[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
AMERICA'S REPORT CARD:
OVERSIGHT OF K-12 PUBLIC EDUCATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH CARE
AND FINANCIAL SERVICES
of the
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND ACCOUNTABILITY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JANUARY 30, 2024
__________
Serial No. 118-87
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available on: govinfo.gov
oversight.house.gov or
docs.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
54-768 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman
Jim Jordan, Ohio Jamie Raskin, Maryland, Ranking
Mike Turner, Ohio Minority Member
Paul Gosar, Arizona Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina Columbia
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Michael Cloud, Texas Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia
Gary Palmer, Alabama Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
Clay Higgins, Louisiana Ro Khanna, California
Pete Sessions, Texas Kweisi Mfume, Maryland
Andy Biggs, Arizona Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York
Nancy Mace, South Carolina Katie Porter, California
Jake LaTurner, Kansas Cori Bush, Missouri
Pat Fallon, Texas Jimmy Gomez, California
Byron Donalds, Florida Shontel Brown, Ohio
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
William Timmons, South Carolina Robert Garcia, California
Tim Burchett, Tennessee Maxwell Frost, Florida
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
Lisa McClain, Michigan Greg Casar, Texas
Lauren Boebert, Colorado Jasmine Crockett, Texas
Russell Fry, South Carolina Dan Goldman, New York
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida Jared Moskowitz, Florida
Nick Langworthy, New York Rashida Tlaib, Michigan
Eric Burlison, Missouri
Mike Waltz, Florida
------
Mark Marin, Staff Director
Jessica Donlon, Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel
Reagan Dye, Professional Staff Member
Sarah Feeney, Professional Staff Member
Mallory Cogar, Deputy Director of Operations and Chief Clerk
Contact Number: 202-225-5074
Julie Tagen, Minority Staff Director
Contact Number: 202-225-5051
------
Subcommittee on Health Care and Financial Services
Lisa McClain, Michigan, Chairwoman
Paul Gosar, Arizona Katie Porter, California Ranking
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina Minority Member
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York
Russell Fry, South Carolina Jimmy Gomez, California
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida Greg Casar, Texas
Nick Langworthy, New York Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
Eric Burlison, Missouri Jasmine Crockett, Texas
Vacancy Vacancy
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on January 30, 2024................................. 1
Witnesses
----------
Ms. Virginia Gentles, Director, Education Freedom Center,
Independent Women's Forum
Oral Statement................................................... 5
Dr. Nat Malkus, Ph.D., Senior Fellow and Deputy Director,
Education Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute
Oral Statement................................................... 7
Ms. Denise Forte (Minority Witness), President and CEO, The
Education Trust
Oral Statement................................................... 8
Written opening statements and statements for the witnesses are
available on the U.S. House of Representatives Document
Repository at: docs.house.gov.
Index of Documents
----------
* Article, NPR, ``The Education Culture War Is Waging'';
submitted by Rep. Lee.
* Research Report, RAND, ``Walking a Fine Line''; submitted by
Rep. Norton.
* Statement for the Record, by the National Education
Association; submitted by Rep. Norton.
* NSCAF School Choice Parent Survey; submitted by Rep. Waltz.
* Questions for the Record: to Ms. Gentles; submitted by Rep.
McClain.
* Questions for the Record: to Dr. Malkus; submitted by Rep.
McClain.
Documents are available at: docs.house.gov.
AMERICA'S REPORT CARD:
OVERSIGHT OF K-12 PUBLIC EDUCATION
----------
Tuesday, January 30, 2024
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Oversight and Accountability
Subcommittee on Health Care And Financial Services
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:23 p.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lisa C. McClain
[Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives McClain, Foxx, Grothman, Burlison,
Porter, Ocasio-Cortez, Lee, Crockett, and Norton.
Also present: Representative Moskowitz.
Mrs. McClain. The hearing of the Subcommittee on Healthcare
and Financial Services will come to order. Welcome, everyone.
Without objection, the Chair may declare a recess at any
time. I recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening
statement.
Don't I have to do the witness stuff first?
OK, I will make an opening statement first.
In all sincerity, thank you for coming. This is an
extremely important bipartisan, I think, topic. We are here to
talk today about K through 12 public education and it is often
failing our American children. Educating American children
should absolutely be a priority. The return on that investment
is unmeasurable, really.
During the pandemic, children's education was put on the
back burner. Teachers were put on the back burner. And the left
chose to keep schools shuttered and put policies over students,
right? We have got to get back to both sides caring about the
student.
The problem since the pandemic is it has only gotten worse.
Just as the left has made work optional since the pandemic,
showing up for school has seemingly become less optional as
well.
I want to talk about chronic absenteeism, missing at least
10 percent of the school year was 74 percent higher last school
year than prior to the pandemic. That is scary to me. I mean,
if children and students are not in school, it is very
difficult for them to grow, for them to learn, whether it be
educationally as well as socially, and it shows.
I mean, nationwide, the average reading and math scores for
a 13-year-old declined 4 points and 9 points respectively from
before the pandemic to this past school year. In 2022, the
average score for 9-year-olds also declined 5 points in reading
and 7 points in math compared to 2020.
Prolonged school closures were a major cause of this
failure. When children are not in school and they are not going
to school, it is difficult for them to learn. And I think that
the children are crying out for help.
Students can only benefit from teaching, extra tutoring,
and extended class time if they are at school. So, instead of
addressing the student's performance, schools are investing in
nonacademic programs to serve political agendas. We need to get
back to getting the politics out of school and getting back to
reading, writing and arithmetic. Leave the social agendas for
the parents, please.
Federal COVID-19 pandemic relief funds that were
appropriated by Congress are being used to support the teaching
of radical ideologies instead of the actual curriculum,
reading, writing, arithmetic, right? Let us get those math
scores up, let us get those reading scores up. And instead of
investing these funds in evidence-based recovery for struggling
students, many states and local governments are choosing to
pursue politics. That is not a place for opinions, it is a
place for facts and educating.
Instead of investing in additional tutoring and class time,
states and local governments are dividing students by race,
pushing anti-Semitic tropes, teaching students that American
institutions perpetuate White supremacy and promoting sexually
explicit gender ideology. Again, let us get back to the facts
and the core principles of learning.
Leave the social issues, leave the politics to the parents.
And they do this for the sake of equity. Schools are reducing
advanced math courses and gifted programs. Let us focus on
those.
Schools are inflating grades, dummying down curriculum, and
eliminating disciplinary actions. Those do not help students.
It actually harms them in the long run. Equity lowers the bar
for the sake of equivalence rather than raising the bar for the
sake of excellence. Let us focus on the positive. Let us focus
on what unites us.
I mean, we do not want students to suffer because of that.
This is not the first time that I have sat in this chair asking
government employees to do their job. It is the state and local
government's job to set curriculum that teach kids how to read
and how to do math, that is the job they signed up for. It is
the school's administrator's job to make sure the kids want to
attend school, give them a place that they want to go. And it
is the parents' job to make sure that their children are
attending school.
And finally, it is the teacher's job to teach the children
fundamental skills that will help them grow into successful
adults. Teaching is often a thankless job. So, we are grateful
for the hardworking teachers and all the work that they do. We
need to do everything we can do to support our teachers to
enable them to educate the next generation. And the best way to
support them is to provide them with resources that they need
to teach the fundamentals and not saddle them with political
agendas from each side of the aisle. The success of our
Nation's children should not be a partisan issue.
I hope that we can find ways to come together and agree to
do everything possible to ensure that our children's education
is a priority. I actually believe this Committee puts children
first and puts their education first. And we are all trying to
make good investments into our students for a better future,
for not only the students but for everyone.
To the panel, thank you for being here for the Subcommittee
today. I am looking forward to having this very important
discussion with you. And I now recognize Ranking Member Porter
for her opening statement.
Ms. Porter. I am OK actually; you can keep them. Thank you,
Madame Chairwoman.
As a single mom of three school-age children and a former
eighth grade teacher, I know how important it is that kids
learn in the classroom and that we encourage their curiosity.
Many Members of this Committee are also parents and we all want
what is best for our kids. We want them to feel supported and
capable. We want them to be learning and be able to obtain
good, high-paying jobs in the future.
Where we as parents cannot reasonably teach our kids
everything, we, of course, rely on our communities, including
after school programs and sports to help fill in the gaps. We
rely on our school to help our children learn. And working
parents like me rely on educators to keep our kids safe so that
we can do our jobs.
We are here today to discuss our Nation's K through 12
public education system. And it is true that in many
communities, our elementary and secondary schools barely get a
passing grade.
I am concerned, though, that over the next hour or more my
colleagues will be more interested in pointing fingers than in
fixing problems, more interested in looking backward than in
looking forward.
Two of the fingers that are being pointed are at COVID-19
school closures and then its so-called woke programs that
indoctrinates students. Look, none of us, least of all me, miss
the day of Zoom school with people yelling about who is taking
up the bandwidth and who is using the iPad right now. It
sucked. It was terrible for parents, it was terrible for
teachers, and most of all it was terrible for all kids.
There is no doubt that COVID-19 disrupted learning. Many
kids missed out and there is a real learning recovery that we
need to be focusing on, so I am not arguing with my Republican
colleagues about that point.
But the reality is that even before COVID-19 reached our
shores and long before Republicans made critical race theory a
rallying cry, K through 12 achievement was less than
outstanding, less than where it needed to be for us to have a
strong, stable, globally competitive economy.
In 2019, our national K through 12 achievement score was a
C. I will say it again, a C. If we are serious about solutions,
we have to start with the facts and look at the real reasons
that kids are struggling. There is a long history of unequal
and inadequate funding for public education that has not set
our kids up for success. And I fear, and I think we need to be
careful not to devalue the hard work of teachers.
We need to not paint them as agents of indoctrination.
Instead, we need to be acknowledging their partnership in
raising our kids. We should be using this hearing to discuss
solutions and support our states and localities in fully
funding K through 12 schools, including what we need to be
paying our teachers to recruit the next generation of
educators. That is how we are going to achieve better outcomes
for students.
So, I want to encourage my Republican colleagues today to
look forward, to look for solutions to the problems rather than
looking at the past, and to really have a collaborative
approach on what we can do to make a difference.
Not just pointing fingers at Democrats or at Progressive
policies, but instead asking what are the best policies for our
kid, period, regardless of which side of the aisle they are
coming from.
Whining about leftwing ideologies, that is not going to
bring us closer to solving the challenges of K through 12
education. So, if we really want to address problems in our
school system, we are going to need to take a closer look at
how our education system is funded, how things have changed
post pandemic, and we need to uplift data-driven strategies
that are working to educate kids.
Elementary and secondary education matters to all of us,
whether your kids are out of school, whether you have never had
kids, whether you are glad to see them go in the morning, we
all benefit from having a strong educational system where kids
are safe to focus on learning. And to get there we need to find
the solutions and make sure that we are adequately funding
them.
So, with that, again, I thank our witnesses. I look forward
to your testimony and I yield back.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you.
Without objection, Representatives Waltz and Moskowitz from
Florida are waived onto the Committee for the purposes of
questioning the witnesses at today's Subcommittee hearing.
I am pleased to welcome our witnesses for today, Virginia
Gentles, Nat Malkus, and Denise Forte.
Virginia is the Director at Education Freedom Center at the
Independent Women's Forum.
Nat is a senior fellow and the Deputy Director of Education
Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute.
And Denise is the President and CEO of the Education Trust.
We look forward to hearing from you and what you have to
say on this important subject. And pursuant to Committee Rule
9(g), the witnesses will please stand and raise their right
hand.
Thank you.
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony that you
are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Let the record show that the witnesses answered in the
affirmative. Thank you and you may take a seat.
We appreciate you being here, and we look forward to your
testimony. Let me remind the witnesses that we have read your
written statement, and it will appear in full in the hearing
record. Please limit your oral arguments to 5 minutes. As a
reminder, please press the button on the microphone in front of
you so that it is on, and the Members can hear you.
When you begin to speak, the light in front of you will
turn green. After 4 minutes the light will become yellow. When
the red light comes on, your 5 minutes has expired, and we
would ask that you please wrap up.
I now recognize Ms. Gentles for her opening statement.
STATEMENT OF VIRGINIA (GINNY) GENTLES
DIRECTOR
EDUCATION FREEDOM CENTER
INDEPENDENT WOMEN'S FORUM
Ms. Gentles. Thank you. Chairwoman McClain, Ranking Member
Porter, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting
me to appear today. My name is Virginia Gentles, and I am the
Director of the Education Freedom Center at Independent Women's
Forum.
At IWF, we celebrate that states are responding to parents'
concerns with the K-12 education system by rapidly expanding
education options. We remain concerned about the consequences
of lengthy school closures which severely harmed a generation
of American students causing devastating learning loss and
soaring chronic absenteeism and revealing the brokenness of the
country' K-12 system.
Starting in March 2020, bureaucrats desperate to stay in
teacher unions' good graces implemented cruel policies that
barred students from attending schools for months and in some
areas over a year.
The foolish school closures morphed into convoluted hybrid
schedules and nonsensical quarantine policies that once again
banned students from schools for days and weeks at a time.
Districts bizarrely required outdoor lunches in below freezing
temperatures, canceled sports and extracurricular activities
and imposed mask mandates that blocked young readers from
seeing or clearly hearing their teachers form sounds and words.
Callous COVID policies taught students that in-person
education is optional, so now they do not show up. Chronic
absenteeism rates have doubled since 2019. Compounding the
COVID era chaos, activists successfully pressured schools to
stop enforcing discipline creating unsafe classrooms for
educators and students.
Over the past few years, states and districts have also
lowered academic standards, canceled homework, and either
inflated grades or dropped grading all together.
Schools opened back up in 2021, but in too many places they
still do not prioritize educating students. A common excuse for
declining student performance, which began years before the
COVID-era closures, is that schools are chronically
underfunded. Yet scores have plummeted to historic lows,
despite the $190 billion Federal Elementary and Secondary
School Emergency Relief, or ESSER, windfall, coupled with
soaring Federal, annual, and state annual K-12 education
budgets.
Plus, Congress mandated that 20 percent of the ESSER III
funds address learning loss. So, if districts were awash in
funding the last 4 years and required to address learn loss,
why did they abysmally fail to educate students? Because too
many schools do not prioritize academic instruction and too
many districts spend irresponsibly.
Union trained activist teachers delight in lessons steeped
in climate alarmism, alternative identities, oppression, anti-
Semitism and decolonization. Many school district bureaucrats
spent ESSER funds on athletic fields and trendy social and
emotional learning materials rather than high dosage tutoring
and added instructional time.
In addition, and importantly, districts imprudently hired
permanent staff and provided pay raises with temporary ESSER
funding, creating a perilous fiscal cliff that is compounded by
declining K -12 public school enrollment.
Let us be honest, the students that districts profess to
prioritize when they purchase glossy SEL materials and
expensive DEI inspired contracts, were harmed the most by
school closures. No amount of public posturing about DEI will
ever undo the extremely inequitable impact of union-pushed
extended public school closures, closures that were avoidable.
Private schools proved that it was possible to quickly
reopen in 2020, possibly the greatest advertisement for school
choice in a generation. But we are all facing a learning loss
crisis that imperils our country's future, only 26 percent of
eighth graders are proficient in math and 31 percent in reading
according to NAEP.
State assessment scores continue to decline in reading, our
PISA math scores hit historic lows, ACT and SAT scores continue
to decline.
It is tempting for those of us who fought to reopen schools
to see the mounting appalling and unacceptable learning loss
evidence and say we told you so. But this sense of vindication
is fleeting in light of the wrongs in our education system.
One group that was egregiously wronged is students with
disabilities. During closures, districts either coerced parents
like me into rewriting individual education programs, IEPs, or
outright refused in-person evaluations, services, and
accommodations, abandoning their responsibility to our Nation's
most vulnerable students.
Parents from across the country can provide evidence that
school districts failed to provide Free Appropriate Public
Education or FAPE. Their children have a right to compensatory
services. Unfortunately, K -12 education headlines this year
likely will fixate on laughable book ban claims or semi
hysterical mass layoff assertions due to the long-scheduled end
of Federal-funded ESSER funding. Choose instead to focus on
students' academic recovery needs.
Please pressure school districts to prioritize the needs of
students rather than adult employees while adjusting the post
ESSER budgets. Investigate districts that were closed for
extended periods, so that students with disabilities can
receive compensatory services. And demand the districts that
directed billions in COVID-era Federal funding to education
fads or permanent labor costs report on the academic progress
of their students.
Thank you.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you. I now recognize Dr. Malkus for his
opening statement.
STATEMENT OF DR. NAT MALKUS, PH.D.
SENIOR FELLOW & DEPUTY DIRECTOR
EDUCATION POLICY STUDIES
AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE
Dr. Malkus. Thank you. Chair McClain, Ranking Member
Porter, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me
here today to testify.
I began tracking school responses to the pandemic at its
outset; work that, unfortunately, is still needed today. AEI's
Return to Learn tracker monitored weekly remote instruction for
8,600 school districts in the first full pandemic year. The
following year, we tracked district masking policies. We also
tracked districts Federal ESSER allocations, enrollments, and
chronic absenteeism. Our tracking has consistently produced
data the Federal Government either never collected or released
far later.
The pandemic effects on students and schools stem from many
sources, but chief among those that were under policymakers'
control was the duration of school closures. Early on, school
reopening became politically polarized as our data bear out.
All schools closed for spring 2020, but the duration of remote
instruction varied the following year. The weekly related to
local COVID threats, the length of closures was strongly
correlated with local Presidential votes. By April 2021, with
vaccines available and COVID cases low, a third of school
districts that voted for President Biden had fully reopened,
compared to 60 percent of Trump districts. That year, the
highest percentage of fully in-person Biden districts never
reached the lowest percentage of Trump districts.
Our district mask policy tracking the next year reflects
similar patterns. Though masking decisions seem less
consequential, they do reflect districts prioritization of
restoring normalcy, and inconsistent Federal guidance was part
of the problem. CDC's blanket guidance for universal school
masking from September 2021 to February 2022 is an example. The
CDC did track local COVID threats, but not district masking
policies. When CDC changed guidance to be based on its local
COVID data, its 100 percent masking recommendation dropped to
37 percent overnight.
This was not a post omicron anomaly, as we showed CDC's new
guidance would have recommended masking for 61 percent of
students on average while the CDC recommended 100 percent do
so. With such uncertain guidance, it is unsurprising that many
district masking policies did not match local COVID threats.
The connection between closures and learning loss is clear,
education recovery scorecard and return-to-learn data show that
in math the most in-person third of districts lost 44 percent
of a year's progress. The most remote third lost 60 percent,
over a third more.
Numerous studies bear these stark patterns out. While
Federal assessments captured a learning loss, since the Federal
Government did not systematically track closure data, they do
not capture differences by school closures.
While important, closures were not the only school pandemic
struggle. Quarantines, social distancing, staffing, shifting
public health guidance, and absenteeism challenged all schools,
even those that reopened earlier.
In my testimony last year, I said that academic recovery
was public education's primary challenge. Learning loss remains
a priority, but today absenteeism is the principal challenge
facing schools.
Chronic absenteeism exploded over the pandemic rising from
15 percent to 28 percent in 2022, with increases in every state
and demographic group. Regrettably, 2023 data saw scant
improvement, falling 2 points in the 39 reporting states. At
that pace, we will return to pre-pandemic rates in 2030.
Worse still, absenteeism hit lower achieving and higher
poverty districts harder, the same districts hit hardest by
pandemic learning loss. And rates varied by race, with 2020 K-
12 rates for Hispanic and Black students hitting 36 and 39
percent respectively.
Addressing absenteeism is crucial for overcoming learning
loss and it will hamper interventions like tutoring or extended
learning time. The current levels threaten the productivity of
American schools.
What can be done to address chronic absenteeism? First, we
need to bring both carrots and sticks. Positive supports,
alone, will not meet the scale of this problem today. Districts
should couple meaningful supports with clear communications and
consequences for parents and students who fail to meet their
moral and legal duties on school attendance.
Second, we need clear leadership from the President down to
the principal. The President and Governors, leaders on Capitol
Hill and in districts must decisively communicate that
pandemic-era exceptionalism is schools is over.
Support from above, gives local leaders, principals and
teachers the backing they need to ask for, and when necessary,
demand that families and students do their part.
Third, only teachers have the relationships to effectively
communicate on attendance, no central office letter, text or
email will carry the weight, personal contact from teachers'
will. Teachers bear heavy burdens, but those burdens will only
grow if chronic absenteeism does not improve.
Finally, we ask much of schools and teachers, but students
and families must meet their responsibilities. Standard
behavior from a few short years ago would be a huge improvement
and it is not too much to ask. If we are unwilling to ask this
of them, who should we blame if this absenteeism crisis becomes
the new normal?
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look
forward to the Subcommittee's questions.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you, doctor.
And the Chair now recognizes Ms. Forte for her opening
statement.
STATEMENT OF DENISE FORTE
PRESIDENT AND CEO
THE EDUCATION TRUST
Ms. Forte. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairwoman McClain,
Ranking Member Porter, and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank
you for the opportunity to testify today.
My name is Denise Forte, and I am the President and CEO of
the Education Trust, a national advocacy and research
organization committed to advancing policies and practices that
dismantle the racial and economic barriers embedded in the
American education system.
But I am also very proud to have been a congressional
staffer for 20 years, most recently as the Staff Director for
the Committee on Education & the Workforce for Ranking Member
Bobby Scott, but I am proudest to be the mother of two young
boys who currently attend public school in Washington, DC.
Today, I am pleased to share with you Ed Trust's assessment
of how students have fared as a result of the pandemic, and
recommendations on how we address the multigenerational
inequities that existed long before COVID-19. We can all agree
that we must provide the highest quality education for all
children to reach their academic potential and overcome the
devastating impact of unfinished learning exacerbated by the
pandemic. We know that too far, far too many students,
especially those of color and those from low-income
backgrounds, suffered disproportionately due to the pandemic
because of many structural inequities, such as instructional
quality, home broadband access, mental health support and many
other external factors.
As we advise states and districts on how to best prioritize
investments, Ed Trust research indicates there are two
strategies most effective to accelerate learning. You have
heard about them already from my colleagues here. Targeted
intensive tutoring and expanded learning times. These solutions
are agreed upon by experts across the political spectrum.
We also know that strong, positive relationships with
teachers and school staff can dramatically enhance students'
motivation, academic engagement, and social skills.
Additionally, many students have already begun investing
in--sorry, many states have already begun expanded learning
time in the summer and after school which research shows could
accelerate learning.
Parents are also deeply concerned about their student's
recovery. They are focused on their academic progress and their
well-being. Parents want better data to know how their students
and schools are performing at this time. And whether resources
are being allocated in an equitable fashion. And they want the
Federal Government, states, and districts to invest in
strategies for increasing access to mental health, including
more trained counselors, nurses, and school psychiatrists.
We are also calling for professional learning opportunities
for educators on learning acceleration, culturally affirming
practices in pedagogy, and technology enabled instruction to
ensure that students have the guidance necessary to reach high
standards.
Finally, because the pandemic is far from over, we must
look beyond this year. States and school districts should lay
the foundation for long lasting structural changes. The average
district has relied on ESSER funding to support roughly eight
percent of its budget in recent years.
The loss of these funds will be hardest on Title I school
districts since they receive more Federal dollars on average. A
state like Arkansas, for example, where 84 percent of all ESSER
funds have been exhausted, 11 percent of their education
revenue was supplied by ESSER funds and they have a growth rate
of incoming revenue slowing by 6 percent, making it
particularly challenging to avoid destructive cuts.
School boards and superintendents are deciding school
closures and teacher layoffs right now, and I mean right now.
Without additional Federal and state investment, district
budgets could be slashed by an average of $1,200 per student.
In real terms, this means students lose. states should
spend remaining dollars on evidence-based approaches to
academic recovery, including increasing funding for Title I,
Title II, to ensure that schools serving the highest number of
students from low-income backgrounds have the resources they
need. Schools have been essential to every community in this
country. The risks are too high for students and for the future
of this country.
Failure is not an option, but working with the support of
communities and families, Federal, state, and district leaders
can take steps to ensure that all students, especially those
who need the most support can obtain an education that equips
them to excel.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. And
I welcome questions.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you, Ms. Forte.
The Chair now recognizes Mr. Grothman for his 5 minutes.
Mr. Grothman. I hope I have the right one here--good. A
couple of questions, we will start with Ms. Gentles or Dr.
Malkus, whoever wants to jump in here, what has been going on
with math scores in this country over the last 40 years or say?
Dr. Malkus. Over the long trajectory, math scores have been
going up. Depending on the test you are looking at, the long-
term trend from NAEP is a great measure of basic skills. They
have been trending up until about 2012. And at that point we
sort of hit the zenith, you can see this in a number of scores.
In the aftermath, they started to decline a little bit. When
the pandemic hit, they fall dramatically.
I think it is important to note how they fell, they fell on
average, but the students that were scoring, sort of, at the
higher end of the spectrum, the 90th percentile and the 70th,
75th percentile, those students did not suffer dramatically
over the pandemic, their scores came down.
The students in the lower end of spectrum, 10th percentile,
25th percentile the floor fell out on their scores. If this was
more even, what we would have is achievement gaps fixed but
everyone losing math progress, lower achievement than previous
years. What we have is both lower achievement and larger
achievement gaps.
Mr. Grothman. So, people are not doing as well in certain
groups.
In Wisconsin, which is the state I know best, probably the
district with the largest share of people of color, students of
color is the city of Milwaukee. And we spend substantially more
per pupil in the city of Milwaukee than almost every other
school district in the state. Nevertheless, we get people
running down the city of Milwaukee schools saying that you
cannot succeed, they are somehow inferior to other schools.
Do you think it has a negative impact on students if they
are constantly told that their schools--particularly when it is
not true--that their schools are unfunded or implying that they
are less funded than other schools?
Ms. Gentles. I think that there is a problem with
constantly denigrating education. And I am sure we can all
agree that we do not want to be here to denigrate K-12.
Mr. Grothman. I guess what I am trying to get at here, are
there people that imply that it is expected, I guess, or this
is the reason why people of certain demographics do not do as
well. Now it is irritating enough that we actually spend more
on those schools, but do you think when we talk about how we
are down on people of certain demographics that it causes any
defeatism in those students?
Ms. Gentles. We certainly do not want to have the bigotry
of low expectations, something that we heard a lot during the
Bush Administration, that there were efforts underway to put
that in the past, but certainly we have that again now that we
are using the pandemic as an excuse for low performance among
low-income students in particular.
So, we do not want to tell families from particular areas
or particular backgrounds that they cannot achieve, that their
students should not be expected to achieve.
Mr. Grothman. OK. Next question, I think part of this DEI
stuff, and insofar as we insert it in younger children, implies
that if you are not of European ancestry, you are not going to
do as well in this country. Now from what I read, at least
economically, people from Asia, the India subcontinent,
Chinese, Filipino, Cuban, even Nigerian, I think at least, I
believe, I am not sure about Nigerian, but I think, are doing
better than Americans of European ancestry.
Do you--is this part of the diversity equity and inclusion
curriculum? Are young people being taught how well people from
non-European backgrounds from China or Philippines, or India
are doing? Are you aware? Is that part of the curriculum.
Ms. Gentles. That does not sound like something that would
be part of curriculum, but we should be clear that even
relatively affluent U.S. students do not score as high on math
as average performing students in places like Japan or South
Korea or Hong Kong, so all of our students are struggling.
Mr. Grothman. OK, I guess the point I am trying to get to,
are students from backgrounds, non-European backgrounds, doing
better than average Americans? And are young people being
taught that or are they being taught how we are being too
unfairly good to Americans whose ancestry around here goes back
decades?
Dr. Malkus. Quite honestly, I am not sure about the
curriculum and contents in DEI indications. There is quite a
number of differences between different groups and my fear is,
is that most of the curriculum is insufficiently demanding of
students of European ancestry, or whatever other group that we
have of them, to deal with the particulars of those arguments.
Mr. Grothman. Thank you.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Ocasio-Cortez for 5 minutes.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you. I do not know what I just
heard right now, but I think--I think when we talk about
students of a certain demographic, you know, as a woman of a
certain demographic, I would be happy to illuminate some of the
disparities, the discrepancies that we are talking about here.
In fact, I wonder if any of my colleagues, anyone here can
articulate in this discussion of absenteeism we say, you know,
people are not showing up to school anymore, it is because they
do not--there is an insinuation that is because people do not
want to go or there is a different attitude. But do we actually
know what one of leading causes of school absenteeism is?
Asthma, asthma.
I represent the Bronx. I represent kids whose only meal
that they will eat in an entire day will be from school. I
represent kids whose--the cleanest air that they will breathe
in their entire day, maybe if they are lucky, will be from
their school, that the safest place that they will be in a day
will be their school. And so, when we come here, we talk about
schools, but if you close your eyes and put yourself in a
classroom of someone else's district you will see that the
challenges are different here.
So, this is not about what we are teaching about European
versus non-European descent. This is about the fact that the
Bronx has one of the highest childhood asthma rates in the
country. And climate curriculum. And when we talk about the
importance of having clean air and clean water, it has a direct
outcome on people's scholastic performance.
So, as we transition in this time of a pandemic, a
respiratory disease, and we wonder why one of the highest
childhood asthma rate geographic zones in the country is
struggling with absenteeism, knowing that respiratory disease
is a major factor in that, maybe we try to solve that problem.
Maybe we take a look at some of the environmental and some of
the economic factors in getting to a school.
Ms. Forte, you have extensive experience in this issue, can
you speak a little bit toward some of those economic and
environmental factors that you see and how they affect
communities and their ability to navigate educational outcomes.
Ms. Forte. Thank you for that question. At the Education
Trust, particularly when you think about the pandemic, the
research is clearly there that what impacted our students was
healthcare, loss of employment of their families, the lack of
technology accessibility. And this really had an impact on
their livelihood, which of course had an impact on their school
day.
And as Representative Ocasio-Cortez pointed out, for many
of these students where they are actually are supported best,
where they are being able to take advantage of services and the
supports that they need to actually succeed in school is at
school, which we believe is the right place for many of these
services.
In addition, we know that lack of mental health support
that they faced during the pandemic needed to be supplemented
while at school. And so, we are happy to see from this recent
investment of American Rescue Plan, the significant investment
in schools that helps schools reopen, that made sure teachers
had the support that they needed, and most of all made sure
that more children had support for mental health services.
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. Thank you so much, Ms. Forte. And this
just correlates with what we have seen, not just the Bronx, but
across the country. We saw admissions, mental health
admissions, of children that were highly disruptive, their
ability to be healthy is what can determine whether they show
up to school and how well they do in school.
On top of that, when we talk about social issues and when
people want to critique social inclusion in schools, housing,
as you mentioned, is a core underlying factor in how well
someone does in school. If you do not have a home or a bed to
lay your head on, how are you going to perform well in school?
And when we talk about inclusion in those issues, one of the
highest rates of childhood homelessness, one of the highest
contributors and factors is if they are LGBT, because if they
go home to a place that will kick them out of their house
because they are gay or trans or queer, how can we imagine them
doing well in school?
And so, if school is not safe for them, if home is not safe
for them and if we allow a culture that continues to
marginalize LGBT people to the point their existence cannot
even be affirmed in school, how can we expect them to do well?
And with that I yield back.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Mr.
Burlison for 5 minutes.
Mr. Burlison. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Right now, public schools are really, in my opinion,
failing to do their most basic duty--educating our children. We
saw widespread closures during the COVID pandemic which led to
students falling behind in core subjects like reading and math,
which, by the way, I opposed the closures and the lockdowns
because it was an absolute scam and the impact to our children,
I think, we will see for an entire generation.
But during that time, under the guise of COVID, Congress
appropriated billions, $189 billion to the ESSER fund to
restore educational services after COVID-19. Of course, like
everything else, the government throws taxpayer dollars at, the
money was often used inappropriately. While there were some
school districts that appropriately spent the funds, there were
many, unfortunately far too many, that used it for nonsense
like DEI programs, critical race theory, gender ideology, and
other woke programming.
And before anyone questions whether or not it actually
happened, I will point to my very own school district that I
graduated from, which spent money implementing these programs.
First and foremost, Congress has a responsibility to
question how the schools are spending taxpayer dollars and how
they are being effective in the use of those dollars.
My first question is to--is it Ms. Gentles, Gentles?
Ms. Gentles. Gentle with an ``s'', so Gentles.
Mr. Burlison. Gentles. Ms. Gentles, will expanding school
choice, which is a popular topic in many states, including
Missouri, will that improve the student outcomes?
Ms. Gentles. Yes, there have been close to 200 studies of
existing School Choice programs and the vast majority of those
do indicate that there are improvements in not just the
participating students, but in the public-school students in
the surrounding area, those competitive pressures improve the
district services to the nearby students. So, rising tides
lifts all boats.
Mr. Burlison. Yes, it is amazing how powerful competition
can be.
My other question, often whenever I am discussing this
topic there are teachers that we--that I think we all love
teachers, but there is often a fear of how this might impact
their livelihood, impact their opportunities. In your opinion,
does expanding school choice help teachers?
Ms. Gentles. Well, the fear comes from the unions who are
concerned about losing the dues paying members from the public
system. There is absolutely no need for fear on the part of
educators or those who care about them because, of course,
education alternatives to that traditional public school need
teachers.
So, teachers are teaching in these private schools and
other education options. And again, when we talk about those
studies its revealed that the teachers' salaries in surrounding
areas where you have school choice programs, those increase, so
everybody benefits.
Mr. Burlison. You know, the sad part is that would you
agree that sometimes what the unions would be advocating for,
in direct conflict with what benefits the students, and what
benefits the teachers?
Ms. Gentles. Well, the teachers' unions are focused on
increasing their dues paying members and so the AFT represents
a Planned Parenthood staff members in some states, for example.
They are not necessarily representing educators and they are in
contrast to the needs of educators when they are advocating for
policies that do not enforce discipline, that creates unsafe
environments for teachers, for example.
Mr. Burlison. Now there are a number of types of different
of School Choice endeavors within different states. Could you
lay out or explain for those who are watching the difference--
the different school choice opportunities and which ones work
better in states that have experimented with this?
Ms. Gentles. Well, according to EdChoice, 75 percent of
students attend traditional public schools and then you have 25
percent of students attending private schools, charter schools,
magnet programs and home education. So that is a quarter of the
Nation's students benefiting from alternative to the
traditional public school. There are studies of the charter
schools that show that they serve low-income students in urban
areas better than the residentially assigned public schools.
And I have mentioned the private school studies.
Within private school choice, you have a newer development
called education savings accounts and a growing number of
states have these flexible spending accounts that allocate the
state portion of the student's funding to an account for the
parent to draw down from to use for tutoring, for tuition, for
transportation, for technology and therapies when you are
talking about special needs children.
And so, these ESA programs are very popular among families
of students with special needs.
Mr. Burlison. Thank you. My time has expired.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Ms.
Crockett for 5 minutes.
Ms. Crockett. OK. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Whew, OK, critical race theory, I just want to be clear, I
am going to go to the end real quick because I know that that
was brought up. Critical race theory, is that typically taught
K through 12? Yes or no?
Ms. Forte. No.
Ms. Crockett. OK, all right. So, we can stop with the
nonsense because K through 12 was not teaching critical race
theory at least in this country. I cannot talk about what
happens in other countries, but in our country, K through 12 is
not learning critical race theory just for those that are
unfamiliar.
In addition to that we just heard about AFT and what they
are advocating for. And I noted that there was a comment that
you made as it relates to discipline and how that is something
AFT should be advocating for so that teachers can be safer. Is
that correct? Am I characterizing what you say correctly?
Ms. Gentles. I believe that both NEA and the AFT should
endorse policies that keep educators safe.
Ms. Crockett. OK. Let me ask you a quick question,
actually, I would like for all three of you to answer this
question. It is just a yes or no, we will start at this end,
when you were growing up and going through school, did you ever
have to go through an active shooter drill? Yes or no?
Ms. Forte. No.
Dr. Malkus. No.
Ms. Gentles. No.
Ms. Crockett. Oh, OK, all right. So, can we agree that guns
being kept out of schools may be one of those things that could
keep not only teachers safe but also students safe? Yes or no.
Ms. Forte. Yes.
Dr. Malkus. Yes.
Ms. Gentles. Yes.
Ms. Crockett. OK, thank you.
So, I do want to touch on a few things that Ms. Ocasio-
Cortez talked about, because I do not really know the breadth
of your understanding or experiences, but to give a little
clarity to the district that I come from, 20 percent of my
district live at or below poverty. And I do come from an urban
district.
I do have a majority minority district. I know that we have
talked about DEI and diversity. And I find that when I am here,
I am constantly fighting to make sure that I can break through
the noise and the stereotypes that exist around not only my
kiddos in my district, but just my constituents.
And one of things that maybe some of you have never
experienced, I do not know, is the fact that one of leading
reasons that students in my district do not show up to school
is because they are poor, because some of them are homeless. We
found that there were children that did not go to school
because they did not have clean clothes.
That is something that certain people do not have to worry
about. And they found that if they brought in washing machines,
so the kids would not make fun of them because they had clean
clothes that they would show up. These are things that maybe in
a more affluent district they may not need money for so while
one of my colleagues talked about how much investment has to go
into some of these school districts in the inner city, I do
want to make it clear that there are different obstacles that
my kiddos deal with, in addition to the fact that I practiced
criminal defense work prior to coming into the legislative
realm.
And in my district, I have the highest incarcerated ZIP
Codes in the entire state. What that means, is that sometimes I
have children that go home and they do not have parents to go
home to or if they are going to parents, their parents may be
involved in things that are not necessarily the best things for
kids to be around.
And so, as has already been stated, sometimes the safest
space is at school for some of these children. And what is so
annoying to me is that we debate whether or not we will invest
in our futures.
As far as I am concerned, there is no better investment
than in our children. Because if we are going to make sure that
this country continues on, it is not going to start by
investing in people that look like me or are my age. It starts
with making sure that there is a foundation.
And I just want to say that I am thankful for those
teachers that decided to go in even when they were under
resourced, even giving their own resources to make it happen. I
lost teachers in my district during the pandemic because they
literally risked their lives in the midst of a pandemic to show
up because they loved those kids that much because I can tell
you the pay is not there.
Teachers are not getting rich, maybe professors, but not
teachers. And so, the fact is I have talked to my school
districts, they were able to take advantage of the extra money
that was given to them, but guess what? They still had gaps
that they needed to fill.
And the reason that I brought up gun violence is No. 1, it
is a safety issue, but also as it relates to the mental health.
Children nowadays know where they need to go in case somebody
comes in. They are looking for the closet. That is no way for
kids in America to live. So, we need to make sure that we put
kids first.
Thank you so much. And with that, I will yield.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you. I now recognize myself for 5
minutes.
One, I think my question is during the pandemic--I am not
here to say it is right or wrong, but I am looking at during
the pandemic, we used ESSER funds to the tune of $190 billion,
correct? My question is where were they spent? What programs
were they used for, right? And did they help? Do we have a
measurable outcome? And did that $190 billion of taxpayer
money, did it do what we intended it to do?
Because I am sure one of the questions that is going to be
coming up at some point in time is do with reauthorize those
funds? Do we continue them, or do we stop them? That is going
to be the question.
And I think if we took a look at some facts and some data,
which is a little concerning to me since everyone on the panel
has talked about our math and reading scores have gone down,
OK, I think we all want to fix them, right? Both sides want to
fix them.
We want to reinvest in our children. So, with that
question, what I would like to know is where were those ESSER
funds used? Were they used for--that we all agree on tutoring
this is something both sides agree on, I heard it tutoring and
expanded learning time.
Any disagreement on that? I think that is what I heard,
correct? Wonderful. We have got some agreement. That is a
bonus, that is a good thing.
All right. So, where were they spent? Were they spent? Was
the bulk of the $190 billion spent on tutoring and expanded
learning time? And if so, what are the results? So, I will Ms.
Gentles start.
Ms. Gentles. So, Marguerite Roza of Georgetown University
has an eduonomics lab and has done her best to go into the
reports that are available from states and districts to assess
how the money has been spent. Unfortunately, 20 states share no
detail beyond how much money each district spent.
Mrs. McClain. Wait a second. So, we gave--and this is our
fault because we did it in a hurry, we did not put guardrails
on it, and they will not share the data with us, or they just
have not gotten around to sharing it with us?
Ms. Gentles. They were not asked to share the data. That is
something that is important to note. They were given
flexibility with this funding and broad guidelines on how to
spend it. And 20 percent was required to be used for learning
loss.
Mrs. McClain. And I do not mean to be rude, but I have a
limited amount of time. Do you know where the money was spent?
Was it spent on tutoring and extended learning?
Ms. Gentles. No, most of it was spent on labor--so,
increasing that permanent staff and on pay raises and a very
small percentage was spent on tutoring, summer school extended
day.
Mrs. McClain. And do you have data to back that up?
Ms. Gentles. Pardon me?
Mrs. McClain. Do you have data to back that up?
Ms. Gentles. Marguerite Roza and the edunomics lab has
that. She did say that we see a higher number of districts
investing in social emotional learning, about half. And she
gave an example of Wisconsin and California, just five percent
of ESSER III expenditures have gone to lengthening the school
day or year or adding time in the summer.
Mrs. McClain. Well, that is not real good.
Dr. Malkus, could you comment, please.
Dr. Malkus. Yes, the answer is we do not know, and we will
not know because there was not guardrails for these funds. I
would say that there were three bills when ESSER funds came
out. And the $13 billion that came out initially went right out
the door on an emergency basis in March 2020, and that made
sense.
Fifty-four billion went out in the second bill that
December. That probably could have had some more guardrails on
it. There was $123 billion that went out in the American Rescue
Plan. That did have some guardrails on it, 20 percent to some
sort of recovery.
But late in the pandemic, after almost all schools in the
country were already open, that last tranche of money really
needed to have more guardrails, more directions and certainly
reporting requirements. I would say that if you wanted to
design a law that would jeopardize arguments about whether the
Federal Government can spend education dollars well, ESSER--you
could not do much better than ESSER.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you.
Ms. Forte.
Ms. Forte. I would agree with Dr. Malkus, but one problem
we still have is not all the money has been spent. So, we do
not know.
Mrs. McClain. So whoa, whoa, whoa. $190 billion has gone
out and some of that 190 has not even been spent yet. I just
want everyone to hear that, so when we come back and we
petition for more funds, more funds that is a big concern that
we have not spent what we had. No. 2, we do not even know what
we spent the money on. And No. 3, do we have any data that
shows that the money is being used for tutoring and lengthening
of----
Ms. Forte. Well, I think we need to remember that in order
to have a tutor that is a labor cost, summer learning that as a
labor cost, extending your day is also a labor cost.
Mrs. McClain. So, in your opinion we do have data on that.
Ms. Forte. We have some data. And we also--just pointing
out to Ms. Gentles that even though the dollars were spent on
labor, in order to run tutoring and after school programs
during the summer at the end of day you need labor and people
to do that.
Mrs. McClain. Do you have data because that would be super
helpful? Do you have that data? Could you share it?
Ms. Gentles. I can get it for you.
Mrs. McClain. Wonderful. Thank you. I am sorry, I am over.
So, the Chair now recognizes Ms. Porter, the Ranking
Member. I am so sorry, Ms. Porter.
Ms. Porter. Thank you very much.
I wanted to talk about chronic absenteeism and share a
couple of things and ask some questions. First, I want to share
with you that as a parent of three kids, in California, as you
may know, has very aggressive absenteeism laws. I have seen
that persistent, frank communication that you call for, Dr.
Malkus, coming from my kids' school.
When they have been sick and I have not gotten them called
in until the next day, they have been in touch. When my
daughter missed 4 days because she was sick, her teacher called
to check in on her and find out if he needed to send home a
learning packet.
So, I do think we are seeing schools start to really own
this issue and I think we should encourage that. But I wanted
to share with you that I think some of that is happening and I
do think this is something, particularly for lower achieving
districts, that we want to be encouraging.
One of the things I really appreciated about your
testimony, Dr. Malkus, and I think it goes to the point that
Ms. Forte just made, is you say things like some of the most
resource intensive and most expensive strategies work the best.
And I think Ms. Forte points to targeted intensive tutoring,
these kinds of high dosage tutoring programs and expended
learning time. And so, I just want to ask you, those things
take money, right?
Dr. Malkus. They do.
Ms. Porter. And some of that money will, as she points out,
goes to labor costs. You would agree with her?
Dr. Malkus. I would.
Ms. Porter. So, do we have enough resources pointed toward
addressing closing the pandemic learning gap and toward
addressing the learning loss that comes from absenteeism?
Dr. Malkus. You know, it is going to depend. Those funds
are district to district. We really do not know how much each
district has spent. It looks at last estimate--and there is
some time lag in this reporting, but $50 billion unspent.
Pretty late in the game.
We will need to have funds to do these things, there is no
doubt about it. But I do want to make the distinction here,
that we should be careful to look at the chronic absenteeism
problem as if it is a problem that we can quick--not quick--but
fix with simple narrow policies.
What we are seeing is every demographic group is 75 to 80
percent up, I mean, across the board. It is a widespread
cultural change, and you do not have to be a social scientist
to figure out why, right? We missed a lot of school; there was
a lot of disruptions, and people are out of the rhythms of
going back to school.
So, I really think it is important for us to recognize this
as we need to fight this as, yes, bring the policy game, but
this is a cultural fight. And, if we cannot reset school
cultures--and it is not just poor schools. I mean, it is there,
but high-achieving, relatively well-off schools, they are up 80
percent too.
So, I really think that this is a cultural problem, and I
want to encourage leadership, up and down the board, to
approach it as such.
Ms. Porter. Yes. So, I mean, I want to share with you, I
think my school has done exactly that, and I have noticed a
marked--so one of the things that, I will be honest with you,
that has caused my kids to miss a frustrating amount of school
for me as a parent this year is they have been sick a lot. And
I think that we have had a rough kind of flu, winter, cold
season, and so I have called them in. They have just been sick.
And one of the things that I, you know, I think is hard to
balance when you are pushing kids and parents to come and
turning up that kind of heat, which is important to have that
standard, is I have to argue to keep my sick kids home because
they say I will get in trouble if I am not there. And so, they
are--I think you have to walk that line.
In terms of these programs, Ms. Forte, I wondered if you
can talk a little bit about a few of these that are working,
like the Virginia High-Dosage Tutoring Program, particularly
the Colorado AmeriCorps Program, on encouraging partnering with
families whose kids are not coming to school, to get them more
engaged.
And then, I think, you know, I just posed it to the
Chairwoman, with the remaining ESSER dollars and if we do
reauthorize it, I think you all have given us some programs to
focus it on.
And I think it is appropriate that we--if we reauthorize
any money, we focus it on these programs that are working and
are being deployed in states. So, I wonder if you could say a
little more about them.
Ms. Forte. Yes. There are many shining examples that I did
have in my written testimony that, either from having small
tutoring groups of three to four students with one teacher
three to four times a week like they are doing in Tennessee to
the program that you mentioned in Colorado, and people are
finding different ways to provide these small learning groups,
whether it is with the teachers, the certified teachers, or
whether it is with AmeriCorps or a college student or whether
it is with grandparents.
And I think that is the way that people should be looking
at it, just making sure that there is a responsible adult
involved in the learning process and that the actual curriculum
is aligned with what the child is learning in school.
Other funds are being used for after-school programs that
are done with a community-based program. Other programs are
about professional learning opportunities, but I will say that,
when we are talking about accelerating learning, the intensive
tutoring and the extended day is where the research points us.
Ms. Porter. Yes. Thank you very much. I hope we can work on
really focusing some--if there is additional funding--focusing
on these proven interventions.
I do think--and I want to thank the Chairwoman for pointing
to this issue--we need to treat this like the real educational
crisis it is. The learning recovery is--the lack of learning
recovery from the pandemic is real, and we do not get anywhere
by pretending otherwise.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Lee for 5 minutes.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I am--as a Black woman who grew up in a working-class
community and went to a public school in what we would call
divested public school system, I have sat through many hearings
that kind of descend into the disappointing.
I think the ones around public education are often the most
insulting because they are the most dangerously disingenuous. I
just want to say that, you know, my colleagues want to blame
everything but what it is when it comes to public education.
But the reality is, is that we know it is not CRT; it is
not wokeness, whatever that is; it is not gay books. Right? It
is racist and inequitable funding schemes that keep Black and
Brown and working-class students out of the most high-
performing schools.
When you add that, of course, to redline policy--redlining
and predatory lending, right, these are children who have been
in locked into school systems that our government, our systems,
have purposefully kept under-invested.
We know that, and even when we think about COVID and the
necessities that we had to--or rather the adjustments that we
had to make, I think often about, you know, private schools
that were able to open faster because these were not school
systems in buildings that they had to worry about HVAC issues
or open lead and asbestos as many in the Commonwealth in
Pennsylvania have to deal with.
Some of the facilities at our schools that our children,
our educators, have to learn in, are facilities that we would
never allow our government to learn in. They would be shut
down.
But we still somehow cannot fully fund public education.
So, I just wanted to point that out, that we recognize what we
are dealing with before we bring in arguments around whether
children of certain races are performing differently than
others.
But the reality is, is that our Republican colleagues--my
Republican colleagues do not want the parents in their district
to know that they have denied their children resources. They do
not want folks to know that they are diverting your hard-earned
tax dollars away from our schools and into the pockets of their
donors.
They are so desperate for distractions as they defund our
classrooms and deprive our teachers that they are banning books
and censoring teachers and bullying LGBTQ+ kids, and they are
erasing Black histories in an attempt to turn us against our
schools.
If Republicans do not like what you have to say, they will
do everything in their power to prevent you from saying it. If
they do not like what you are reading, they will do everything
in their power to keep you from reading it, even if it is
literally just talking about the history of this country or
exercising your free speech, because heaven forbid someone gets
uncomfortable during a lesson about our history of chattel
enslavement in America, or someone feels seen by reading about
themselves or someone like them, or learns about White
supremacy by reading ``The 1619 Project'' or ``The Diary of
Anne Frank.''
I do ask for unanimous consent to enter this article from
the NPR entitled ``The Education Culture Wars Waging, But for
Most Parents It's Background Noise'' into the record.
Mrs. McClain. Without objection.
Ms. Lee. Republicans are claiming it is about parents'
rights to be involved in their children's classes. Which
parents? In this national poll, NPR found that by wide margins
and regardless of their politics, 76 percent of parents were
happy with their kids' schools and what they are taught.
Just 18 percent of parents were not happy with the way
gender and sexuality was taught; 19 percent say the same thing
about race and racism; and 14 feel that way about U.S. history.
These numbers show what is really happening. Teachers are
being forced to bow to a very vocal minority at the expense of
the overwhelming majority of parents and teachers and, most
importantly, all of our students.
And, while we are so focused on a small group, we are
ignoring real barriers for marginalized students, including
language barriers, access to technology and tutoring, and a
lack of funding for underserved schools.
It is much easier to make teachers a political punching bag
than to invest in our communities, even though that investment
works. I have seen it firsthand in school districts like mine.
For instance, Pittsburgh public schools, during the pandemic
when it was necessary to adjust and do school from home, many
kids were left without reliable internet.
In Pittsburgh, our local universities--Carnegie Mellon
University and the University of Pittsburgh--partnered with
nonprofits and used Federal grant money to connect over 600
families to the internet.
CMU also set up dedicated servers with free courses and
classes for students to access, including virtual labs and
coding courses.
Ms. Forte, do you think having internet access or not using
gender-neutral pronouns is more important to a kid's education?
Ms. Forte. I think that having access to technology is more
important.
Ms. Lee. Thank you.
This learning gap is really more about a practice gap. Our
young people need more tools to get excited about learning. In
Pittsburgh, CMU has started programs that use phone apps and
augmented reality to better engage young students.
They also expanded tutoring for low-income families, backed
by AI, to make the tutoring more effective, all funded through
Federal grants.
Ms. Forte, what do you think is better for students,
creating new technology for them to learn with or removing
books from their classrooms and libraries unless they have been
approved by every single parent?
Ms. Forte. Certainly, creating new technology to learn.
Ms. Lee. Thank you.
Without investing in our marginalized community, we are
never going to see improvement. We have got this huge gap in
STEM when it comes to Black and Brown people and women. This
hearing could have focused on how to get young people excited
about science and math and how to better reach underserved
schools.
But, instead, we are stuck listening to the same broken
record. Cutting funding, banning books, and censoring
curriculum is not the answer.
With that, I yield back.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you. And I think you just made a very
great argument for school of choice.
With that, I recognize Dr. Foxx for 5 minutes.
Ms. Foxx. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Ms. Gentles, in the last 4 months, we have seen a stunning
wave of anti-Semitism sweep our education institutions. While
many of these incidents have occurred in higher education,
there have also been several in K-12 schools. I think that is
simply abhorrent.
Can you talk more about how much anti-Semitism is in K-12
schools?
Ms. Gentles. I think we are just getting familiar with this
concerning issue with K-12 education, but we do have examples
of families in both coasts--I believe New Jersey and then also
California--going to the school district and saying that ``my
child is experiencing intolerable anti-Semitism,'' and those
school districts then pay for the private school tuition for
the students to leave and go to a safe environment where they
will not be bullied. And that is something that Jewish families
may have to consider throughout the country if this continues.
Ms. Foxx. Thank you very much.
Dr. Malkus, we have heard about how serious learning loss
and chronic absenteeism are, but the Department of Education
does not seem to be focusing on this.
Instead, it seems to be spending all its time pursuing
radical, far-left agenda items, such as college loan
forgiveness.
Can you talk about how much work the Department is doing on
learning loss compared to Democrat political priorities?
Dr. Malkus. I have been tracking a number of things,
probably too many, over this pandemic, but one of them that
came up was student loan forgiveness. So, I do actually have
yet another tracker at--on student debt.
When you include all forms of that, including the pause,
things legislated by Congress, PSLF funding, and the new IDR
reforms, we have exceeded $370 billion in forgiven student
loans, I might add, without--much of that, rather, without
consent of Congress.
That is where a great deal of the Administration's focus
has gone. There was an agenda that came out, I think it was 10
days, perhaps 2 weeks ago, where the Administration and members
of the Domestic Policy Council pushed for high-dosage tutoring
and extended learning time and talked about chronic absenteeism
to some degree.
While those things are worthwhile and I am glad that they
are paying attention to it, I do not think those priorities are
as focused on the K-12 challenges that we are facing and
particularly showing the leadership that we need from the
Administration on chronic absenteeism, that we need right now.
Ms. Foxx. You used a term that I want to ask if we can
agree that we might want to change the word ``forgiveness'' in
terms of loans. Actually, isn't it a transfer of debt from the
people who took it out to people who did not take out the debt?
Dr. Malkus. The Federal student loan portfolio comes
directly out of the Federal Treasury, and so, when loans are
forgiven, then the balance of the loan is--that was set to be
received by the Treasury, plus whatever interest the borrower
agreed to, will no longer be received.
And I just might add, because I am concerned about these
issues as well, that the SAVE program is an enormous student
loan entitlement that will keep on giving without congressional
action.
Ms. Foxx. Thank you.
Mr. Malkus, again--or Dr. Malkus, it is a fact that test
scores and proficiency levels have declined across the country
since before the COVID pandemic. Realistically, what percentage
of students should be meeting grade-level proficiency
standards, and what role do teachers and school administrators
have in helping students get back on track?
Dr. Malkus. That seemingly simple question is a very
difficult one. There was a while, in the no-child-left-behind
era, that we thought a 100 percent of students should be
proficient or what we would think of as on-grade level. That
was aspirational for sure.
Look, I think the important thing to note is that is a very
difficult question to answer: What is the percentage? Higher is
better, and it is going lower. That is what we need to know.
It is not only going lower on average; it is going lower
for our lowest performers. That means that whatever opportunity
education gives to students, the kids who are achieving at the
lower end are getting less of it. I am alarmed by this.
What can teachers and administrators do? The list goes on a
long way, but I am very concerned, not only from the chronic
absenteeism but from other pandemic effects in schools, that we
have a culture problem in schools.
The culture in schools has shifted, and we need to do
aggressive maintenance with all hands on deck. I think we need
leadership from government leaders to give cover to lower-level
folks to push hard on teachers but also on parents and on
students to get back to the baseline, which was no great
shakes, before the pandemic.
Ms. Foxx. Thank you. Thank you. I thank the witnesses.
I thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I yield back.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Ms.
Norton for 5 minutes.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Madam Chair.
As a life-long First Amendment champion who argued and won
a free-speech case in front of the U.S. Supreme Court and the
daughter of a public schoolteacher, I am deeply concerned by
the rise of book bans and increase in efforts to diminish free
speech, especially in the classroom.
I am acutely aware of the fact that you do not have to
agree with what someone has to say to fight tooth and nail for
their right to say it. I know that because I have defended
people in court who I know would not defend me if the roles
were reversed.
Right now, Republicans across the country are advancing
dangerous bills that would bar virtually all discussion about
race and gender differences in American history and society.
Ms. Forte, how have Republican-led book bans and anti-free
speech initiatives affected students' ability to learn?
Ms. Forte. Thank you for that question. I am sad to report
that it has been a real distraction from the hard issues at
hand that students are facing in the classroom.
These book bans mean that fewer children have exposure to
the things they really do want to learn. We hear from students
that they want more engaging curriculum.
We hear from students that they want to be able to see
themselves in their curriculum, and the fact that a small
number of folks have been able to enact these book bans is
really disheartening and does a disservice to the librarians
and the teachers across this country who work really hard to
make sure that the curriculum put in front of young people
today is engaging.
And, by the way, more engaging curriculum actually helps
with absenteeism. So, we could actually be using more robust
curriculum in the classroom to bring our kids back into the
classroom.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Ms. Forte.
While it is incredibly important that students learn from
developmentally appropriate materials, these book bans and
anti-free speech efforts are designed to be intentionally vague
to target teachers.
Because of these Republican-led efforts, teachers do not
know what they can and cannot say. These teachers are forced to
do their jobs in constant fear of being fired, fined, or having
angry parents turn on them.
I ask unanimous consent to enter this study from RAND
entitled ``Walking a Fine Line: Educators' View of Politicized
Topics in Schooling'' in the record.
Mrs. McClain. Without objection.
Ms. Norton. This national survey of teachers and principals
found that roughly one in four teachers have been directed by
school or district leaders to limit conversations on political
or social issues.
The survey also found that 48 percent of principals and 40
percent of teachers reported that the intrusion of political
issues and opinions into their professions are a job-related
stressor.
These bills that politicize the conversations teachers can
have with their students are harmful. They aim to terrify
teachers into avoiding any meaningful discussion about
important topics like racial discrimination. Even when not
passing at all, these bills have chilling effects across the
country that negatively impact teachers and students.
When a new Iowa law barred educators from teaching, quote,
``that the United States of America and the state of Iowa are
fundamentally or systemically racist or sexist,'' end quote, a
teacher in Iowa was told by the superintendent that she was
unsure if he was able to teach his class that slavery was
wrong.
All of this is a distinction that prevents teachers from
doing their job, which is to help students learn. This is
shameful, especially given how urgent it is that we help
students get up to speed after pandemic-related disruptions.
I yield the rest of my time to the Ranking Member.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you, Ms. Norton.
In closing, I want to thank our witnesses once again today
for your testimony. What I was really amazed at is we do agree
on some really key, important things, which was tutoring and
extended learning.
I mean, that is--I did not hear any disagreement on that
and that dollars, if we decide to spend more dollars or the
dollars that we have not spent, I mean, they should go there
first and foremost. So, cats and dogs living together, look at,
we all agree on something.
But thank you very much for your statement and your
testimony and taking your time today.
I now recognize Ms. Norton for her closing remarks.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
I want to reiterate the importance of getting our students
back on track. This is an opportunity to invest in our schools
and allocate the resources needed to address longstanding
inequities in education exacerbated by the pandemic.
Democrats invested in students' safety in the classroom
during the pandemic, and we are investing in recovery efforts
in the aftermath. House Democrats are working to empower
teachers, families, and students and address longstanding
inequities in education.
In contrast, House Republicans are focused on cutting
education funding, banning books, and censoring curriculum,
things I fought for and won in the Supreme Court and won more
than five decades ago. Let us not go backward.
Before I gavel out, I ask unanimous consent to insert into
the record a statement of the National Education Association.
Mrs. McClain. Without objection.
Ms. Norton. I want to end with a quote from them that I
think should resonate across the hearing room: ``Instead of
supporting students and the educators who match and nurture
them, some in Congress are looking for scapegoats and
distractions. Students and families are desperate for
lawmakers' attention, commitment, and creativity. Parents are
demanding more from Congress. They want students to have the
resources they deserve and the opportunities to pursue their
dreams. They want their children's schools to be safe from gun
violence, places where students are free to learn, and
experienced educators are free to teach. If you are serious
about educating and uplifting American students, please focus
on what they truly need.''
I yield back.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you.
And we are going to go a little bit out of order, but the
Chair now recognizes Mr. Moskowitz for 5 minutes.
Mr. Moskowitz. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I apologize for
my tardiness.
I want to thank the Committee and the Members who are--who
have looked at, you know, the anti-Semitism that we have seen
in our universities and the hearing that we saw many weeks ago
and the fact that there is discussion to have a staff member
specifically on the education committees to focus on the
prevalence of anti-Semitism in our universities.
I also want to point out that I was the emergency
management director for the state of Florida during COVID for
Governor DeSantis. And we did reopen our schools, and that was
an evidence-based decision at that time because, remember, we
were dealing with Alpha, right? That was the COVID strain that
we had. There was no Delta. There was no Omicron. It was Alpha.
And the data was clear, if you looked at countries in
Europe, who were ahead of us, that it was not affecting kids.
And now, in hindsight, it is super clear that the states
that stayed closed on their schools has dramatically hurt kids,
minority kids and kids from poverty-stricken neighborhoods. No
doubt that it has hurt them more by the schools being closed.
And so, you know, I think, on a go-forward basis, these are
the things that have to be balanced, and I think Florida got it
right when it came to handling schools and what to do there.
But, Madam Chairwoman, I would be remiss if I did not bring
up something that has not made any sense to me in the 118th
Congress.
I am from the city of Parkland. I am a graduate of Marjory
Stoneman Douglas High School. I just walked the Secretary of
Education through the freshman building that is a time capsule
to the shooting of February 14 that happened now 6 years ago.
The building is exactly as it was the day of the shooting,
minus the victims. Every backpack, every shoe that fell off,
the homework that is on the desk that day for that student,
what is on the dry-erase board, the computers that are on the
desk, and of course the evidence of the shooting, the bullet
holes, the blood, the DNA, that--the horrors within those walls
of what took place there on February 14th.
And look, I was in the state legislature that worked on the
Marjory Stoneman Douglas School Safety Act, the bipartisan bill
that dealt with gun violence, mental health, and safety.
In Florida, we raised the age to buying a gun to 21,
instituted red-flag laws which have now been used 12,000 times
in the state of Florida since we put that in place--12,000
times law enforcement has deemed someone a danger to themselves
or a danger to others and has taken their weapons and given
them a hearing, a due process hearing, to show that they can
have them back--being used by Republican sheriffs all over the
state, saving lives; 3-day waiting periods and hundreds of
millions of dollars for mental health and school safety.
I know we have disagreements on stopping the gun from
getting to the school, but I implore my colleagues to look at
school safety.
If you--and I have brought my Republican colleagues, some
of them, through the building--if you look at the failures of
that building and how the failures of how that school was built
contributed to the deaths, there is so much we can do on a
bipartisan basis on school safety: how the doors get locked,
what the windows are made of, making sure our teachers are
trained, making sure the students, God forbid something comes
to school, know where to hide, what corners to go to.
They did not know that at Douglas. They ran right into the
site of the shooter. The shooter never entered a classroom. He
killed either people in the hallway, or he shot through the
window, you know, the little window that these class doors
have. All these classrooms had steel doors. The bullets went
right through them. They were hollow.
And so, there are lots of things we can do on school
safety, which is why I started the Bipartisan School Safety
Caucus with Representative Gonzalez from Uvalde, right? Both of
us have seen what the failures look like.
Even if you do everything you can and the gun still gets to
the school, we have to figure out how we can work on school
safety, and, you know, I pleaded with my Republican colleagues,
in the next year, we are focused on all these distractions, but
there is a lot of bipartisan work we can do to mitigate and
save kids and teachers and faculty who work in these schools.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Mrs. McClain. Thank you, Mr. Moskowitz.
I now recognize myself for my closing arguments.
Thank you, again, very much for taking the time. This issue
is critically important and how we spend the taxpayers' money,
how we spend your money, our money, is critically important.
And I think we need to really focus on, if we really want
to make the investment, which we do, into our children, that we
are getting the return on our dollars, right?
Because one thing I have learned up here is everybody
always asks for money, and I think it goes back to the old
Ronald Reagan quote, is we got to make sure that we are getting
value for our dollars.
And I am interested--you know, I learned a lot today that
we do not have a lot of data on how we spent this money, and we
need to do a better job of getting that data, because maybe we
are doing it right; I do not know.
It would not appear--let me put it in a positive note--it
would appear that we could do a lot better with the declining
reading and math scores and absenteeism.
I mean, today's hearing, I think, was a necessary step
forward to raising awareness of the troubling state of our
Nation's schools.
Children are struggling academically, emotionally, and
developmentally. The poor test scores, chronic absenteeism, I
mean, it was just interesting, before I came here, I had a
group of administrators and teachers from my district, and that
was their No. 1 issue, was chronic absenteeism, right? And I am
like, ``You got to be kidding me.'' No, chron---and I think you
are right, Mr. Malkus, is we are out of shape; we have lost
that muscle memory, right, in the pandemic.
We have got to get that muscle memory back, and how do we
do that? How do we do that to make that investment in the
children, in their future, to really get that return on
investment?
I mean, we have a duty as Members of Congress, not only to
represent our constituents but also to conduct oversight of
Federal spending programs. It is clear that the Federal
Government failed. We failed to adequately monitor nearly $190
billion that Congress allocated to help schools reopen and
students recover from the pandemic.
I mean, that just blows my mind. $190 billion and we do not
have any idea where that money was, and we got 50--50-some that
we do not even know--that is not even spent yet.
But I bet we are going to ask for more. You guys want to
take me up on that bet? I bet.
There is a lot to learn from the whole-of-government's
response to the pandemic including lessons on snap decision-
making. In the height of an emergency, Congress quickly passed
relief bills to help American people and to buoy the economy,
but this emergency legislation failed to impose necessary
guardrails to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse despite our
Republican warnings.
This Committee has done extensive work to expose the
massive level of waste, fraud, and abuse of COVID-relief
programs.
The School Relief Fund, known as the Elementary and
Secondary School Relief, ESSER, Fund, was implemented without
sufficient reporting requirements--shame on us--nor parameters
for appropriate uses.
We have got to fix that. We have got to get some answers
before we spend one more dollar of taxpayer money, because I
think that will also help us know where to spend it on that is
giving us the best value for our money. Right?
As a result, we have seen state and local education
agencies spending taxpayer dollars on programs that are not
helping students recover from the pandemic learning loss.
Test scores are down across the country, and schools are
pursuing political agendas instead of teaching students the
fundamentals of reading, writing, arithmetic. I mean, we used--
when the focus was that simple and we kept it simple, we did a
lot better.
They should not be keeping parents in the dark about what
their children are learning. What is the harm in telling
parents what their kids are learning? I got to be honest; I do
not see that. I mean, they are children, right?
They should not be using taxpayer dollars to fund political
pet projects. It is clear that the status quo is not working,
in my humble opinion. Something needs to change.
Today we have discussed some ways in which the state and
local governments can productively and proactively invest in
students' achievements that will work. And we agree on it.
Crazy, right? We agree on it. It is tutoring and extended
classroom learning.
We know that expanded school of choice works. We know that
parents engaging with schools and taking their children's
school attendance seriously works.
And we know that teaching evidence-based math and reading
curriculum works, right? At the end of the day, this crazy
thing of accountability actually works.
We have also discussed what does not work. We know that
installing racial division is damaging to the children. Why are
we introducing children to problems they do not even know they
have?
I do not understand why we are doing that. That seems very
counterproductive. We know that not grading students fairly is
damaging to the children because we are distorting their
reality.
Some of the best learnings that we get--or that I have
gotten is from failures, right, not somebody distorting my
reality. We know that failing to discipline children just leads
to more disruptive behavior.
All we have to do is look at what happened last night in
the city of--in our city here in D.C., two carjackings. When
there is no consequence to your action, bad things happen. And
they do not stop happening. They do not get better. They get
worse.
Because if your child has a curfew of 11 and they come home
at 11:30 and there is no consequence to that action, guess what
behavior that incentivizes? More bad behavior.
It is not that tough. We have rules. We have regulations,
and we need to begin to discipline and enforce those rules. And
the sooner we enforce those rules, the sooner children
understand right from wrong, and maybe we can nip some of this
in the bud as they get older.
As parents, we must advocate for our children, and as
elected representatives and as Members of this Committee, we
must take these issues seriously. Our Nation's children, or the
so-called pandemic cohort, do not deserve to be left behind.
In closing, I do want to thank our panelists once again for
your important testimony today. I cannot thank you enough for
the work you do for the investment of our future, and that is
with our children.
And I thank you for the fact-based evidence.
Ms. Forte, I look forward to your evidence, I really do,
because this is an important--these are important issues.
And, without objection, all Members have 5 legislative days
within which to submit materials and additional written
questions for the witnesses which will be forwarded to the
witnesses.
If there is no further business, without objection, the
Subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:57 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]