WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A 39-member House-Senate panel chaired by Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) today approved the final version of President George W. Bush’s education reform legislation, the No Child Left Behind Act (H.R. 1). The panel’s actions clear the way for final House and Senate approval of the most significant federal education reforms in a generation, and a measure that would mean immediate new options for children in thousands of failing public schools nationwide.

     “This agreement will bring much-needed reforms to a federal law that has lost its focus and never met its promise,” said Boehner, in reference to the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which is reauthorized and reformed under H.R. 1. “These reforms mean new hope for students in failing schools, and new choices for parents who want the best education possible for their children. They will mean new freedom and flexibility for teachers and school districts to meet higher expectations.”

     “Money alone cannot improve student achievement, as three and a half decades of increased education spending have shown. Achievement gaps between disadvantaged students and their more affluent peers remain wide despite the federal investment of more than $130 billion since 1965,” Boehner said. “The H.R. 1 conference agreement focuses on improving student achievement through rigorous accountability measures, expanding choices for parents, giving states and local school districts new flexibility, and streamlining the federal education bureaucracy.”

     “I look forward to moving this bipartisan education bill quickly through the House and to the President’s desk so that it can begin to make a difference for our nation’s schools and our children,” said Boehner.

# # # # #

Ø Would empower parents, voters and taxpayers with data, including annual report cards on school performance and statewide results. Would provide parents with information about the quality of their children’s schools, the qualifications of the teachers teaching their children, and their children’s progress in key subjects.

Ø Would require states using federal education dollars to demonstrate results through annual reading and math assessments for students in grades 3 through 8. The conference report would authorize $400 million to help states design and administer tests.

Ø States would be required to disaggregate data by race, gender, and other criteria to demonstrate to parents and taxpayers not just that overall student achievement is improving, but also that achievement gaps are closing between disadvantaged students and other groups of students.

Ø Would provide unprecedented new flexibility for all 50 states and every local school district in America in the use of federal education funds.

Ø Every local school district in America would immediately receive the freedom to transfer up to 50 percent of the federal dollars they receive among an assortment of programs. Local school districts would not need to obtain permission before transferring funds.

Ø Would allow up to 150 local flexibility demonstration projects to be established across the nation. Local school districts choosing to participate would receive a virtual waiver from federal education rules in exchange for signing an “accountability contract” with the Education Secretary, in which the school district would agree to improve student achievement.

Ø All 50 states would immediately receive the freedom to transfer up to 50 percent of the non-Title I state activity funds they receive from the federal government among an assortment of ESEA programs. States would not need to obtain permission before transferring funds.

Ø Would allow seven states across the nation to have new flexibility in the use of 100 percent of non-Title I federal funds in a variety of categories, granting them a waiver from federal education requirements relating to a variety of ESEA programs. A state would not need to meet any new accountability requirements in order to participate, nor would the state be required to enter into a more rigorous “performance agreement” with the U.S. Secretary of Education.

Ø Would allow states and local school districts participating in state and local flexibility demonstration projects to coordinate their efforts through state-local “flexibility partnerships” to ensure that federal education funds are used most effectively to meet the unique needs of students.

Ø Would consolidate and streamline programs and target resources to existing programs that serve poor students.

Ø Would reduce the overall number of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) programs from 55 to 45. (The Senate-passed bill increased the overall number of ESEA programs from 55 to 89.)

Would lay the groundwork for private school choice with breakthroughs on several key elements that enhance options for parents with children in chronically-failing schools. These options would be made available immediately (for the 2002-03 school year) for students in thousands of schools already identified as failing under current law.

Ø Public/Charter School Choice: Parents with children in failing schools would be allowed to transfer their child to a better-performing public or charter school immediately after a school is identified as failing.

Ø Supplemental Services: Would allow federal Title I funds (approximately $500 to $1,000 per child) to be used to provide supplemental educational services - including tutoring, after school services, and summer school programs - for children in failing schools. Faith-based providers would be among those eligible to be selected by parents to assist students, establishing an important precedent on the road to equal educational opportunity.

Ø Charter Schools. Would create a major new expansion of the charter school initiative, expanding opportunities for parents, educators and interested community leaders to create schools outside the bureaucratic structure of the education establishment.

Ø Would prohibit federally sponsored national testing, federally controlled curriculum, as well as any mandatory national teacher test or certification.

Ø Focuses on effective, proven methods of reading instruction backed by scientific research.

Ø Would triple federal reading funding from the present $300 million to $900 million in 2002.

Ø Would lay the groundwork for important reforms in special education and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the next major education reform project.

Ø Would ask states to have a highly-qualified teacher in every public classroom by 2005, emphasizing state and local methods.

Ø Would explicitly ban federal teacher testing and national teacher certification.

Ø In addition to funds specifically earmarked for teacher quality, would give local schools new freedom to make spending decisions with up to 50 percent of the non-Title I federal funds they receive. With this new freedom, a local school district could decide to use additional funds for hiring new teachers, increasing teacher pay, improving teacher training and development or other uses.

Ø Would make it easier for local schools to recruit and retain excellent teachers.

Ø Would consolidate current programs into a new Teacher Quality Program that would allow greater flexibility for local school districts.

Ø Would include Teacher Opportunity Payments, which would provide funds for teachers to choose professional development activities.

Ø Would apply “Dollars to the Classroom” principles to federal formula grant programs, meaning that 95 percent of funds would be spent at the local level.

Ø A student who is a victim of a crime, or attends a public school designated by the state as unsafe, would be permitted to transfer to a safe public school. Such students would be given this option in federal law for the first time ever.

Ø Would help ensure that teachers, principals, and other school professionals can undertake reasonable actions to maintain order and discipline in the classroom without the fear of being dragged into court or subjected to frivolous lawsuits.

Ø As recommended by Empower America’s Bill Bennett and other leading education reform advocates, would require a small sample of students in each state to participate in the fourth and eighth grade National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in reading and math every other year as a means of verifying the results of statewide assessments, which all students would take. To ensure that the NAEP remains an independent, high-quality, accurately-reported test, a host of safeguards would be authorized.

Ø Would consolidate the Bilingual and Immigrant Education Programs, streamlining the current bureaucracy into a single federal program with a new focus: helping limited English proficient (LEP) students learn English.

Ø Would require that LEP children be tested for reading and language arts in English after they have attended school in the United States for three consecutive years.

Ø Would require that parents be notified that their LEP child is in need of English language instruction.

Ø Would eliminate the current requirement that 75 percent of funding be used to support programs using a child’s native language in instruction.

Ø Would exempt all home schools and home school students (as well as private schools and students not using federal funds) from all testing requirements.

Ø Would provide greater fairness for rural school districts by giving local school officials greater say in how federal funds are used.

Ø Would include a provision under which federal funds would be denied to any local school district that prevents or otherwise denies participation in constitutionally-protected school prayer.