[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 100 (Wednesday, July 9, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H6363-H6383]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2211, READY TO TEACH ACT OF 2003
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). Pursuant to clause 8 of rule
XX, the pending business is the question of agreeing to the resolution,
House Resolution 310, on which the yeas and nays are ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 252,
nays 170, not voting 12, as follows:
[Roll No. 338]
YEAS--252
Abercrombie
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachus
Baker
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Bell
Bereuter
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Clay
Coble
Cole
Collins
Cox
Crane
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
DeMint
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Doolittle
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Emerson
English
Eshoo
Everett
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Honda
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Isakson
Issa
Istook
Jefferson
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
[[Page H6364]]
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas (OK)
Manzullo
Marshall
Matheson
McCollum
McCotter
McCrery
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
Meeks (NY)
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Musgrave
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Rush
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Saxton
Schrock
Scott (GA)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Spratt
Stearns
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Toomey
Turner (OH)
Upton
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--170
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Ballance
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Case
Clyburn
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doyle
Emanuel
Engel
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Gonzalez
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hoeffel
Holt
Hooley (OR)
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
John
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kleczka
Kucinich
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Menendez
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (PA)
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
NOT VOTING--12
Cramer
Dreier
Edwards
Gephardt
Gibbons
Goss
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Janklow
Millender-McDonald
Owens
Pascrell
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood) (during the vote). Members are
advised there are 2 minutes to vote.
{time} 1211
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2211.
{time} 1212
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 2211) to reauthorize title II of the Higher Education Act of
1965, with Mr. Simpson in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having
been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) and the
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) each will control 30
minutes.
{time} 1215
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act of 2003, which was reported by the
Committee on Education and the Workforce on June 10 by a bipartisan
voice vote, complements the No Child Left Behind Act and will help
improve the quality and accountability of our Nation's teacher
preparation programs.
No Child Left Behind set a lofty, but achievable, goal of placing a
highly qualified teacher in every public school classroom by the 2005-
2006 school year. We can all agree that a highly qualified teacher
plays a pivotal role in the successful education of our Nation's
children, and those children deserve nothing less. Congress has kept
our word to increase funding to help ensure teachers can become highly
qualified. In fact, we increased funding for teacher quality grants by
35 percent in the first year of No Child Left Behind alone, and the
increases are continuing. We are providing the resources, and this bill
will build on that effort by supporting our teachers with real reforms.
There is a serious problem when the programs charged with training
the teachers of tomorrow are not meeting that goal, and that is exactly
what we are facing today. Everyone here will agree that highly
qualified teachers prepared to meet the challenges of the classroom and
fulfill the needs of our students are essential if we are going to
succeed with education reform in America. Yet the Nation's teacher-
training programs suffer from serious lack of accountability, and this
time it is the teachers who are being left behind.
The bill before us today takes important steps to ensure that
teacher-training programs are in fact giving perspective teachers the
skills and knowledge they need to meet the highly qualified standard in
No Child Left Behind. Let us be clear on this point: this bill is about
supporting our teachers. We are expecting a lot from them, and they
deserve to have access to high quality training programs that ensure
that when they step into the classroom they are truly ready to teach.
This legislation makes several improvements to title II of the Higher
Education Act to ensure that teacher-training programs are providing
perspective teachers with the skills they need to be highly qualified
and ready to teach when they enter the classroom. This bill is about
helping teachers, pure and simple, giving them the tools and training
they need to meet the needs of our Nation's students.
H.R. 2211 authorizes competitively awarded grants under the Higher
Education Act to increase the quality of our teaching force by
improving the preparation of perspective teachers and enhancing teacher
professional development activities. We want to hold teacher-
preparation programs accountable for preparing highly qualified
teachers and recruit highly qualified individuals, including minorities
and individuals from other occupations, into the teaching force.
The Ready to Teach Act ensures that program effectiveness can
accurately be measured and places a renewed emphasis on the skills
needed to meet the ``highly qualified'' standard found in No Child Left
Behind, such as the use of advanced technology in the classroom,
vigorous academic content knowledge, scientifically based research and
challenging State student academic standards.
Under this legislation, funds can also be used to recruit
individuals, and specifically minorities, into the teaching profession.
The committee adopted a bipartisan amendment offered by the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Burns), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens), and
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) to authorize grants for the
creation of Centers of Excellence at high quality, minority-serving
institutions.
In general, those Centers of Excellence will help increase teacher
recruitment and make institutional improvements to teacher-preparation
programs at minority-serving institutions. Grants under this program
will be competitively awarded to high quality teacher preparation
programs at eligible institutions, which include historically black
colleges and universities,
[[Page H6365]]
Hispanic-serving institutions, tribally controlled colleges or
universities, Alaska native-serving institutions, or native Hawaiian-
serving institutions.
Mr. Chairman, as we work to place highly qualified teachers in
classrooms across the Nation, I am particularly pleased that the Ready
to Teach Act allows for innovative programs that provide alternative
options to traditional teacher-training programs. Proposals outlined in
this bill, such as charter colleges of education, provide a much-needed
alternative route to training highly qualified and effective teachers.
H.R. 2211 authorizes States to use funds to set up charter colleges
of education that function in a manner similar to elementary and
secondary charter schools, except that they would prepare highly
qualified teachers in a higher-education setting. Charter colleges of
education would exchange flexibility in meeting State requirements for
institutional commitments to produce results-based outcomes for
teacher-education graduates, measured based on increased student
academic achievement.
This bill takes the important step of recognizing that individuals
seeking to enter the teaching profession often have varied backgrounds;
and by creating a more flexible approach that steps outside the box,
these individuals can become highly qualified teachers through training
programs as unique as their own individual experiences.
H.R. 2211 will also hold teacher-preparation programs accountable for
preparing highly qualified teachers. While current higher-education law
contains annual reporting requirements, these reporting measures have
often proven ineffective in measuring the true quality of teacher-
preparation programs. In fact, the current requirements have often been
manipulated, leaving data skewed and often irrelevant. The Ready to
Teach Act includes accountability provisions that will strengthen the
reporting measures and hold teacher-preparation programs accountable
for providing accurate and useful information.
I would like to thank a new member of our committee, the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), the author of this bill, for his work on
the Ready to Teach Act. I would also like to commend my colleague, the
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the ranking member; the
gentleman from California (Chairman McKeon) of the subcommittee; and
his ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), for their
bipartisan effort on this bill. They have put together a bipartisan
bill that makes commonsense changes to title II of the Higher Education
Act to help improve the quality of our Nation's teachers.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the underlying bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) ask
unanimous consent to control the time of the gentleman from California
(Mr. George Miller)?
Mr. KILDEE. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Michigan is
recognized.
There was no objection.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act
of 2003, with the hope that certain amendments that were made in order
will be adopted.
I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), the author
of this bill, and the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), the
chairman of the subcommittee. He and I have worked together for a
number of years now on higher-education matters. It was a very
enjoyable task in this. I would also like to thank the chairman of the
full committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner), for his
work in the committee.
Mr. Chairman, this legislation reauthorizes title II's teacher-
quality programs and makes much-needed improvements to its
accountability system. Teacher quality is a critical element to ensure
our children succeed academically. This bill makes great strides to
improve teacher-preparation programs that create our supply of highly
qualified teachers.
Chief of these improvements is a bipartisan amendment accepted at the
subcommittee markup creating the Minority Centers of Excellence
program. This new program will allow high-quality Historically Black
Colleges, Hispanic-serving institutions and Tribal colleges to improve
teacher preparation and to work with disadvantaged school districts.
This program will tap the vast knowledge and skill housed in these
institutions to improve teacher preparation, especially for minority
teachers.
In addition, the bill's provisions to expand teacher retention and
preparation of early childhood teachers are very critical improvements.
With added resources for retention, school districts will be more able
to keep highly qualified teachers in their districts. With new
resources to ensure that we have early childhood teachers, our Nation's
youngest children will receive the head start they really need to
succeed.
While this legislation represents a good first step, we are missing
an opportunity to address some of the most pressing issues facing
education. Whether it is the No Child Left Behind Act, IDEA or Pell
Grants, the Bush administration and Republican leadership have failed
to meet their education funding commitments.
President Bush and the House and Senate appropriations committees
have proposed funding, for example, title I at $12.35 billion. That is
over $6 billion short of the $18.5 billion which the President signed
into law for this year when he signed No Child Left Behind.
The Republican budget resolution promised $2.2 billion in new IDEA
funding. The House and Senate appropriations committees have proposed
less than half that amount.
In addition, the Pell Grants have been frozen by the House and Senate
appropriation committees, despite increasing college costs.
While I really want to reiterate that I will support this
legislation, the administration and the Republican Congress are missing
an opportunity to meet our education funding commitments.
Basically, and Members have heard me say this before, this is an
authorization bill; and it is a good authorization bill. We worked hard
on it. But I have always said an authorization bill is like a get-well
card, Mr. Chairman. If I have a friend who is ill, I will send my
friend a get-well card, which expresses my attitude, how I value my
friend, and that is very important. But what my friend really needs is
a Blue Cross card to pay the bills.
I think we have to work closer together to make sure there is not
such a wide disparity between the levels that are in the authorization
bills, the get-well card, and what is in the appropriations bill, the
Blue Cross card.
But having said that, I want to say that the authorizing committee
did work well together; and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the
chairman, was very, very fair to us, and we adopted Democratic
amendments in that committee. I think the authorizers have done a good
job.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, let me again congratulate my friend from Michigan. This
is a bipartisan bill that has been worked on with Members on both sides
of the aisle to try to address the serious needs that we have in our
teacher preparation programs as outlined in title II of the Higher
Education Act. But as a side note, I need to respond to my colleague
from Michigan when it comes to the issue of funding the Federal
Government's role in education.
We can look at this as a glass half empty, or we can look at it as a
glass half full. Federal education spending over the last 3 fiscal
years has gone from $28 billion for elementary and secondary programs
to $35.7 billion for these same programs, including almost $400 million
to pay for the development and implementation of the testing
requirements under No Child Left Behind.
We can look at title I. It has been increased almost 200 percent over
the last 6 years. We can look at the last 6 years of special education
funding having risen 300 percent.
So when Members come to the floor of the House and suggest that we
are not meeting our commitments, I have no choice but to stand up and
say, let us be honest. We are doing our share.
[[Page H6366]]
Could we do more? Of course, we could do more.
But as I told my colleagues one day, I was elected to come to
Congress and make decisions; I was not elected to be Santa Claus, and
today is not Christmas. As we get through the appropriations process,
we are going to continue to work at the appropriate funding levels for
these education programs. But, today, we have a bipartisan bill that
will help improve the quality of our Nation's teachers and those who
seek to be teachers, and we have to continue to work together to meet
this important goal.
Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), the author of this bill, who spent an awful
lot of time as a school board member, a State legislator, and now as a
Member of Congress, developing teacher-training programs to help meet
the needs of our Nation's teachers.
{time} 1230
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the Committee on
Education and the Workforce, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), for
yielding me this time. I would like to thank the chairman of the
subcommittee, the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), as well as
the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee). We have worked very closely, very good
together, as the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) pointed out, in a
very bipartisan fashion. And, as the chairman just mentioned, it is not
all about funding; it is certainly also about accountability. That is
what we are trying to do in the reauthorization of the Title II part of
the Higher Education Act: We want to bring additional accountability so
that we make sure that no child is left behind by assuring that a
qualified teacher is, indeed, in every classroom.
H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act of 2003, is a bill that I
introduced to help ensure that teacher training programs are producing
well-prepared teachers to meet the needs of American students. H.R.
2211 updates the teacher provisions of the Higher Education Act.
Specifically, this legislation amends Part A, Teacher Quality
Enhancement Grants for States and Partnerships, and also Part B,
Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology of Title II of the
Higher Education Act. In addition, H.R. 2211 authorizes teacher
preparation Centers of Excellence for minority-serving institutions.
The purposes of the Ready to Teach Act are to increase student
academic achievement, elevate the quality of the current and future
teaching force by improving the preparation of prospective teachers and
enhancing professional development activities; hold teacher preparation
programs accountable for preparing highly qualified teachers; and to
recruit highly qualified individuals, including minorities and
individuals from other occupations, into the teaching force.
As in current law, H.R. 2211 authorizes three types of competitive
grant programs: State grants, partnership grants, and teacher
recruitment grants.
State grant funds must be used to reform teacher preparation
requirements, coordinate with activities under Title II of No Child
Left Behind Act, and ensure that current and future teachers are highly
qualified. Programs administered through State grants will focus on
effective teacher preparation, placing a renewed emphasis on the skills
needed to meet the ``highly qualified'' standard.
The partnership grants allow effective partners to join together,
combining their strengths and resources to train highly qualified
teachers and achieve success in the classroom. The eligible
partnerships must include four partners: a high-quality teacher
preparation program at an institution of higher education; a college of
arts and sciences, presumably at that same institution; a high-need,
local educational agency; and a public or private educational
organization. It can include additional partners, but it must include
those four. These partnerships will require the faculty of the teacher
preparation programs to serve with a highly qualified teacher in the
classroom, allowing effective in-class experience to ensure that
teachers are truly prepared to teach. Among other things, partnership
activities will help to ensure that teachers are able to use advanced
technology effectively in the classroom, address the needs of students
with different learning styles, including students with disabilities,
and receive training in methods of improving student behavior in the
classroom.
As America holds teacher preparation programs accountable for
preparing teachers who will ensure that no child is left behind, the
need to recruit individuals into the teaching profession will only
expand. Teacher recruitment grants will help bring high-quality
individuals into teacher programs and ultimately put more highly
qualified teachers into the classrooms. H.R. 2211 recognizes the need
to ensure that high-need, local educational agencies are able to
effectively recruit highly qualified teachers, and will help answer
that need by increasing the number of teachers being trained.
H.R. 2211 also includes a new program which is based on provisions
submitted to the committee by the United Negro College Fund and the
Hispanic Education Coalition to authorize teacher preparation Centers
of Excellence at minority-serving institutions. In general, the purpose
of this program and this amendment brought to us by my colleague and
good friend, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Burns), are to increase
teacher recruitment and to make institutional improvements to teacher
preparation programs at minority-serving institutions.
While current higher education law contains annual reporting and
accountability requirements for institutions of higher education, these
measures, as the chairman indicated, have proven ineffective in
determining the true quality of teacher preparation programs. H.R. 2211
in this reauthorization adds accountability provisions to the Higher
Education Act that will strengthen these current law provisions and
hold teacher preparation programs accountable for providing accurate
and useful information about the quality of their programs.
Mr. Chairman, in summary, H.R. 2211 is specifically designed to align
teacher preparation programs with the high standards of accountability
and results provided for in No Child Left Behind Act. This Ready to
Teach Act will help to ensure that program effectiveness can accurately
be measured and places a strong focus on the quality of teacher
preparation and a renewed emphasis on the skills needed to meet the
``highly qualified'' standard found in the No Child Left Behind Act.
In conclusion, I want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle for their assistance in moving this bill through the process. It
is a bipartisan product, Mr. Chairman, of which we can all be proud. I
urge each and every one of my colleagues to support H.R. 2211, the
Ready to Teach Act of 2003.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Price).
(Mr. PRICE of North Carolina asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to rise in
support of H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act, and to highlight the new
provisions for recruiting and training teachers that it contains.
Our Nation faces the unprecedented challenge of recruiting and
retaining an additional 2.5 million teachers over the next 10 years.
This is necessary to keep pace with anticipated retirements and a
growing student population. It is also a critical aspect of education
reform. The No Child Left Behind Act requires that every teacher be
``highly qualified'' by the 2005-06 school year. In fact, there is
hardly an aspect of educational reform that does not depend on a well-
trained and highly motivated teaching force.
That is why I introduced the Teaching Fellows Act, H.R. 1805, modeled
on a program established in 1986 by the North Carolina General Assembly
that has brought some 4,000 young people into our State's teaching
force and that offers, I believe, a model for national emulation. I am
grateful to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger), a
cosponsor of H.R. 1805, and to the gentleman from California (Chairman
McKeon), and to the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Kildee) and to many
[[Page H6367]]
other subcommittee and full committee members for their cooperation in
writing major elements of the Teaching Fellows Act into the bill that
is before us today.
Much as we envisioned in the Teaching Fellows Act, H.R. 2211, as
amended in committee, would establish State scholarship programs for
prospective teachers and give them the preparation and support they
need to make a long-term commitment to the field. Scholarships could be
offered to high school students embarking on a 4-year program or to
students farther along in college when they might be better prepared to
make a career choice.
The bill also contains a second recruitment initiative: Through
partnerships between community colleges and 4-year schools, H.R. 2211
would offer fellowships to 2-year students, particularly those in
training as teaching assistants, to go on for their bachelor's degree
and full teaching certification. This community college component of
the program is especially promising for rural and small town areas. Too
often our beginning teachers are lured away by schools in the big
cities and the affluent suburbs, leaving rural and inner-city schools
behind. But community colleges typically contain people more deeply
rooted in these underserved areas, and enabling them to complete a 4-
year degree would be a promising strategy for identifying and training
a cadre of ``home-grown'' teachers.
The program we envision would not merely throw money at individual
students, but would seek, through rich, extracurricular programs, to
promote espirit de corps and collaborative learning, to strengthen
professional identity, and to provide a support system as students
first enter the classroom as teachers. Students would participate in
various community and school-based internships and experiences that go
well beyond normal teacher preparation. In North Carolina, these
enrichment programs have featured orientations to school systems,
communities, and educational issues, as well as experiences like
Outward Bound and international travel.
In exchange, scholarship recipients would be required to teach in a
public school for a minimum of 1 year plus a period of time equivalent
to the length of their scholarships. In this the program would resemble
the National Health Service Corps, which helps finance students'
medical and dental education in exchange for service in underserved
areas, and early National Service proposals, which envisioned young
people being given scholarships as compensation for community service.
The ideas of reciprocal obligation and community service would thus be
enlisted in the service of teaching, which is surely one of the best
ways one can imagine of giving back to the community and to the next
generation.
Finally, the legislation assumes that the route to success is not
through regimented, top-down administration, but through a
decentralized structure that engages and empowers local leaders and
participants. States would be given the option of running their
programs through nonprofit organizations separate from their department
of education, an arrangement that has fostered innovation and
flexibility in North Carolina.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2211 does not include all of the elements of the
Teaching Fellows Act, and it leaves future funding levels
indeterminate. It will require us to work with the Department of
Education to get an energetic program up and running, and to push in
this body for adequate annual appropriations. But I am enthused at the
opportunity this bill affords to initiate and expand State scholarship
programs for prospective teachers. I want to commend and thank those
colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have contributed to this
effort.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to control the time
of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
California?
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to thank
the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner) and my colleague, the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), a new member of the committee who
has shown great leadership in bringing forth this bill. I want to thank
him for his work on this important piece of legislation.
I rise in strong support of H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act of
2003, a bipartisan bill that seeks to meet the call of the No Child
Left Behind Act to place a highly qualified teacher in every classroom.
It makes improvements to Title II of the Higher Education Act to help
ensure teacher training programs are producing well-prepared teachers
to meet the needs of America's students.
There is widespread awareness that the subject matter, knowledge, and
teaching skills of teachers play a central role in the success of
elementary and secondary education reform. More than half of the 2.2
million teachers that America's schools will need to hire over the next
10 years will be first-time teachers, and they will need to be well
prepared for the challenges of today's classrooms. For these reasons,
the Nation's attention has increasingly focused on the role that
institutions of higher education and States play in ensuring that new
teachers have the content knowledge and teaching skills they need to
ensure that all students are held to higher standards.
Accordingly, building on current law, the Ready to Teach Act
authorizes three types of teacher training grants, and each play a
unique, yet crucial, role in the education of tomorrow's teachers.
State grant funds must be used to reform teacher preparation
requirements and ensure that current and future teachers are highly
qualified. Partnership grants allow effective partners to join
together, combining strengths and resources to train highly qualified
teachers and achieve success where it matters most: in the classroom.
Teacher recruitment grants help bring high-quality individuals into
teacher programs, and ultimately put more highly qualified teachers
into classrooms.
H.R. 2211 includes a new program to authorize grants for the creation
of teacher preparation programs at minority-serving institutions around
the country. These institutions provide equal opportunity and strong
academic programs for minority and disadvantaged students to help
achieve greater financial stability for the institutions that serve
these students.
In general, the Ready to Teach Act focuses on three key objectives,
accountability, flexibility, and effectiveness, to improve the quality
of teacher preparation.
While current higher education law contains some annual reporting
requirements, these reporting measures have proven ineffective in
measuring the true quality of teacher preparation programs. In fact,
the current requirements have often been manipulated, leaving data
skewed and often irrelevant. H.R. 2211 includes accountability
provisions that will strengthen reporting requirements and hold teacher
preparation programs accountable for providing accurate and useful
information.
This legislation recognizes that flexibility should exist in methods
used for training highly qualified teachers and, for that reason, would
allow funds to be used for innovative methods in teacher preparation
programs such as chartered colleges of education, which can provide an
adequate gateway for teachers to become highly qualified. Pioneering
programs such as charter colleges of education would also implement
systems to gauge a true measure of teacher effectiveness: the academic
achievement of students.
In addition to increasing accountability measures, the Ready to Teach
Act increases the effectiveness and quality in teacher training by
including provisions to focus training on the skills and knowledge
needed to prepare highly qualified teachers.
{time} 1245
The bill places a renewed emphasis on a broad range of skills
required for effective teaching, such as the use of advanced technology
in the classroom, rigorous academic content knowledge, scientifically
based research and challenging State student academic content
standards.
Teacher-preparation programs have a great deal of responsibility
contributing to the preparation of our Nation's teachers, and this bill
will make sure they are meeting their responsibilities. Once again, I
want to commend the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
[[Page H6368]]
Gingrey) for introducing the Ready to Teach Act, and I appreciate the
bipartisan efforts of the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller)
and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) on this bill.
I believe the Ready to Teach Act will help to ensure that the best
and brightest teachers are teaching our children. I urge our colleagues
to support this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by commending the
committee leadership on both sides of the aisle for their efforts on
this bipartisan bill, the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Boehner); the ranking member, the gentleman from California
(Mr. George Miller); the subcommittee leadership, the gentleman from
California (Mr. McKeon); and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee);
and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) for all his work on this
piece of legislation.
It is critical that we improve teacher training in this country to
make sure that the children in our classrooms get the best possible
results. I want to thank the committee for adopting an amendment that I
submitted along with the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) to
make it clear that these teacher-training funds could be used to train
the teachers who train our youngest children because we all understand
the importance of early, early education.
I must say, however, I am very concerned about the growing gap
between what we say we want to do as an authorizing committee and what
we are willing to pay for as a Congress. We can talk all day long about
the good things we are going to do; but at the end of the day, if we
are not going to pay for them, all we have is talk. And I think this
gap, this credibility gap, cannot be made more clear between what we
are going to do here today and what we will do tomorrow when we take up
the education appropriations bill.
Today we will pass an authorizing bill, Ready to Teach, calling for a
$300 million authorization to do the things we are talking about on
this floor. Tomorrow we will have a Republican appropriations bill that
has less than one-third of that money, $300 million authorized, $90
million appropriated. Today we are talking about how important it is to
teach teachers, but tomorrow we will take up an education
appropriations bill that underfunds No Child Left Behind by $8 billion.
It is great to have trained teachers; but we if we do not provide the
schools with the money to hire them, our kids will not get the benefit
of those teachers, and that is $8 billion short.
Today we are talking about training special education teachers so
they can provide a good education to the children in this country who
have disabilities. But tomorrow we will take up an education
appropriations bill that provides less than 50 percent of what this
committee, the Committee on Education and the Workforce, said we should
be providing.
Now, the chairman said we can look at that as a cup half full or half
empty. The fact of the matter is we promised a full cup; and we, as a
Congress, are not delivering. I think the chairman of the committee is
absolutely right, we came here to make decisions to establish
priorities. Let us do it. The reason we are falling short tomorrow in
the appropriations bill and not meeting the commitments that we are
making today in this authorizing bill is because the priority of the
majority party here was to provide huge tax cuts that
disproportionately benefit the very wealthiest Americans. Let us get
our priorities straight and truly pass not only an authorizing bill but
an appropriations bill that leaves no child behind.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the
great State of Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), a member of the committee and a
good friend of mine.
Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman and also the
gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner), the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Gingrey), and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for their work
on this bill.
I would like to remind the gentleman who just spoke that frequently
what is authorized and what is appropriated is not the same. I
certainly share many of his sentiments, but I do believe that H.R. 2211
is an important bill because I spent 5 years teaching in a teachers
college, 3 years when I was a young man in my twenties, and 2 years
more recently at an unspecified age. And I was often struck by the
disconnect between the theory of teaching presented in the teachers
college and the practical aspects of teaching in the classroom. As a
result, because of this disconnect, we find a lot of young teachers
going into the classroom unprepared and they leave early, and this is
very expensive to the whole system.
So H.R. 2211 requires teachers colleges to work together with school
districts so education theory and actual classroom teaching experience
are aligned. I think this is critical because so often what happens is
the teachers college kind of drifts off into a never-never-land of
theory and they are really not rooted in actual experience. So I think
this is a critical change. And I think this will encourage higher
retention rates.
In addition, as has been pointed out previously, H.R. 2211 ensures
that teacher preparation is thorough and that teachers have sufficient
knowledge and skills to truly meet the highly qualified standards set
forth in No Child Left Behind. Again, my experience has been that too
often teachers have not adequately been assessed in terms of their
knowledge, their skill; and mediocrity has often been the norm, and
that is tragic in a profession as important as this. So H.R. 2211
raises the bar for teacher preparation. I think it is a good bill, and
I urge its support; and I thank those who have worked so hard to bring
it to fruition.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).
(Mr. KIND asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Committee on Education and
the Workforce, I too want to commend the leadership of the committee
for putting together this bipartisan piece of legislation.
This is an important piece of the overall higher-education bill that
we have to reauthorize during the rest of this session. It recognizes
the importance of teacher quality in the classroom. It recognizes the
fact that because of attrition and the aging population, retirement, we
will have to replace 2.2 million teachers over the next decade. It also
recognizes that the quality of a teacher is the second most important
determinant of how well students perform in the classroom, right behind
the active involvement of loving and caring parents in their own
child's education. But it also recognizes the new mandates that are
being placed on schools and school districts throughout the entire
country under No Child Left Behind that mandates that every classroom
have a qualified, certified teacher by 2005 and 2006 under the No Child
Left Behind legislation. And in part, this bill is meant to address
these growing challenges as a Nation.
But like my friend from Maryland indicated, there is a growing gap
between the rhetoric for support for education in this country and what
is actually being appropriated and the resources and funds that are
going to achieve the success that we are demanding of our school
districts.
I am particularly pleased that under this legislation it is
reauthorizing the Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology
program. This is a program that has been highly successful in preparing
prospective teachers to use technology to help students reach their
highest potential. Unfortunately, in the education appropriations bill
that will start later today and tomorrow, the Republican majority has
zeroed out funding for that technology program, even though we have
this powerful new learning tool and yet there exists a gap between the
integration of that technology in classroom curriculum. We need more
resources and more training for teachers on how to use this technology
rather than zeroing it out.
I am also disappointed that under the labor-HHS and education
appropriations bill that we are $8 billion short in
[[Page H6369]]
fully funding the No Child Left Behind legislation. We are setting up
these school districts for failure unless we provide them the tools and
resources they need to meet the new Federal mandates that are passed
under this legislation. The President ran as an education President. He
got passed the No Child Left Behind, which establishes these new
Federal mandates. And I think it is outrageous that he is not funding
this now, as the promise was just a short year and a half ago that he
would.
Let me say in conclusion that I am very proud and I think every
Member in this House is very proud of the military force that we have
protecting our country. We have a lot of well-motivated, well-trained
individuals that comprise our Armed Forces; but it does not just happen
by accident. We invest a lot of money in our military to make sure they
have the proper training and the proper equipment so they can be an
effective military force around the globe as they carry out our orders
as policymakers. But we have another national security threat that I am
afraid is going neglected, and that is the investment in the future of
our Nation, in our children, and in these education programs which will
also make our country strong. We need to do a better job of backing up
the rhetoric around here with the resources. This bill is a start if
the funding follows, and I would encourage bipartisan support for it.
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger), a senior member of the Committee on
Education and the Workforce.
Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me
time. First, I would like to begin by thanking the chairman and the
ranking member for working with me and my colleague from North Carolina
(Mr. Price) to include aspects of the gentleman's Teaching Fellows Act
in today's bill.
The Ready to Teach Act authorizes competitive grants to encourage
development of teacher-training programs and to create highly qualified
teachers. I believe that one of the most important additions that we
made to this legislation is that it allows a partnership grant to be
used to coordinate with community colleges to strengthen teacher-
training programs.
It is estimated that North Carolina will need 80,000 new teachers
over the next decade. To address this problem in my area, Appalachian
State Teachers' College, it used to be, it is now Appalachian State
University, which is a branch of the university and recognized as one
of the best teaching colleges in the United States, Caldwell Community
College and the local public schools initiated a proposal to leverage
technology and integrate their resources to develop a model teacher-
training program. Area residents who typically would not have had
access to the teacher prep program would have the opportunity to become
highly qualified teachers through the use of distance technology. It is
this kind of innovative thinking that the Ready to Teach Act aims to
encourage, and I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this
bipartisan legislation.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Davis).
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman
for yielding me time.
``Unfunded mandate'' is a term and a phrase that we often hear in
education. Time and time again we attempt to solve problems by
demanding change while refusing to provide funds necessary for schools
to make that desirable change. Loan forgiveness attracts college
graduates into the field of education and encourages current teachers
to continue their education. However, this does not fully address the
problems of teacher quality and higher education affordability;
especially we need to help title I schools.
However, the labor-HHS-education appropriations bill falls $334
million short of the promised $1 billion in title I funds under the No
Child Left Behind Act.
Mr. Chairman, over one-fifth of our secondary school students have
taken at least one class from a teacher who neither majored nor minored
in that subject in college. Today our schools lack many greatly needed
and highly qualified teachers; therefore, we must improve teacher
training and education. H.R. 2211 attempts to promote teacher training
and development by making up for some of the funding shortfalls in
education. In the labor-HHS-education appropriations bill, we were
promised $3.2 billion for States to improve teacher quality; and yet,
like the promise to fund title I schools, the appropriations bill falls
$244 million short. As a result, 54,000 fewer teachers will receive
federally supported professional development.
H.R. 2211 attempts to make up for some of the unfunded mandates under
the No Child Left Behind Act. Indeed, there are some encouraging
aspects to this bill which I am in great support of. However, it still
lacks greater funding, which is needed for true improvement in
education that will maximize the potential of teachers and the
potential of students so that, indeed, no child is left behind.
Mr. Chairman, I support this legislation, but I sure hope that before
it is over we will have the money that is needed to fund the thoughts
and ideas.
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Burns), a former college professor.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman, the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Boehner), and the ranking member, the gentleman from
California (Mr. George Miller), and the author, my good friend, the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), for their leadership in bringing
this bill to the floor today.
Paine College and Savanna State University are two Historically Black
Colleges and Universities in the 12th district of Georgia. Both of
these institutions do a wonderful job of preparing young professionals
for lives in the working world. With these two institutions and the
many minority-serving institutions across this country, it is
imperative that we increase opportunities for Americans of all
educational, ethnic, and geographic backgrounds to become highly
qualified teachers.
{time} 1300
I was proud to sponsor an amendment that will allow grants to be
competitively awarded to highly qualified teacher-training programs for
eligible institutions. These institutions can include Historically
Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-serving institutions,
Tribally controlled colleges and universities, Alaska Native-serving
institutions and Native Hawaiian-serving institutions.
I would like to especially thank my good colleague, the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Owens), and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa)
for their cosponsorship of this amendment in committee and then
ultimately its successful adoption and strong bipartisan support we
have received. I would also like to thank the United Negro College Fund
and the Hispanic Education Coalition for the help they provided and the
inspiration for this amendment that strengthened this bill.
The purposes of this provision are to increase our teacher
recruitment at minority-serving institutions and to make institutional
improvements to teacher-preparation programs at minority-serving
institutions. Specifically, we are looking for funds here that will
allow these universities and colleges to be awarded grants to produce
highly qualified minority teachers. We need more strong, high-quality
teachers from all backgrounds, both current and future.
I urge my colleagues to support the Ready to Teach Act. H.R. 2211
will result in more highly qualified teachers, and this will increase
the academic achievement of America's students.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Holt).
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time, and I commend him and the chairman and the other senior members
of this subcommittee for this bipartisan legislation, which will not
only help recruit and retain highly qualified teachers but also provide
professional development. I certainly hope, as others have said, that
the majority and the appropriators will see fit to fund this program
fully, unlike the labor and education bill which, as it now stands,
underfunds the No Child Left Behind by $8 billion.
[[Page H6370]]
I am pleased that the committee has accepted two of my amendments in
this bill. The first amendment would ensure that teacher-recruitment
programs could assist people who want to make the transition into
teaching from a career outside of the field of education.
The second amendment will allow school districts to form partnerships
with universities and businesses. This will allow opportunities for
teachers to get clinical experience and training in areas related to
science, mathematics and technology, including opportunities in
laboratories and businesses. I think teachers with real-world
experience are more able to show applications of science to the
student, which is a more inspiring way to teach.
Investing in improved math and science education in this country is
directly linked to the strength of our national security. I believe if
we, as a Nation, fail to make a new national commitment to science and
math education, we are facilitating the gradual erosion of America's
physical and economic security, and do not just take my word for it.
The United States Commission on National Security in the 21st Century
headed by former Senators Gary Hart and Warren Rudman said, ``The
inadequacies of our systems of research and education pose a greater
threat to the U.S. national security over the next quarter century than
any potential conventional war that we might imagine. If we do not
invest heavily and wisely in rebuilding these two core strengths,
America will be incapable of maintaining its global position long into
the 21st century.''
Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for working with me on these
amendments, and I ask my colleagues to support this bill.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Quinn). The Chair would inform the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) that he has 10 minutes remaining.
The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) has 4 minutes remaining.
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra), the chairman of the
Subcommittee on Select Education.
Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I thank my chairman for yielding me the
time and congratulate him and the gentleman from California (Mr. George
Miller) on the success in passing an education agenda beginning more
than a year ago and passing the President's agenda for No Child Left
Behind, at least beginning that process, and now filling in the many
different pieces that are necessary to make sure that every one of our
children has the opportunity to leave school well qualified and well
prepared to go for higher education for a professional career.
The part of the bill that I think is most interesting here was what
my colleague from Georgia just talked about. This authorizing grants
for the creation of centers of excellence at highly qualified,
minority-serving institutions, such as Historically Black Colleges and
Universities and Hispanic-serving institutions.
Over the last number of years, this Congress has taken an increasing
interest in making sure that Historically Black Colleges and Hispanic-
serving institutions get the resources they need so that they can more
effectively serve those populations that have a tremendous amount of
potential and that they have done such a good job at. We are reaching
out to Historically Black Colleges and Universities and to Hispanic-
serving institutions specifically in this bill to provide the
resources, additional resources and grants, for them to build more
effective teaching programs because we recognize that if we are going
to address the vision that we have in mind of making sure that we leave
no child left behind, that we have to develop more effective training-
teacher programs specifically to reach into inner city schools; and
that is what we are looking at here.
We have talked with Historically Black Colleges and Universities to
try to partner with them to develop programs to reach into the inner
city, to use their unique resources. This fulfills the promise. This,
along with the next bill, really gets us moving in the right direction.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Green).
Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Michigan
for yielding me the time, and also the chairman of the committee.
Both the Ready to Teach Act and the Teacher Recruitment and Retention
Act try to improve teacher training and quality and retention. I
congratulate the Committee on Education and the Workforce on these two
bills, but both these bills fall short in one important area. They fail
to correct the problem of the government pension offset, or what is
called the GPO. The Committee on Education and the Workforce cannot
address this major reason people are leaving the teaching profession
because they do not have the jurisdiction.
In my home State of Texas, teachers are leaving the profession in
droves because of the unfair GPO. This provision reduces spousal
benefits by two-thirds and, in some cases, eliminates benefits
altogether.
The GPO is a problem for many public servants, but especially bad for
women. Eighty percent of the Texas school teachers and retirees are
women. Sixty percent of that group are married. Almost all of them are
eligible for Medicare through their husbands, and none of them are
eligible for their spousal Social Security benefit because of the
government pension offset.
After a lifetime of being underpaid as teachers, they depend on their
Social Security widow's benefit to make up for it in their retirement;
but the GPO, the government pension offset, takes away that widow's
benefit.
The only way some teachers can escape this unfair mentality is by
working their last day in a job covered by Social Security and their
retirement system. This last-day exemption is the only way teachers can
get a fair retirement benefit; but this House is trying to take that
away, and we debated this issue a few months back when the House voted
narrowly on H.R. 743, the so-called Social Security Protection Act.
That language would eliminate the last-day exemption and cause many
of my Texas teachers to lose their widow's benefits. Teachers in Texas
are retiring by the busload so that they can get their benefits before
the Senate acts to take them away.
This is a serious problem in Texas and other States that do not have
Social Security as part of their teacher retirement system, and it is
causing a serious retention problem. Debating these bills today is
good, but we really need to look at why teachers are leaving the
profession instead of getting into it.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Michigan for
yielding me the time.
Students in this era take laptops and hand-held computers to class,
but they are very often being taught by teachers who started teaching
when cable television was an innovation or even when color television
was an innovation.
This is a very promising bill that the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Gingrey) has written, that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Kildee), the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), and
the others have brought to the floor. I am happy to support it and
commend all those responsible for it.
My concern is that the promise of this bill may well turn out to be
another unfulfilled promise when it comes to helping teachers catch up
to the new realities of the world in which they are teaching. School
districts across this country already understand that reality. When
they look at the requirements under the No Child Left Behind Act, they
understand that by the 2005-2006 school year, every classroom must have
a highly qualified teacher in that classroom. The gap between getting
to that point and where we are now is a very expensive one; and if we
look at the education funding bill that the House will be considering
tomorrow, there is an $8 billion difference between what is needed by
school districts around our country and what is
[[Page H6371]]
provided by the majority in its bill to meet that need.
It does not make sense to raise standards and raise expectations and
then fail to provide the funding and the money and the resources to
meet those expectations. It is obvious that many of the teachers that
are presently teaching around our country today are going to need
sabbaticals, are going to need extra education, are going to need extra
training in order to meet the new standards of being a highly qualified
teacher.
I support raising those standards, but I do not support falsely
raising expectations about what we are going to do for public education
and then failing to meet those expectations. How are we in this
predicament?
The budget forecast a few years ago said that this year for every
$100 we are going to spend to run our government, we would have $125
worth of revenue coming in. Did not happen. Certainly the terrorist
attack of 9/11 had a role in this. The recession has had a major role
in this, but the two huge tax cuts enacted by the majority have also
had a role in this. So, today, instead of having $125 of revenue for
every $100 that we need to spend, we have about $80 of revenue for
every $100 that we need to spend.
What gets cut? Environmental protection, health care, education. This
is one more example of a choice the majority has made between the long-
term fiscal health of the country by improving education and the short-
term political gratification of enacting tax cuts.
This is the right bill. It makes a great promise, but the majority
will fail to fulfill that promise because it continues to worship at
the altar of irresponsible fiscal practices.
I urge support of the bill.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2211 is a good bill. As its name
suggests, the Ready to Teach Act works to ensure that our children, our
future, are taught by well-prepared and qualified teachers. It also
supports our schools so that they are able to recruit and retain the
teachers who give so much of themselves for the children of others.
We will pass this bill today; and in doing so, we all agree that the
country needs the Federal Government to spend $300 million on teacher
preparation and retention; but in fact, we will not spend that much on
teacher preparation and retention. The President has asked that we
spend only $90 million or 30 percent of what we today all agree is
necessary. Why?
Yesterday we passed the defense spending bill that spends $8.9
billion on a missile system which does not work; and today we will pass
an education bill that, if fully funded, would work, but we will not
fully fund it.
There is money for education. We could reallocate the $8.9 billion
for missile defense and put it into education. We would have money to
hire and train thousands more qualified teachers. We would have money
to buy 9 million more computers for our children and schools. We would
have money to fully fund and expand the Head Start program, IDEA, and
the No Child Left Behind Act.
Instead, we are spending too much, $8.9 billion, for a missile
program that will not work, and we are underfunding the education
account.
Mr. Chairman, as we walk in each day to vote, we walk under the
canopy of the House, and there is a pediment that is supported by the
pillars, and the pediment is called the ``Apotheosis of Democracy,''
and in the middle of it right at the apex there is a woman whose arm is
outextended, and her arm is protecting a child who is sitting
blissfully atop a pile of books. That sculpture, which is right at the
center of our experience as we come in to vote every day, is entitled
``Peace Protecting Genius.''
{time} 1315
And the child genius is protected not with nuclear arms, but with the
arms of eternal love and sitting atop a pile of books which represents
knowledge.
We have to realize that our protection in this country and our
security depends on education, and that it is peace which protects
genius, and that it is peace which will lead us on a path towards
sparing the tremendous amount of monies that are to be wasted by the
Pentagon, and freeing it up so that we can put that money back into
education to truly protect the future of this Nation and to enable the
children of this Nation to be able to have lives that are rich, that
are endowed with great education, and that lead to a world of peace.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This is a bipartisan bill, and we do our best especially in the field
of education when we work in a bipartisan way, and we did that in
committee. There was not only civility in committee, but a great deal
of enjoyment in writing this bill. This is a good start for the
authorization of the remaining titles of the Higher Education Act.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee),
the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), and Members on both
sides of the aisle for their work. I especially want to thank the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), a new member of our committee and
new Member of Congress, for his authorship of the underlying bill.
We all know that one of the real keys to ensuring every child in
America gets a chance at a good education is to ensure that every child
has a highly qualified teacher in their classroom. There has been much
effort around the country at improving the quality of teacher
preparation programs. What we try to do in the bill we have before us
today is to strengthen those programs and to bring greater
accountability for those programs that need a little more oversight
than they are getting today.
The goal here is to take young people and others outside of the
profession and put them through rigorous programs that will benefit
them and their students when they are in the classroom. There are just
too many programs today around the country that are doing not as well
as they could in terms of preparing teachers for tomorrow.
There has been a lot of discussion here about funding, because later
on today the House is expected to take up the Labor-HHS appropriation
bill, which includes the funding for education. As I said earlier, 2 to
3 years ago we were spending $28 billion a year on elementary and
secondary education programs. Today we are spending $35.7 billion per
year. Most of the money to fund primary and secondary education comes
from State governments, local governments, and property taxes. The
Federal Government's role is focused on helping needier students have a
better chance at the same kind of education than our children received.
We are doing our share. Could we be doing more? Absolutely, we could
be doing more. But we are here, as I said before, to make decisions,
and I do think that we are meeting our commitments under No Child Left
Behind. I do again suggest to all of our Members that this is a good
underlying bipartisan bill, so let us support it.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, and other distinguished
members, I rise today in order to speak about House Resolution 2211, a
bill that shall reauthorize Title II of the Higher Education Act of
1965.
For our country to progress, we as representatives of the people,
must adhere to the provisions of the Higher Education Act, especially
in regards to the activities addressed in Title II of that document.
Activities such as the disbursement of teacher quality enhancement
grants for our States and grants preparing the teachers of tomorrow
with the newest technology of today benefit society as a whole.
Besides maintaining the grant-given ability so crucial to the future
of the United States, House Resolution 2211 would also create a new
grant program for higher educational institutions that have
historically served minority populations. Schools that largely cater to
Native-American, African-American, and Hispanic-American student bodies
will receive the funding needed to compete with our Nation's premiere
universities by developing teachers that will improve the high academic
standards of the United States.
In fact, I attempted to submit an amendment that would require the
Secretary of Education to collect all grant repayments and redirect the
funds to low-income and historically low-achieving school districts. I
offered this amendment for the purpose of balancing the benefits
conferred to low-income and needy
[[Page H6372]]
schools when exceptional students who complete teacher education
programs opt to repay the amount of the scholarship awarded to assist
them in completing education programs.
Additionally, teacher preparation programs will flourish under House
Resolution 2211. Current law neglects to provide funding for the
enhancement of institutionally based teacher preparation programs; this
bill allows State and partnership grantees to use funds to strengthen
and improve teacher preparation programs and will reauthorize
institutions to strengthen technology instruction for teacher
candidates.
We believe that the future of our youth is the future of our country;
an investment in our children is an investment for America. Teachers
are responsible for the development of the United States through their
impact in our classrooms. It is greatly appreciated when teachers begin
the process of intellectual development for our children, but there is
an even greater appreciation when teachers continue working with those
children throughout the years. Teachers are quite often the role models
of the children who eventually go on to serve the United States through
avenues of public service. House Resolution 2211 requires teachers who
are part of the grant program to stay a minimum of two years, thus
having a longer and more influential role in our country's future.
How will we know and how will we be able to gauge the improvement of
our children, so that ``not child is truly left behind?'' House
Resolution 2211 addresses such a topic. Under the bill, a State will
require the grantees to report information regarding the extent to
which substantial progress is made with the allocated funds and will
also track the number of highly qualified teachers produced due to the
grant program. With a statistical system able to verify the definite
success, all Americans will see just how important this bill is for us.
House Resolution 2211, if passed, will last until fiscal year 2008. I
am certain that the United States will see an improvement in the
quality of our teachers, but more importantly, an increase in the
quality of our Nation's future, the children, during that time.
This bill is a key component in a series of bills to reauthorize the
Higher Education Act as we seek to meet the call of the No Child Left
Behind Act, an act striving to place a highly-qualified teacher in
every classroom in the United States.
Mr. Chairman and members, the United States is a great country. To
continue on a path that America has been on for over two hundred years,
the passage of House Resolution 2211 must be passed. When no child is
left behind, as a country we can say that Congress has done its part in
the development of each individual child. This is what the parents of
America are asking for, and I believe we should comply with their
demands.
I strongly urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 2211.
Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Ready to Teach
Act. This bill takes important steps toward one of the most important
goals for our Nation--filling our schools with committed, talented
teachers.
The shortage of qualified teachers in our country has reached
critical levels, and it has a direct impact on the quality of
education, especially in underserved areas. In urban districts, close
to 50 percent of newcomers leave the profession during their first five
years of teaching. This bill recognizes the importance of not only
filling our schools with teachers, but providing these teachers with
the resources and training that allow them to be successful and to make
their students successful as well.
I want to call your attention to a school in my district, The Chicago
Academy, as an example of the type of positive change that can be
brought about by quality teacher preparation programs. The Chicago
Academy is a joint program of Chicago Public Schools and a nonprofit
organization. Academy for Urban School Leadership, which is taking
groundbreaking steps to address the teacher shortage in underserved
Chicago schools. The President of the Carnegie corporation called this
institution ``a model for our Nation.''
The Chicago Academy creates a ``farm team'' of teachers for Chicago's
underserved public schools, through a teacher residency program which
involves an entire year of in classroom training, instead of the
typical twelve-week student teacher segment of graduate programs in
education. Each classroom of 24 students is shared by one experienced
mentor teacher and two resident teachers, providing an unmatched
student-teacher ratio for public schools.
In-classroom training is coupled with graduate work with faculty from
National-Louis University. Residents are provided with a stipend for
their participation in the program, and receive a Masters of Arts in
Teaching at the completion of the year. In return, they commit to five
years of service in underperforming Chicago schools.
In the Academy's first year of operation, 82 percent of students
performed at or above national norms in reading--better than any other
school in the neighborhood This school is proof of the way that a
quality school changes a community. Families are moving out of the
suburbs and into Chicago in order to send their children to the
Academy. And this effect can extend to the underserved schools that
will be supplied with these committed teachers.
The first class of 30 resident teachers graduated last month. Next
year, a second Academy will open, and the current school will expand to
include the eighth grade. As these new teachers transition into
underserved Chicago schools, the number of students served by this
program increases exponentially.
The values embodied by the Chicago Academy are those reflected in
this important legislation. I commend Mr. Gingrey, Chairman Boehner,
and Ranking Member Miller for their bipartisan work to bring this
reauthorization to the floor.
Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2211, the Ready
to Teach Act, which will strengthen teacher training programs to ensure
teachers are highly-qualified and ready to teach when they enter the
classroom.
Eighteen months ago the President signed the No Child Left Behind Act
into law and ever since, States and school districts across the country
have been answering the call. The Ready to Teach Act follows the
momentum of No Child Left Behind and meets its requirement to place a
highly qualified teacher in every classroom--a requirement of great
import, as the value of a qualified teacher on a student's ability to
learn has been proven, over and over again. H.R. 2211 achieves this by
making improvements to the Higher Education Act to help ensure teacher
training programs are producing highly qualified teachers to meet the
needs of America's students.
All States and nearly all teacher education programs in the country
are affected by general accountability provisions in this legislation.
Schools receiving Federal funds must report annually on the quality of
teacher preparation, including information on the pass rates of their
graduates on initial certification assessments. Higher educational
institutions enrolling federally-aided students in their teacher
preparation programs must report annually, detailing, among other
things, the certification pass rates of graduates.
Unfortunately, this data has proven ineffective in measuring the true
quality of teacher preparation programs. Current requirements have
often been manipulated, leaving data skewed and often irrelevant. For
example, if a student fails to pass the State certification exam, upon
completion of the institution's program, the school will award them a
degree in another field rather than in education. A school will only
award students an education degree if that student has passed the state
exam. That way, the school will always have a 100 percent pass rate.
H.R. 2211 sets forth more useful information. This includes requiring a
school to report on all students who have completed 50 percent of the
program and requiring an average score of students rather than the pass
rates.
As in current law, H.R. 2211 will continue to award State,
partnership and teacher recruitment grants. In doing so, H.R. 2211 has
evolved with the teaching profession and places updated requirements on
these grants.
State grants will be used to increase the advancement technology in
the classroom and increase the focus on rigorous academic content
knowledge and scientifically based research. States will be given
flexibility in identifying innovative methods for teacher preparation
programs, such as charter colleges of education to provide an
alternative gateway for teachers to become highly qualified.
Partnership grants allow effective partners to join together,
combining strengths and resources to train highly qualified teachers
and achieve success in the classroom. Among other things, partnership
activities will help to ensure that teachers are able to address the
needs of students with different learning styles, and receive training
in methods of improving student behavior in the classroom.
Finally, teacher recruitment grants will help bring high quality
individuals into teacher programs, and ultimately put more highly
qualified teachers into classrooms. The Ready to Teach Act places a
priority on applicants that will emphasize measures to recruit
minorities into the teaching profession, providing a teaching workforce
that is both highly qualified and diverse.
We are fortunate in the State of Delaware to have the University of
Delaware's Elementary Teacher Education program. In many ways the
University of Delaware has already begun to address the need to have a
highly qualified teacher in our classrooms. They have been innovative
and forward thinking always recognizing the importance of providing
their students with a strong academic base as well as a practical
experience.
[[Page H6373]]
In their freshman year at the University of Delaware, students
participate in field experiences in the school setting. Freshmen have
the opportunity to observe, tutor, and offer general assistance in the
classroom. As sophomores and juniors, the experiences include planning,
implementing, and assessing limited instructional units with small
groups or an entire class. As seniors, students become engaged in an
extended student teaching experience.
Technology is integrated throughout the curriculum and all students
will graduate with the skills necessary to utilize technology in their
instructional planning. The Elementary Teacher Education program's goal
is to prepare teachers who are reflective practitioners serving a
diverse community of learners as scholars, problem solvers and
partners.
I am committed to ensuring No Child Left Behind is a success for
America's children. The Committee and this Congress have been working
since passage to ensure other laws in the education arena are aligned
with No Child Left Behind. We have accomplished this with IDEA, Head
Start and hopefully today with the Ready to Teach Act. I encourage my
colleagues to support H.R. 2211.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, I believe that H.R. 221 is a step in the
right direction. It builds on the improvements made to teacher
preparation programs in the 1998 amendments to the Higher Education Act
and provides a much needed focus on preparing a diverse teacher corps
so that America's teachers reflect the students in America's
classrooms.
To improve student achievement, schools of education must graduate
teacher candidates that are prepared to teach our Nation's increasingly
diverse K-12 student population. About 42 percent of all public schools
in the United States have no minority teachers even though minority
students make up more than a third of enrollment in U.S. public
schools.
Minority teachers make up just 13.5 percent of all teachers. By the
early 21st century, the percentage of minority teachers is expected to
shrink to an all-time low or 5 percent. While 41 percent of American
students will be minorities. Furthermore, some 2.4 million teachers
will be needed in the next 11 years because of teacher attrition and
retirement as well as increased student enrollment.
Improving minority teacher recruitment will help our Nation meet the
challenge of addressing this severe nationwide teacher shortage.
Minority-serving institutions are uniquely equipped to help us
address these shortages.
The Centers of Excellence established in this legislation could
provide much needed assistance so that these institutions can increase
the number of highly qualified teachers they produce. However, this can
only happen if the resources are made available.
Unfortunately the majority and the Administration have elected to
allocate our resources elsewhere--mainly to tax breaks for the elite--
the wealthiest individuals in our nation. It is my sincere hope that we
will provide the funding for all of these programs that we say are
critical to the education of our children.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and to make a stand
for the necessary investment in education.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Quinn). All time for general debate has
expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the committee amendment in the nature of a
substitute printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill
for the purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule, and shall be
considered read.
The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is
as follows:
H.R. 2211
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Ready to Teach Act of
2003''.
SEC. 2. TEACHER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT GRANTS.
Part A of title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1021 et seq.) is amended to read as follows:
``PART A--TEACHER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT GRANTS FOR STATES AND
PARTNERSHIPS
``SEC. 201. PURPOSES; DEFINITIONS.
``(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this part are to--
``(1) improve student academic achievement;
``(2) improve the quality of the current and future
teaching force by improving the preparation of prospective
teachers and enhancing professional development activities;
``(3) hold institutions of higher education accountable for
preparing highly qualified teachers; and
``(4) recruit qualified individuals, including minorities
and individuals from other occupations, into the teaching
force.
``(b) Definitions.--In this part:
``(1) Arts and sciences.--The term `arts and sciences'
means--
``(A) when referring to an organizational unit of an
institution of higher education, any academic unit that
offers 1 or more academic majors in disciplines or content
areas corresponding to the academic subject matter areas in
which teachers provide instruction; and
``(B) when referring to a specific academic subject matter
area, the disciplines or content areas in which academic
majors are offered by the arts and science organizational
unit.
``(2) Exemplary teacher.--The term `exemplary teacher' has
the meaning given such term in section 9101 of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``(3) Highly qualified.--The term `highly qualified' has
the meaning given such term in section 9101 of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``(4) High-need local educational agency.--The term `high-
need local educational agency' means a local educational
agency--
``(A)(i)(I) that serves not fewer than 10,000 children from
families with incomes below the poverty line; or
``(II) for which not less than 25 percent of the children
served by the agency are from families with incomes below the
poverty line;
``(ii) that is among those serving the highest number or
percentage of children from families with incomes below the
poverty line in the State, but this clause applies only in a
State that has no local educational agency meeting the
requirements of clause (i); or
``(iii) with a total of less than 600 students in average
daily attendance at the schools that are served by the agency
and all of whose schools are designated with a school locale
code of 7, as determined by the Secretary; and
``(B)(i) for which there is a high percentage of teachers
not teaching in the academic subjects or grade levels that
the teachers were trained to teach; or
``(ii) for which there is a high percentage of teachers
with emergency, provisional, or temporary certification or
licensing.
``(5) Poverty line.--The term `poverty line' means the
poverty line (as defined by the Office of Management and
Budget, and revised annually in accordance with section
673(2) of the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C.
9902(2))) applicable to a family of the size involved.
``(6) Professional development.--The term `professional
development' has the meaning given such term in section 9101
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 7801).
``(7) Scientifically based reading research.--The term
`scientifically based reading research' has the meaning given
such term in section 1208 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6368).
``(8) Scientifically based research.--The term
`scientifically based research' has the meaning given such
term in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``(9) Teaching skills.--The term `teaching skills' means
skills that--
``(A) are based on scientifically based research;
``(B) enable teachers to effectively convey and explain
subject matter content;
``(C) lead to increased student academic achievement; and
``(D) use strategies that--
``(i) are specific to subject matter;
``(ii) include ongoing assessment of student learning;
``(iii) focus on identification and tailoring of academic
instruction to students's specific learning needs; and
``(iv) focus on classroom management.
``SEC. 202. STATE GRANTS.
``(a) In General.--From amounts made available under
section 210(1) for a fiscal year, the Secretary is authorized
to award grants under this section, on a competitive basis,
to eligible States to enable the eligible States to carry out
the activities described in subsection (d).
``(b) Eligible State.--
``(1) Definition.--In this part, the term `eligible State'
means--
``(A) the Governor of a State; or
``(B) in the case of a State for which the constitution or
law of such State designates another individual, entity, or
agency in the State to be responsible for teacher
certification and preparation activity, such individual,
entity, or agency.
``(2) Consultation.--The Governor or the individual,
entity, or agency designated under paragraph (1) shall
consult with the Governor, State board of education, State
educational agency, or State agency for higher education, as
appropriate, with respect to the activities assisted under
this section.
``(3) Construction.--Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed to negate or supersede the legal authority under
State law of any State agency, State entity, or State public
official over programs that are under the jurisdiction of the
agency, entity, or official.
``(c) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this section, an eligible State shall, at the time of the
initial grant application, submit an application to the
Secretary that--
``(1) meets the requirement of this section;
``(2) demonstrates that the State is in full compliance
with sections 207 and 208;
``(3) includes a description of how the eligible State
intends to use funds provided under this section;
``(4) includes measurable objectives for the use of the
funds provided under the grant;
``(5) demonstrates the State has submitted and is actively
implementing a plan that meets the requirements of sections
1111(h)(1)(C)(viii) and 1119 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(h)(1)(C)(viii) and
6319); and
``(6) contains such other information and assurances as the
Secretary may require.
[[Page H6374]]
``(d) Uses of Funds.--An eligible State that receives a
grant under this section shall use the grant funds to reform
teacher preparation requirements, to coordinate with State
activities under section 2113(c) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6613(c)), and to
ensure that current and future teachers are highly qualified,
by carrying out one or more of the following activities:
``(1) Reforms.--Ensuring that all teacher preparation
programs in the State are preparing teachers who are highly
qualified, and are able to use advanced technology
effectively in the classroom, including use for instructional
techniques to improve student academic achievement, by
assisting such programs--
``(A) to retrain faculty; and
``(B) to design (or redesign) teacher preparation programs
so they--
``(i) are based on rigorous academic content,
scientifically based research (including scientifically based
reading research), and challenging State student academic
content standards; and
``(ii) promote strong teaching skills.
``(2) Certification or licensure requirements.--Reforming
teacher certification (including recertification) or
licensing requirements to ensure that--
``(A) teachers have the subject matter knowledge and
teaching skills in the academic subjects that the teachers
teach necessary to help students meet challenging State
student academic achievement standards; and
``(B) such requirements are aligned with challenging State
academic content standards.
``(3) Alternatives to traditional teacher preparation and
state certification.--Providing prospective teachers with
alternative routes to State certification and traditional
preparation to become highly qualified teachers through--
``(A) innovative approaches that reduce unnecessary
barriers to State certification while producing highly
qualified teachers;
``(B) programs that provide support to teachers during
their initial years in the profession; and
``(C) alternative routes to State certification of teachers
for qualified individuals, including mid-career professionals
from other occupations, former military personnel, and recent
college graduates with records of academic distinction.
``(4) Innovative programs.--Planning and implementing
innovative and experimental programs to enhance the ability
of institutions of higher education to prepare highly
qualified teachers, such as charter colleges of education or
university and local educational agency partnership schools,
that--
``(A) permit flexibility in meeting State requirements as
long as graduates, during their initial years in the
profession, increase student academic achievement;
``(B) provide long-term data gathered from teachers'
performance over multiple years in the classroom on the
ability to increase student academic achievement;
``(C) ensure high-quality preparation of teachers from
underrepresented groups; and
``(D) create performance measures that can be used to
document the effectiveness of innovative methods for
preparing highly qualified teachers.
``(5) Merit pay.--Developing, or assisting local
educational agencies in developing--
``(A) merit-based performance systems that reward teachers
who increase student academic achievement; and
``(B) strategies that provide differential and bonus pay in
high-need local educational agencies to retain--
``(i) principals;
``(ii) highly qualified teachers who teach in high-need
academic subjects, such as reading, mathematics, and science;
``(iii) highly qualified teachers who teach in schools
identified for school improvement under section 1116(b) of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6316(b));
``(iv) special education teachers;
``(v) teachers specializing in teaching limited English
proficient children; and
``(vi) highly qualified teachers in urban and rural schools
or districts.
``(6) Teacher advancement.--Developing, or assisting local
educational agencies in developing, teacher advancement and
retention initiatives that promote professional growth and
emphasize multiple career paths (such as paths to becoming a
highly qualified mentor teacher or exemplary teacher) and pay
differentiation.
``(7) Teacher removal.--Developing and implementing
effective mechanisms to ensure that local educational
agencies and schools are able to remove expeditiously
incompetent or unqualified teachers consistent with
procedures to ensure due process for the teachers.
``(8) Technical assistance.--Providing technical assistance
to low-performing teacher preparation programs within
institutions of higher education identified under section
208(a).
``(9) Teacher effectiveness.--Developing--
``(A) systems to measure the effectiveness of teacher
preparation programs and professional development programs;
and
``(B) strategies to document gains in student academic
achievement or increases in teacher mastery of the academic
subjects the teachers teach as a result of such programs.
``(10) Teacher recruitment and retention.--Undertaking
activities that--
``(A) develop and implement effective mechanisms to ensure
that local educational agencies and schools are able
effectively to recruit and retain highly qualified teachers;
or
``(B) are described in section 204(d).
``(11) Preschool teachers.--Developing strategies--
``(A) to improve the qualifications of preschool teachers,
which may include State certification for such teachers; and
``(B) to improve and expand preschool teacher preparation
programs.
``(e) Evaluation.--
``(1) Evaluation system.--An eligible State that receives a
grant under this section shall develop and utilize a system
to evaluate annually the effectiveness of teacher preparation
programs and professional development activities within the
State in producing gains in--
``(A) the teacher's annual contribution to improving
student academic achievement, as measured by State academic
assessments required under section 1111(b)(3) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311(b)(3)); and
``(B) teacher mastery of the academic subjects they teach,
as measured by pre- and post-participation tests of teacher
knowledge, as appropriate.
``(2) Use of evaluation system.--Such evaluation system
shall be used by the State to evaluate--
``(A) activities carried out using funds provided under
this section; and
``(B) the quality of its teacher education programs.
``(3) Public reporting.--The State shall make the
information described in paragraph (1) widely available
through public means, such as posting on the Internet,
distribution to the media, and distribution through public
agencies.
``SEC. 203. PARTNERSHIP GRANTS.
``(a) Grants.--From amounts made available under section
210(2) for a fiscal year, the Secretary is authorized to
award grants under this section, on a competitive basis, to
eligible partnerships to enable the eligible partnerships to
carry out the activities described in subsections (d) and
(e).
``(b) Definitions.--
``(1) Eligible partnerships.--In this part, the term
`eligible partnership' means an entity that--
``(A) shall include--
``(i) a partner institution;
``(ii) a school of arts and sciences;
``(iii) a high-need local educational agency; and
``(iv) a public or private educational organization; and
``(B) may include a Governor, State educational agency, the
State board of education, the State agency for higher
education, an institution of higher education not described
in subparagraph (A), a public charter school, a public or
private elementary school or secondary school, a public or
private educational organization, a business, a science-,
mathematics-, or technology-oriented entity, a faith-based or
community organization, a prekindergarten program, a teacher
organization, an education service agency, a consortia of
local educational agencies, or a nonprofit telecommunications
entity.
``(2) Partner institution.--In this section, the term
`partner institution' means an institution of higher
education, the teacher training program of which demonstrates
that--
``(A) graduates from the teacher training program exhibit
strong performance on State-determined qualifying assessments
for new teachers through--
``(i) demonstrating that the graduates of the program who
intend to enter the field of teaching have passed all of the
applicable State qualification assessments for new teachers,
which shall include an assessment of each prospective
teacher's subject matter knowledge in the content area or
areas in which the teacher intends to teach; or
``(ii) being ranked among the highest-performing teacher
preparation programs in the State as determined by the
State--
``(I) using criteria consistent with the requirements for
the State report card under section 207(a); and
``(II) using the State report card on teacher preparation
required under section 207(a); or
``(B) the teacher training program requires all the
students of the program to participate in intensive clinical
experience, to meet high academic standards, and--
``(i) in the case of secondary school candidates, to
successfully complete an academic major in the subject area
in which the candidate intends to teach or to demonstrate
competence through a high level of performance in relevant
content areas; and
``(ii) in the case of elementary school candidates, to
successfully complete an academic major in the arts and
sciences or to demonstrate competence through a high level of
performance in core academic subject areas.
``(c) Application.--Each eligible partnership desiring a
grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and accompanied by
such information as the Secretary may require. Each such
application shall--
``(1) contain a needs assessment of all the partners with
respect to teaching and learning and a description of how the
partnership will coordinate with other teacher training or
professional development programs, and how the activities of
the partnership will be consistent with State, local, and
other education reform activities that promote student
academic achievement;
``(2) contain a resource assessment that describes the
resources available to the partnership, the intended use of
the grant funds, including a description of how the grant
funds will be fairly distributed in accordance with
subsection (f), and the commitment of the resources of the
partnership to the activities assisted under this part,
including financial support, faculty participation, time
commitments, and continuation of the activities when the
grant ends; and
``(3) contain a description of--
``(A) how the partnership will meet the purposes of this
part;
``(B) how the partnership will carry out the activities
required under subsection (d) and any permissible activities
under subsection (e);
[[Page H6375]]
``(C) the partnership's evaluation plan pursuant to section
206(b);
``(D) how faculty of the teacher preparation program at the
partner institution will serve, over the term of the grant,
with highly qualified teachers in the classrooms of the high-
need local educational agency included in the partnership;
and
``(E) how the partnership will ensure that teachers in
private elementary and secondary schools located in the
geographic areas served by an eligible partnership under this
section will participate equitably in accordance with section
9501 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 7881).
``(d) Required Uses of Funds.--An eligible partnership that
receives a grant under this section shall use the grant funds
to reform teacher preparation requirements, to coordinate
with State activities under section 2113(c) of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6613(c)), and
to ensure that current and future teachers are highly
qualified, by carrying out one or more of the following
activities:
``(1) Reforms.--Implementing reforms within teacher
preparation programs to ensure that such programs are
preparing teachers who are highly qualified, and are able to
use advanced technology effectively in the classroom,
including use for instructional techniques to improve student
academic achievement, by--
``(A) retraining faculty; and
``(B) designing (or redesigning) teacher preparation
programs so they--
``(i) are based on rigorous academic content,
scientifically based research (including scientifically based
reading research), and challenging State student academic
content standards; and
``(ii) promote strong teaching skills.
``(2) Clinical experience and interaction.--Providing
sustained and high-quality preservice and in-service clinical
experience, including the mentoring of prospective teachers
by exemplary teachers, substantially increasing interaction
between faculty at institutions of higher education and new
and experienced teachers, principals, and other
administrators at elementary schools or secondary schools,
and providing support for teachers, including preparation
time and release time, for such interaction.
``(3) Professional development.--Creating opportunities for
enhanced and ongoing professional development that improves
the academic content knowledge of teachers in the subject
areas in which the teachers are certified to teach or in
which the teachers are working toward certification to teach,
and that promotes strong teaching skills.
``(4) Teacher preparation.--Developing, or assisting local
educational agencies in developing, professional development
activities that--
``(A) provide training in how to teach and address the
needs of students with different learning styles,
particularly students with disabilities, limited English
proficient students, and students with special learning
needs; and
``(B) provide training in methods of--
``(i) improving student behavior in the classroom; and
``(ii) identifying early and appropriate interventions to
help students described in subparagraph (A) learn.
``(e) Allowable Uses of Funds.--An eligible partnership
that receives a grant under this section may use such funds
to carry out the following activities:
``(1) Alternatives to traditional teacher preparation and
state certification.--Providing prospective teachers with
alternative routes to State certification and traditional
preparation to become highly qualified teachers through--
``(A) innovative approaches that reduce unnecessary
barriers to teacher preparation while producing highly
qualified teachers;
``(B) programs that provide support during a teacher's
initial years in the profession; and
``(C) alternative routes to State certification of teachers
for qualified individuals, including mid-career professionals
from other occupations, former military personnel, and recent
college graduates with records of academic distinction.
``(2) Dissemination and coordination.--Broadly
disseminating information on effective practices used by the
partnership, and coordinating with the activities of the
Governor, State board of education, State higher education
agency, and State educational agency, as appropriate.
``(3) Managerial and leadership skills.--Developing and
implementing professional development programs for principals
and superintendents that enable them to be effective school
leaders and prepare all students to meet challenging State
academic content and student academic achievement standards.
``(4) Teacher recruitment.--Activities--
``(A) to encourage students to become highly qualified
teachers, such as extracurricular enrichment activities; and
``(B) activities described in section 204(d).
``(5) Clinical experience in science, mathematics, and
technology.--Creating opportunities for clinical experience
and training, by participation in the business, research, and
work environments with professionals, in areas relating to
science, mathematics, and technology for teachers and
prospective teachers, including opportunities for use of
laboratory equipment, in order for the teacher to return to
the classroom for at least 2 years and provide instruction
that will raise student academic achievement.
``(6) Coordination with community colleges.--Coordinating
with community colleges to implement teacher preparation
programs, including through distance learning, for the
purposes of allowing prospective teachers--
``(A) to attain a bachelor's degree and State certification
or licensure; and
``(B) to become highly qualified teachers.
``(f) Special Rule.--At least 50 percent of the funds made
available to an eligible partnership under this section shall
be used directly to benefit the high-need local educational
agency included in the partnership. Any entity described in
subsection (b)(1)(A) may be the fiscal agent under this
section.
``(g) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to prohibit an eligible partnership from using
grant funds to coordinate with the activities of more than
one Governor, State board of education, State educational
agency, local educational agency, or State agency for higher
education.
``SEC. 204. TEACHER RECRUITMENT GRANTS.
``(a) Program Authorized.--From amounts made available
under section 210(3) for a fiscal year, the Secretary is
authorized to award grants, on a competitive basis, to
eligible applicants to enable the eligible applicants to
carry out activities described in subsection (d).
``(b) Eligible Applicant Defined.--In this part, the term
`eligible applicant' means--
``(1) an eligible State described in section 202(b); or
``(2) an eligible partnership described in section 203(b).
``(c) Application.--Any eligible applicant desiring to
receive a grant under this section shall submit an
application to the Secretary at such time, in such form, and
containing such information as the Secretary may require,
including--
``(1) a description of the assessment that the eligible
applicant, and the other entities with whom the eligible
applicant will carry out the grant activities, have
undertaken to determine the most critical needs of the
participating high-need local educational agencies;
``(2) a description of the activities the eligible
applicant will carry out with the grant, including the extent
to which the applicant will use funds to recruit minority
students to become highly qualified teachers; and
``(3) a description of the eligible applicant's plan for
continuing the activities carried out with the grant, once
Federal funding ceases.
``(d) Uses of Funds.--Each eligible applicant receiving a
grant under this section shall use the grant funds--
``(1)(A) to award scholarships to help students, such as
individuals who have been accepted for their first year, or
who are enrolled in their first or second year, of a program
of undergraduate education at an institution of higher
education, pay the costs of tuition, room, board, and other
expenses of completing a teacher preparation program;
``(B) to provide support services, if needed to enable
scholarship recipients--
``(i) to complete postsecondary education programs; or
``(ii) to transition from a career outside of the field of
education into a teaching career; and
``(C) for followup services provided to former scholarship
recipients during the recipients first 3 years of teaching;
or
``(2) to develop and implement effective mechanisms to
ensure that high-need local educational agencies and schools
are able effectively to recruit highly qualified teachers.
``(e) Additional Discretionary Uses of Funds.--In addition
to the uses described in subsection (d), each eligible
applicant receiving a grant under this section may use the
grant funds to develop and implement effective mechanisms to
recruit into the teaching profession employees from--
``(1) high-demand industries, including technology
industries; and
``(2) the fields of science, mathematics, and engineering.
``(f) Service Requirements.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish such
requirements as the Secretary determines necessary to ensure
that recipients of scholarships under this section who
complete teacher education programs--
``(A) subsequently teach in a high-need local educational
agency for a period of time equivalent to--
``(i) one year; increased by
``(ii) the period for which the recipient received
scholarship assistance; or
``(B) repay the amount of the scholarship.
``(2) Use of repayments.--The Secretary shall use any such
repayments to carry out additional activities under this
section.
``(g) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority under
this section to eligible applicants who provide an assurance
that they will recruit a high percentage of minority students
to become highly qualified teachers.
``SEC. 205. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.
``(a) Duration; One-Time Awards; Payments.--
``(1) Duration.--
``(A) Eligible states and eligible applicants.--Grants
awarded to eligible States and eligible applicants under this
part shall be awarded for a period not to exceed 3 years.
``(B) Eligible partnerships.--Grants awarded to eligible
partnerships under this part shall be awarded for a period of
5 years.
``(2) One-time award.--An eligible partnership may receive
a grant under each of sections 203 and 204, as amended by the
Ready to Teach Act of 2003, only once.
``(3) Payments.--The Secretary shall make annual payments
of grant funds awarded under this part.
``(b) Peer Review.--
``(1) Panel.--The Secretary shall provide the applications
submitted under this part to a peer review panel for
evaluation. With respect to each application, the peer review
panel shall initially recommend the application for funding
or for disapproval.
``(2) Priority.--In recommending applications to the
Secretary for funding under this part, the panel shall--
``(A) with respect to grants under section 202, give
priority to eligible States serving States that--
[[Page H6376]]
``(i) have initiatives to reform State teacher
certification requirements that are based on rigorous
academic content, scientifically based research, including
scientifically based reading research, and challenging State
student academic content standards;
``(ii) include innovative reforms to hold institutions of
higher education with teacher preparation programs
accountable for preparing teachers who are highly qualified
and have strong teaching skills; or
``(iii) involve the development of innovative efforts aimed
at reducing the shortage of highly qualified teachers in high
poverty urban and rural areas; and
``(B) with respect to grants under section 203--
``(i) give priority to applications from broad-based
eligible partnerships that involve businesses and community
organizations; and
``(ii) take into consideration--
``(I) providing an equitable geographic distribution of the
grants throughout the United States; and
``(II) the potential of the proposed activities for
creating improvement and positive change.
``(3) Secretarial selection.--The Secretary shall
determine, based on the peer review process, which
application shall receive funding and the amounts of the
grants. In determining grant amounts, the Secretary shall
take into account the total amount of funds available for all
grants under this part and the types of activities proposed
to be carried out.
``(c) Matching Requirements.--
``(1) State grants.--Each eligible State receiving a grant
under section 202 or 204 shall provide, from non-Federal
sources, an amount equal to 50 percent of the amount of the
grant (in cash or in kind) to carry out the activities
supported by the grant.
``(2) Partnership grants.--Each eligible partnership
receiving a grant under section 203 or 204 shall provide,
from non-Federal sources (in cash or in kind), an amount
equal to 25 percent of the grant for the first year of the
grant, 35 percent of the grant for the second year of the
grant, and 50 percent of the grant for each succeeding year
of the grant.
``(d) Limitation on Administrative Expenses.--An eligible
State or eligible partnership that receives a grant under
this part may not use more than 2 percent of the grant funds
for purposes of administering the grant.
``SEC. 206. ACCOUNTABILITY AND EVALUATION.
``(a) State Grant Accountability Report.--An eligible State
that receives a grant under section 202 shall submit an
annual accountability report to the Secretary, the Committee
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, and
the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of
Representatives. Such report shall include a description of
the degree to which the eligible State, in using funds
provided under such section, has made substantial progress in
meeting the following goals:
``(1) Percentage of highly qualified teachers.--Increasing
the percentage of highly qualified teachers in the State as
required by section 1119 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6319).
``(2) Student academic achievement.--Increasing student
academic achievement for all students as defined by the
eligible State.
``(3) Raising standards.--Raising the State academic
standards required to enter the teaching profession as a
highly qualified teacher.
``(4) Initial certification or licensure.--Increasing
success in the pass rate for initial State teacher
certification or licensure, or increasing the numbers of
qualified individuals being certified or licensed as teachers
through alternative programs.
``(5) Decreasing teacher shortages.--Decreasing shortages
of highly qualified teachers in poor urban and rural areas.
``(6) Increasing opportunities for professional
development.--Increasing opportunities for enhanced and
ongoing professional development that--
``(A) improves the academic content knowledge of teachers
in the subject areas in which the teachers are certified or
licensed to teach or in which the teachers are working toward
certification or licensure to teach; and
``(B) promotes strong teaching skills.
``(7) Technology integration.--Increasing the number of
teachers prepared effectively to integrate technology into
curricula and instruction and who use technology to collect,
manage, and analyze data to improve teaching, learning, and
decisionmaking for the purpose of increasing student academic
achievement.
``(b) Eligible Partnership Evaluation.--Each eligible
partnership receiving a grant under section 203 shall
establish, and include in the application submitted under
section 203(c), an evaluation plan that includes strong
performance objectives. The plan shall include objectives and
measures for--
``(1) increased student achievement for all students as
measured by the partnership;
``(2) increased teacher retention in the first 3 years of a
teacher's career;
``(3) increased success in the pass rate for initial State
certification or licensure of teachers;
``(4) increased percentage of highly qualified teachers;
and
``(5) increasing the number of teachers trained effectively
to integrate technology into curricula and instruction and
who use technology to collect, manage, and analyze data to
improve teaching, learning, and decisionmaking for the
purpose of improving student academic achievement.
``(c) Revocation of Grant.--
``(1) Report.--Each eligible State or eligible partnership
receiving a grant under section 202 or 203 shall report
annually on the progress of the eligible State or eligible
partnership toward meeting the purposes of this part and the
goals, objectives, and measures described in subsections (a)
and (b).
``(2) Revocation.--
``(A) Eligible states and eligible applicants.--If the
Secretary determines that an eligible State or eligible
applicant is not making substantial progress in meeting the
purposes, goals, objectives, and measures, as appropriate, by
the end of the second year of a grant under this part, then
the grant payment shall not be made for the third year of the
grant.
``(B) Eligible partnerships.--If the Secretary determines
that an eligible partnership is not making substantial
progress in meeting the purposes, goals, objectives, and
measures, as appropriate, by the end of the third year of a
grant under this part, then the grant payments shall not be
made for any succeeding year of the grant.
``(d) Evaluation and Dissemination.--The Secretary shall
evaluate the activities funded under this part and report
annually the Secretary's findings regarding the activities to
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of
the Senate and the Committee on Education and the Workforce
of the House of Representatives. The Secretary shall broadly
disseminate successful practices developed by eligible States
and eligible partnerships under this part, and shall broadly
disseminate information regarding such practices that were
found to be ineffective.
``SEC. 207. ACCOUNTABILITY FOR PROGRAMS THAT PREPARE
TEACHERS.
``(a) State Report Card on the Quality of Teacher
Preparation.--Each State that receives funds under this Act
shall provide to the Secretary annually, in a uniform and
comprehensible manner that conforms with the definitions and
methods established by the Secretary, a State report card on
the quality of teacher preparation in the State, both for
traditional certification or licensure programs and for
alternative certification or licensure programs, which shall
include at least the following:
``(1) A description of the teacher certification and
licensure assessments, and any other certification and
licensure requirements, used by the State.
``(2) The standards and criteria that prospective teachers
must meet in order to attain initial teacher certification or
licensure and to be certified or licensed to teach particular
subjects or in particular grades within the State.
``(3) A description of the extent to which the assessments
and requirements described in paragraph (1) are aligned with
the State's standards and assessments for students.
``(4) The percentage of students who have completed at
least 50 percent of the requirements for a teacher
preparation program at an institution of higher education or
alternative certification program and who have taken and
passed each of the assessments used by the State for teacher
certification and licensure, and the passing score on each
assessment that determines whether a candidate has passed
that assessment.
``(5) The percentage of students who have completed at
least 50 percent of the requirements for a teacher
preparation program at an institution of higher education or
alternative certification program and who have taken and
passed each of the assessments used by the State for teacher
certification and licensure, disaggregated and ranked, by the
teacher preparation program in that State from which the
teacher candidate received the candidate's most recent
degree, which shall be made available widely and publicly.
``(6) A description of each State's alternative routes to
teacher certification, if any, and the number and percentage
of teachers certified through each alternative certification
route who pass State teacher certification or licensure
assessments.
``(7) For each State, a description of proposed criteria
for assessing the performance of teacher preparation programs
in the State, including indicators of teacher candidate
skills and academic content knowledge and evidence of gains
in student academic achievement.
``(8) For each teacher preparation program in the State,
the number of students in the program, the average number of
hours of supervised practice teaching required for those in
the program, and the number of full-time equivalent faculty
and students in supervised practice teaching.
``(b) Report of the Secretary on the Quality of Teacher
Preparation.--
``(1) Report card.--The Secretary shall provide to
Congress, and publish and make widely available, a report
card on teacher qualifications and preparation in the United
States, including all the information reported in paragraphs
(1) through (8) of subsection (a). Such report shall identify
States for which eligible States and eligible partnerships
received a grant under this part. Such report shall be so
provided, published and made available annually.
``(2) Report to congress.--The Secretary shall report to
Congress--
``(A) a comparison of States' efforts to improve teaching
quality; and
``(B) regarding the national mean and median scores on any
standardized test that is used in more than 1 State for
teacher certification or licensure.
``(3) Special rule.--In the case of programs with fewer
than 10 students who have completed at least 50 percent of
the requirements for a teacher preparation program taking any
single initial teacher certification or licensure
assessment during an academic year, the Secretary shall
collect and publish information with respect to an average
pass rate on State certification or licensure assessments
taken over a 3-year period.
[[Page H6377]]
``(c) Coordination.--The Secretary, to the extent
practicable, shall coordinate the information collected and
published under this part among States for individuals who
took State teacher certification or licensure assessments in
a State other than the State in which the individual received
the individual's most recent degree.
``(d) Institution and Program Report Cards on Quality of
Teacher Preparation.--
``(1) Report card.--Each institution of higher education or
alternative certification program that conducts a teacher
preparation program that enrolls students receiving Federal
assistance under this Act shall report annually to the State
and the general public, in a uniform and comprehensible
manner that conforms with the definitions and methods
established by the Secretary, both for traditional
certification or licensure programs and for alternative
certification or licensure programs, the following
information:
``(A) Pass rate.--(i) For the most recent year for which
the information is available, the pass rate of each student
who has completed at least 50 percent of the requirements for
the teacher preparation program on the teacher certification
or licensure assessments of the State in which the
institution is located, but only for those students who took
those assessments within 3 years of receiving a degree from
the institution or completing the program.
``(ii) A comparison of the institution or program's pass
rate for students who have completed at least 50 percent of
the requirements for the teacher preparation program with the
average pass rate for institutions and programs in the State.
``(iii) A comparison of the institution or program's
average raw score for students who have completed at least 50
percent of the requirements for the teacher preparation
program with the average raw scores for institutions and
programs in the State.
``(iv) In the case of programs with fewer than 10 students
who have completed at least 50 percent of the requirements
for a teacher preparation program taking any single initial
teacher certification or licensure assessment during an
academic year, the institution shall collect and publish
information with respect to an average pass rate on State
certification or licensure assessments taken over a 3-year
period.
``(B) Program information.--The number of students in the
program, the average number of hours of supervised practice
teaching required for those in the program, and the number of
full-time equivalent faculty and students in supervised
practice teaching.
``(C) Statement.--In States that require approval or
accreditation of teacher education programs, a statement of
whether the institution's program is so approved or
accredited, and by whom.
``(D) Designation as low-performing.--Whether the program
has been designated as low-performing by the State under
section 208(a).
``(2) Requirement.--The information described in paragraph
(1) shall be reported through publications such as school
catalogs and promotional materials sent to potential
applicants, secondary school guidance counselors, and
prospective employers of the institution's program graduates,
including materials sent by electronic means.
``(3) Fines.--In addition to the actions authorized in
section 487(c), the Secretary may impose a fine not to exceed
$25,000 on an institution of higher education for failure to
provide the information described in this subsection in a
timely or accurate manner.
``(e) Data Quality.--Either--
``(1) the Governor of the State; or
``(2) in the case of a State for which the constitution or
law of such State designates another individual, entity, or
agency in the State to be responsible for teacher
certification and preparation activity, such individual,
entity, or agency;
shall attest annually, in writing, as to the reliability,
validity, integrity, and accuracy of the data submitted
pursuant to this section.
``SEC. 208. STATE FUNCTIONS.
``(a) State Assessment.--In order to receive funds under
this Act, a State shall have in place a procedure to identify
and assist, through the provision of technical assistance,
low-performing programs of teacher preparation within
institutions of higher education. Such State shall provide
the Secretary an annual list of such low-performing
institutions that includes an identification of those
institutions at risk of being placed on such list. Such
levels of performance shall be determined solely by the State
and may include criteria based upon information collected
pursuant to this part. Such assessment shall be described in
the report under section 207(a).
``(b) Termination of Eligibility.--Any institution of
higher education that offers a program of teacher preparation
in which the State has withdrawn the State's approval or
terminated the State's financial support due to the low
performance of the institution's teacher preparation program
based upon the State assessment described in subsection (a)--
``(1) shall be ineligible for any funding for professional
development activities awarded by the Department of
Education; and
``(2) shall not be permitted to accept or enroll any
student who receives aid under title IV of this Act in the
institution's teacher preparation program.
``SEC. 209. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
``(a) Methods.--In complying with sections 207 and 208, the
Secretary shall ensure that States and institutions of higher
education use fair and equitable methods in reporting and
that the reporting methods do not allow identification of
individuals.
``(b) Special Rule.--For each State in which there are no
State certification or licensure assessments, or for States
that do not set minimum performance levels on those
assessments--
``(1) the Secretary shall, to the extent practicable,
collect data comparable to the data required under this part
from States, local educational agencies, institutions of
higher education, or other entities that administer such
assessments to teachers or prospective teachers; and
``(2) notwithstanding any other provision of this part, the
Secretary shall use such data to carry out requirements of
this part related to assessments or pass rates.
``(c) Limitations.--
``(1) Federal control prohibited.--Nothing in this part
shall be construed to permit, allow, encourage, or authorize
any Federal control over any aspect of any private,
religious, or home school, whether or not a home school is
treated as a private school or home school under State law.
This section shall not be construed to prohibit private,
religious, or home schools from participation in programs or
services under this part.
``(2) No change in state control encouraged or required.--
Nothing in this part shall be construed to encourage or
require any change in a State's treatment of any private,
religious, or home school, whether or not a home school is
treated as a private school or home school under State law.
``(3) National system of teacher certification
prohibited.--Nothing in this part shall be construed to
permit, allow, encourage, or authorize the Secretary to
establish or support any national system of teacher
certification.
``SEC. 210. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
part $300,000,000 for fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may
be necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years, of
which--
``(1) 45 percent shall be available for each fiscal year to
award grants under section 202;
``(2) 45 percent shall be available for each fiscal year to
award grants under section 203; and
``(3) 10 percent shall be available for each fiscal year to
award grants under section 204.''.
SEC. 3. PREPARING TOMORROW'S TEACHERS TO USE TECHNOLOGY.
(a) Eligibility.--Section 222(a)(3)(D) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1042(a)(3)(D)) is amended by
inserting ``nonprofit telecommunications entity,'' after
``community-based organization,''.
(b) Permissible Uses of Funds.--Section 223(b)(1)(E) of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1043(b)(1)(E)) is
amended to read as follows:
``(E) To use technology to collect, manage, and analyze
data to improve teaching, learning, and decisionmaking for
the purpose of increasing student academic achievement.''.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 224 of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1044) is amended by
striking ``each of fiscal years 2002 and 2003.'' and
inserting ``fiscal year 2004 and each of the 4 succeeding
fiscal years.''.
SEC. 4. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.
Title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1021 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``PART C--CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE
``SEC. 231. PURPOSES; DEFINITIONS.
``(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this part are--
``(1) to help recruit and prepare teachers, including
minority teachers, to meet the national demand for a highly
qualified teacher in every classroom; and
``(2) to increase opportunities for Americans of all
educational, ethnic, class, and geographic backgrounds to
become highly qualified teachers.
``(b) Definitions.--As used in this part:
``(1) Eligible institution.--The term `eligible
institution' means--
``(A) an institution of higher education that has a teacher
preparation program that meets the requirements of section
203(b)(2) and that is--
``(i) a part B institution (as defined in section 322);
``(ii) a Hispanic-serving institution (as defined in
section 502);
``(iii) a Tribal College or University (as defined in
section 316);
``(iv) an Alaska Native-serving institution (as defined in
section 317(b)); or
``(v) a Native Hawaiian-serving institution (as defined in
section 317(b));
``(B) a consortium of institutions described in
subparagraph (A); or
``(C) an institution described in subparagraph (A), or a
consortium described in subparagraph (B), in partnership with
any other institution of higher education, but only if the
center of excellence established under section 232 is located
at an institution described in subparagraph (A).
``(2) Highly qualified.--The term `highly qualified' has
the meaning given such term in section 9101 of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``(3) Scientifically based reading research.--The term
`scientifically based reading research' has the meaning given
such term in section 1208 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6368).
``(4) Scientifically based research.--The term
`scientifically based research' has the meaning given such
term in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``SEC. 232. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.
``(a) Program Authorized.--From the amounts appropriated to
carry out this part, the Secretary is authorized to award
competitive grants to eligible institutions to establish
centers of excellence.
[[Page H6378]]
``(b) Use of Funds.--Grants provided by the Secretary under
this part shall be used to ensure that current and future
teachers are highly qualified, by carrying out one or more of
the following activities:
``(1) Implementing reforms within teacher preparation
programs to ensure that such programs are preparing teachers
who are highly qualified and are able to use advanced
technology effectively in the classroom, including use for
instructional techniques to improve student academic
achievement, by--
``(A) retraining faculty; and
``(B) designing (or redesigning) teacher preparation
programs that--
``(i) prepare teachers to close student achievement gaps,
are based on rigorous academic content, scientifically based
research (including scientifically based reading research),
and challenging State student academic content standards; and
``(ii) promote strong teaching skills.
``(2) Providing sustained and high-quality preservice
clinical experience, including the mentoring of prospective
teachers by exemplary teachers, substantially increasing
interaction between faculty at institutions of higher
education and new and experienced teachers, principals, and
other administrators at elementary schools or secondary
schools, and providing support, including preparation time,
for such interaction.
``(3) Developing and implementing initiatives to promote
retention of highly qualified teachers and principals,
including minority teachers and principals, including
programs that provide--
``(A) teacher mentoring from exemplary teachers or
principals; or
``(B) induction and support for teachers and principals
during their first 3 years of employment as teachers or
principals, respectively.
``(4) Awarding scholarships based on financial need to help
students pay the costs of tuition, room, board, and other
expenses of completing a teacher preparation program.
``(5) Disseminating information on effective practices for
teacher preparation and successful teacher certification test
preparation strategies.
``(6) Activities authorized under sections 202, 203, and
204.
``(c) Application.--Any eligible institution desiring a
grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such a time, in such a manner, and accompanied
by such information the Secretary may require.
``(d) Minimum Grant Amount.--The minimum amount of each
grant under this part shall be $500,000.
``(e) Limitation on Administrative Expenses.--An eligible
institution that receives a grant under this part may not use
more than 2 percent of the grant funds for purposes of
administering the grant.
``(f) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out this part.
``SEC. 233. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
part $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may be
necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years.''.
SEC. 5. TRANSITION.
The Secretary of Education shall take such actions as the
Secretary determines to be appropriate to provide for the
orderly implementation of this Act.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. No amendment to the committee amendment is
in order except those printed in House Report 108-190. Each amendment
may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a Member
designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable
for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by
the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and
shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in House
Report 108-190.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Gingrey
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to the rule, I offer amendment
No. 1.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Gingrey:
Page 6, line 25, strike ``(1)'' and insert ``(1)(B)''.
Page 7, beginning on line 11, strike ``shall, at the time
of the initial grant application, submit'' and insert ``shall
submit''.
Page 8, line 15, after ``qualified,'' insert ``are able to
understand scientifically based research and its
applicability,''.
Page 9, line 10, after ``teach'' insert ``that are''.
Page 10, line 7, strike ``and experimental''.
Page 18, line 4, strike ``fairly distributed'' and insert
``used''.
Page 18, line 9, strike ``and''.
Page 18, line 25, strike ``teachers'' and insert
``teachers, principals, and superintendents''.
Page 19, line 5, strike the period at the end and insert
``; and''.
Page 19, after line 5, insert the following:
``(4) contain a certification from the high-need local
educational agency included in the partnership that it has
reviewed the application and determined that the grant
proposed will comply with subsection (f).
Page 19, line 17, after ``qualified,'' insert ``are able to
understand scientifically based research and its
applicability,''.
Page 24, after line 2, insert the following:
``(h) Supplement, Not Supplant.--Funds made available under
this section shall be used to supplement, and not supplant,
other Federal, State, and local funds that would otherwise be
expended to carry out the purposes of this section.
Page 28, beginning on line 19, strike ``serving States''.
Page 29, line 3, strike ``include'' and insert ``have''.
Page 29, line 8, strike ``involve the development of'' and
insert ``have''.
Page 32, line 22, strike ``receiving'' and insert
``applying for''.
Page 33, beginning on line 3, insert ``,'' after
``students''.
Page 36, strike lines 10 through 20 and insert the
following:
``(5) For students who have completed at least 50 percent
of the requirements for a teacher preparation program at an
institution of higher education or alternative certification
program, and who have taken and passed each of the
assessments used by the State for teacher certification and
licensure, each such institution's and each such program's
average raw score, ranked by teacher preparation program,
which shall be made available widely and publicly.
Page 48, line 19, strike ``qualified'' and insert
``qualified, are able to understand scientifically based
research,''.
Page 49, line 21, after ``teacher'' insert ``or
principal''.
Page 50, line 7, strike ``test'' and insert ``and licensure
assessment''.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310, the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The manager's amendment to H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act of 2003,
makes refinements to the bill as reported by the Committee on Education
and the Workforce on June 10, 2003. This has been a bipartisan bill
every step of the way, and I believe it will enjoy broad support among
my colleagues in the House. I will not take a great deal of time to
describe the amendment in detail since it was drafted in consultation
with our Democratic Member, and it contains mostly technical and
clarifying changes as recommended by the Department of Education.
However, Mr. Chairman, I would like to take a moment to point out a
few of the changes of this proposed amendment. As currently drafted,
H.R. 2211 authorizes grants to design or redesign teacher preparation
programs that are based on rigorous academic content, scientifically
based research, and challenging State student academic content
standards. This amendment adds language to ensure that teachers in
these programs are able to understand the scientifically based research
and how to apply that in their classrooms.
Under H.R. 2211, each partnership that applies for a grant must
include at least a high-quality teacher preparation program at an
institution of higher education; second, a school of arts and sciences;
third, a high-need local education agency; and, finally, a public or
private educational organization. In addition, this legislation
requires that at least 50 percent of partnership grant funds be used to
``directly benefit'' partner local education agencies. This provision
in the amendment is designed to ensure that each partner local
education agency has the ability to influence grant activities, and
guarantees that partnership activities focus on the needs of teachers
and students in the classroom.
My amendment adds a provision to the bill to require that partnership
grant applications contain a certification from the partner local
educational agencies stating that they will ``directly benefit'' from
the proposed grant activities. This amendment ensures that the
partnership grant funds are used only to supplement, not to supplant,
other Federal, State, and local funds that would otherwise be used for
teacher preparation activities.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, my amendment ensures that teacher preparation
program average raw score data that is reported to the State is also
included in the State report card on quality of teacher preparation.
This amendment makes common-sense, noncontroversial changes to the
legislation, and I ask for my colleagues' support. Support it because
it improves the quality of the programs authorized under Title II of
the Higher Education Act.
[[Page H6379]]
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time
in opposition, although I am not in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to oppose this amendment.
This amendment makes, indeed, important technical and clarifying
changes to the bill, and I urge its support.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and, pending
that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Gingrey) will be postponed.
The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in House
Report 108-190.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Kildee
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Millender-McDonald), I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Kildee:
Page 18, strike line 23.
Page 19, line 5, strike the period at the end and insert a
semicolon.
Page 19, after line 5, insert the following:
``(F) how the partnership will design and implement a
clinical program component that includes close supervision of
student teachers by faculty of the teacher preparation
program at the partner institution and mentor teachers;
``(G) how the partnership will design and implement an
induction program to support all new teachers through the
first 3 years of teaching that includes mentors who are
trained and compensated by the partnership for their work
with new teachers; and
``(H) how the partnership will collect, analyze, and use
data on the retention of all teachers in schools located in
the geographic areas served by the partnership to evaluate
the effectiveness of its teacher support system.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310, the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This amendment would expand the bill to allow clinical and mentoring
programs as part of the teacher preparation. I believe this amendment
is a good addition to the bill, and I would urge its passage.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, although I do not oppose the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, we have worked with the minority on this amendment, we
support it, and I ask that the membership also support the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment
No. 3 printed in House Report 108-190.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Honda
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Honda:
Page 23, insert after line 15 the following:
``(7) Teacher mentoring.--Establishing or implementing a
teacher mentoring program that--
``(A) includes minimum qualifications for mentors;
``(B) provides training and stipends for mentors;
``(C) provides mentoring programs for teachers in their
first 3 years of teaching;
``(D) provides regular and ongoing opportunities for
mentors and mentees to observe each other's teaching methods
in classroom settings during the school day;
``(E) establishes an evaluation and accountability plan for
activities conducted under this paragraph that includes
rigorous objectives to measure the impact of such activities;
and
``(F) provides for a report to the Secretary on an annual
basis regarding the partnership's progress in meeting the
objectives described in subparagraph (E).
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking the chairman of the
committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), and the ranking
member, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), for their
leadership in crafting this legislation and the support for this
noncontroversial bipartisan amendment.
I would also like to give a special thanks to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) for working with us on this amendment.
This amendment, based on legislation I introduced earlier this year,
the Teacher Mentoring Act, would permit the use of grant funds to be
used for teacher mentoring programs and is supported by the American
Federation of Teachers.
As a former teacher and principal, I can attest to the critical role
teacher mentoring programs play in preparing and retaining teachers for
the many challenges they will face. Teacher retention rates remain a
critical problem for our Nation's schools.
According to the National Commission on Teaching and America's
Future, nearly a quarter of new teachers quit by the end of their
second year, and almost half leave within 5 years. This revolving-door
phenomenon is particularly problematic in high-poverty schools, where
the turnover rate is almost one-third higher than the national average.
Teachers who leave the profession often point to support programs for
beginning teachers as a key to increasing retention rates.
One critical source of support can be found through teacher mentoring
programs that will pair new teachers with experienced educators serving
as mentors. A large majority of school districts today have enacted
teacher mentoring programs that have proven successful in retaining
teachers. In fact, teachers without mentoring programs have been shown
to leave the profession at a rate almost 70 percent higher than those
with mentoring programs.
My amendment, Mr. Chairman, will help provide the necessary resources
for these essential programs, and I urge all Members to support this
bipartisan amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, although I do not oppose the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent at this time to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This amendment, Mr. Chairman, was drafted in consultation with the
Committee on Education and the Workforce, and we support it. It does
include minimum qualifications for mentors, provides training and
stipends for mentors, provides mentoring programs for teachers in their
first 3 years of teaching, and provides regular and ongoing
opportunities for mentors and mentees to observe each other's teaching
methods in classroom settings during the school day.
I served for 9 years on a school board before I came here, and we had
a mentoring program there which was very beneficial. I think this is a
strong amendment to the bill, improves the
[[Page H6380]]
bill, and I would ask the support of our colleagues for this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).
The amendment was agreed to.
{time} 1330
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Quinn). It is now in order to consider
amendment No. 4 printed in House Report 108-190.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Kildee
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentleman from
California (Mr. Baca), I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Kildee:
Page 23, after line 15, insert the following:
``(7) Computer software for multilingual education.--
Training teachers to use computer software for multilingual
education to address the needs of limited English proficient
students.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310, the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment will expand the bill to allow teachers
to retrain using computer software for bilingual education. I believe
this amendment is a good addition to the bill and urge its passage.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time
in opposition, although I do not oppose the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment was also written with the committee, has
the support of the committee, and I believe will be very beneficial to
those multilingual children who need this special help; and I urge
support for the amendment.
Mr. BACA. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the amendment that will
help address a growing problem in our Nation today. My amendment asks
for more funding for teachers so that they can be trained to address
the needs of students who are of limited English, or speak English as a
second language.
In our school systems, the faces that fill our classrooms are
diverse. No longer are our students simply Anglo, English-speaking,
American born children. Rather, they are children from many different
races and cultural backgrounds, speaking many different languages. But
sadly, our teachers are not given the proper tools or training they
need to address this growing diversity.
Our teachers are left to their own devices to try to communicate with
a classroom of children who do not speak the same language as the
instructor. Because we do not give teachers the resources to teach
students with limited English skills, many students are being left
behind all across this nation. Students with limited English skills are
more likely to drop out of school.
We need to build their self-esteem and confidence; otherwise they are
more likely to get involved with drugs and alcohol. They are more
likely to commit crimes. We need trained teachers who are able to reach
out to students with limited English skills and stop them from dropping
out of school. Every child deserves an education! Every child deserves
to be taught! Every child deserves the access to opportunity!
Education opens the door for opportunity, but for many children with
limited English, the doors will always remain shut if they do not learn
to read, speak, and write in English!
The need for qualified teachers who can teach students with limited
English skills exists not only in states with large immigrant
populations like California, Florida, and Texas, but it exists all
across the United States! That is why funding to train teachers
properly is so crucial!
Georgia, North Carolina, Indiana, Oregon, New Hampshire, and Missouri
all reported an increase of over 40 percent in students with limited
English! This is not merely a problem in California; it is a problem
all over this country! And we cannot ignore it any longer!
Hispanics represent over 14 percent of the total population. It isn't
fair to the teachers and it isn't fair to the students if we don't
train them! That is why, even here in the Capital, many Congressional
members are taking Spanish classes to learn the language and the
ability to communicate to their new diverse constituents. School
districts are suffering due to a lack of teachers properly trained in
teaching English as a Second Language!
In North Carolina there are only 900 qualified teachers for 53,000
students with limited English! In Wisconsin, schools districts that may
have had only 8 students with limited English now have as many as 65
today. In Idaho, almost 18,000 limited English students are enrolled in
their public school system but research indicates that nearly 40
percent will drop out by the 10th grade!
The fact is that immigrants exist, they are increasingly settling in
rural communities not accustomed to immigrants, and are sending their
kids to schools that do not know how to educate these children. Our
country is a nation of new faces who need and deserve an education.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and help
the countless school districts throughout our nation who need our help.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment
No. 5 printed in House Report 108-190.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Meeks of New York
Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Meeks of New York:
Page 26, strike lines 8 through 17 and insert the
following:
``(e) Additional Discretionary Uses of Funds.--In addition
to the uses described in subsection (d), each eligible
applicant receiving a grant under this section may use the
grant funds--
``(1) to develop and implement effective mechanisms to
recruit into the teaching profession employees from--
``(A) high-demand industries, including technology
industries; and
``(B) the fields of science, mathematics, and engineering;
and
``(2) to conduct outreach and coordinate with inner city
and rural secondary schools to encourage students to pursue
teaching as a career.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310, the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).
Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I come before this body to offer an amendment to
today's Ready to Teach Act. As we here in Congress continue to discuss
year in and year out the education of our children, this Nation's
future, I am pleased to offer an amendment that I feel will have a
large impact not only on the diversity of schools today but also on the
future academic achievement of our students.
My amendment proposes to encourage partnerships between educational
entities and inner city and rural secondary schools. This partnership
will be funded by allowable uses of funds, which will fund outreach and
coordinate efforts that encourage inner city and rural youth to pursue
teaching as a career.
The need for such collaboration is evident to both educational
researchers and anyone who simply walks into nearly any public school
in the Nation. Research shows that our educational system must increase
its efforts to encourage a higher proportion of students of color and
males into the postsecondary pipeline. Too often, students leak out of
the college pipeline between their 9th and 12th grade years because
they do not consider themselves college material.
My amendment helps prevent that from occurring. By forming
partnerships between educational entities and secondary schools, an
opportunity is created to identify those secondary students who find
teaching attractive
[[Page H6381]]
and encourage them to remain focused on their studies.
Not only does my amendment encourage teaching as a career, but it
also encourages diversity. Obviously, a teacher's effectiveness
depends, first and foremost, on his or her skills and high
expectations; yet we also know that students benefit in important ways
by having some teachers who look differently or some who look like
them, who share similar cultural experiences, who come from similar
neighborhoods, and who serve as role models demonstrating that
education and achievement are things to be respected. It is important
to expose children to a diverse teaching staff and to diverse role
models within each of our schools. Where we have a rural or inner city
school with teachers unlike the students, we are giving students a
stunted educational experience.
Mr. Chairman, as schools are redoubling their commitment to raising
standards and closing achievement gaps, we need to seize every
opportunity to boost the achievement of inner city and rural students.
This amendment provides us with an opportunity not only to change the
demographics of the teacher workforce, but also to encourage students
to continue their pursuit of an education and to reveal to them the
nature of the work of teaching.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the chairman and ranking member
of the Committee on Education and the Workforce for their cooperation
in allowing me to offer this amendment, and I request the support of
all my colleagues as we seek to provide more educational opportunities
to all our children.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time
in opposition to this amendment, although I do not oppose the
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment was also drafted in consultation with
the Committee on Education and the Workforce. We feel it makes the bill
stronger. We strongly support it, and I urge my colleagues to support
it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Gingrey
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 1 printed in House Report 108-190
offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) on which further
proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice
vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 416,
noes 4, not voting 14, as follows:
[Roll No. 339]
AYES--416
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Ballance
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Carter
Case
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Clay
Clyburn
Coble
Cole
Collins
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cox
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Hensarling
Herger
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kleczka
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
Majette
Maloney
Manzullo
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Otter
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Toomey
Towns
Turner (OH)
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--4
Flake
Frank (MA)
Paul
Sabo
NOT VOTING--14
Cramer
Cunningham
Edwards
Gephardt
Gibbons
Goss
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Janklow
Millender-McDonald
Moran (VA)
Owens
Oxley
Scott (GA)
Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Quinn) (during the vote). Members are
advised there are 2 minutes remaining in this vote.
{time} 1358
Mr. SABO changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mrs. CUBIN changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 339, the Gingrey
amendment to H.R. 2211, I am not recorded. Had I been present, I would
have voted ``aye.''
(Mr. ABERCROMBIE asked and was given permission to speak out of order
for 1 minute.)
[[Page H6382]]
Casting of Votes
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I know it is the intention of the
Chairman and leadership to expedite the casting of votes. I have risen
on the floor in the past speaking on behalf of those, particularly in
the Longworth Building, to request that we make some attempt either by
way of signage, blinking lights sufficient to be able to attract
attention. I am not sure of the precise manner, but it is virtually
impossible during these months when we are being visited with the
number of people that are in the buildings, particularly in Longworth,
to make use of those elevators to get here in a timely fashion.
No Member wants to try to tell members of the public to get off
elevators or not to come in. They make inquiries and so on, as they
should. It is simply unfair to them. We have got to figure out a way to
make at least one elevator eligible for exclusive use by the Members
during the time in which a vote is taking place.
{time} 1400
Simply to ring the bells and then expect people to know what that
means, let alone to be able to follow up on it during the 15- or 16- or
17-minute period, is impossible.
I guarantee you, you are going to have people, as has happened
recently and almost happened again today, that are going to miss votes
and be upset about it, unless we are able to figure out some way to
figure out the logistics associated with that.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Chairman, I think if you look at the historical
context in which Members were allowed to vote, if you go back to the
earliest House building, the Cannon Building, you will find that they
went to the extreme position of having two sets of buttons, one with
which the elevators operate exclusively when Members are to vote.
Clearly, in today's kind of relationship with people who visit, we do
not want to impose our desire to move around the Capitol at our
pleasure. But during the vote period, it seems to me that either we
have people on the elevators, or we use modern technology to allow us
to utilize those elevators.
Historically, they had people on them and separate buttons. You are
just asking for a fair shot to get to the floor to cast your vote. I do
not think that is unreasonable at all.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the
gentleman, most especially because I like to be supportive of him as
much as possible.
Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Quinn). The gentleman from Alaska
controls the time, or Hawaii.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. It is a common mistake, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Hawaii, who looks like
he is from Alaska.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, both the gentleman from Alaska and
myself are shy and retiring types, and so it is often the case that we
are mistaken for one another.
Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. I yield to the gentleman, who has been working very
hard to resolve this issue and for whom I have great respect as a
result.
Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to point out just a couple of things.
One, we have worked on this situation before. People are touchy
politically I know about having someone on the elevators. In fact,
there was a vote on this floor a few years ago where somebody thought
it would save their election by trying to throw these people off. The
bottom line is you need people on there to help. We have had some
shortages. Let us not have a vote to do that kind of thing again.
The second thing is that the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson)
and I have been looking at this, and also the elevator repair, because
people were stuck on elevators. We never again want that mixture of
Members on the elevators.
Finally, let me just say that there is an appropriation in 2004. If
we can get that moved up a little bit, we can get that sped up. The
gentlemen are both correct.
In closing, I promise the gentleman, I will bring the plan personally
to him and visit him in Anchorage.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. There being no other amendments, the
question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute,
as amended.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended,
was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
LaHood) having assumed the chair, Mr. Quinn, Chairman pro tempore of
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R.
2211) to reauthorize title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965,
pursuant to House Resolution 310, he reported the bill back to the
House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the committee
amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of the
Whole? If not, the question is on the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 404,
noes 17, not voting 13, as follows:
[Roll No. 340]
AYES--404
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baker
Baldwin
Ballance
Ballenger
Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Becerra
Bell
Bereuter
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Bradley (NH)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (OH)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burgess
Burns
Burr
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carson (OK)
Carter
Case
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Clay
Clyburn
Coble
Cole
Collins
Conyers
Cooper
Costello
Cox
Crane
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Culberson
Cummings
Cunningham
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
DeMint
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Dooley (CA)
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Fletcher
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fossella
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green (TX)
Green (WI)
Greenwood
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hensarling
Herger
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoeffel
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley (OR)
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inslee
Isakson
Israel
Issa
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Kleczka
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas (KY)
Lucas (OK)
Lynch
Majette
[[Page H6383]]
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntyre
McKeon
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Nethercutt
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Osborne
Ose
Oxley
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Ryun (KS)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Sandlin
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrock
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stupak
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Terry
Thomas
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Turner (OH)
Turner (TX)
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Vitter
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--17
Bartlett (MD)
Bishop (UT)
Flake
Franks (AZ)
Gilchrest
Gutknecht
Hefley
Jones (NC)
King (IA)
Kingston
Manzullo
Otter
Paul
Rohrabacher
Tancredo
Taylor (NC)
Toomey
NOT VOTING--13
Cramer
Edwards
Gephardt
Gibbons
Goss
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Janklow
Millender-McDonald
Moran (VA)
Owens
Pickering
Towns
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood) (during the vote). Two minutes
remain to vote.
{time} 1424
Mr. ROHRABACHER changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________