $3.6 billion in Teacher Quality funds provided by the
Education Department to states by formula grant, the states would be
required to spend 15-20 percent (their choice) of that money for math
and science partnerships. Under the House version, the states would
award the money competitively to partnerships. Allowable activities
include teacher professional development, recruitment, and research
opportunities.
Neither bill preserves the Eisenhower Professional Development
state grants program, which in recent years has set aside $250 million
per year specifically for teacher development in science and math. The
Senate bill would reauthorize the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse as
a resource for teachers to find instructional materials; it is not
mentioned in the House bill. The Senate bill also calls for testing in
science, not annually as with reading and math, but three times during
a student's 3rd- 12th grade years. The House bill does not incorporate
science testing, but at the urging of Rep. Vern Ehlers (R-MI), the
chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee has agreed
to support it in conference.
One major remaining issue for ESEA is funding. As an authorizing
bill, ESEA can provide funding guidance but not appropriate actual
dollars. The Senate ESEA bill would authorize close to $33 billion for
FY 2002, while the House version would authorize $23 billion (both
greater than Bush has requested for the coming year.) There is some
talk that Senate Democrats may consider delaying the final ESEA bill
to hold out for higher funding in the Labor-HHS-Education
Appropriations bill.
One day before the Senate approved its ESEA bill, the House Science
Committee passed two bills also relating to science education. H.R.
1858, The National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act,
introduced by committee chairman Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY), would
authorize establishment of a math and science partnership program (at
$200 million per year) within NSF (see FYI #67). Among its
other provisions, Boehlert's bill would establish a scholarship
program for science, math, and engineering majors to pursue a teaching
career, and establish four national centers for research on education
and learning.
Also approved by the Science Committee on June 13 was Ehlers' H.R.
100, the National Science Education Act. This bill is a streamlined
version of one of the science education bills Ehlers first introduced
last year, and would primarily authorize NSF to give grants to
universities for training and support of master teachers for K-9 math
and science classrooms.
"Today we passed two thoughtful, innovative, bipartisan bills
that should have a significant impact on improving pre-college
education," Boehlert stated in a committee press release.
"These are bills everyone on this committee can be proud of and,
most important, they should make a difference to America's
students." The committee's Ranking Minority Member, Ralph Hall
(D-TX), praised Boehlert for accepting many provisions authored by
committee Democrats and "working in a bipartisan fashion."
Both Science Committee bills must now go to the House Education and
the Workforce Committee, where prospects for mark-up are uncertain. If
Boehlert's bill authorizing math and science partnerships within NSF
were ultimately to achieve passage, it is not clear what the
implications would be for the ESEA bill, which authorizes similar
partnerships within the Education Department. The final decisions on
which partnership programs receive funding, and how much, most likely
will lie in the hands of the VA/HUD appropriators, who appropriate
funds for NSF programs, and the Labor-HHS-Education appropriators, who
write the funding bill for the Education Department.
