[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 38 (Wednesday, April 6, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3294-S3295]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. DODD (for himself, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Salazar):
  S. 724. A bill to improve the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce with 
Senators Durbin and Salazar a very important piece of legislation, 
``The No Child Left Behind Reform Act.'' This legislation makes three 
basic changes to the No Child Left Behind Act which was signed into law 
in January of 2002.
  The No Child Left Behind Act received the support of this Senator and 
eighty-six of our colleagues. Like most, if not all, of our colleagues 
who supported this bill, I supported it because I care about improving 
the quality of education in America for all of our children. I believed 
that this law would help to achieve that goal by establishing more 
rigorous standards for measuring student achievement, by helping 
teachers do a better job of instructing students, and last but not 
least, by providing the resources desperately needed by our schools for 
even the most basic necessities to help put the reforms we passed into 
place.
  Regrettably, the high hopes that I and many others had for this law 
have not been realized. The law is being implemented by the 
Administration in a manner that is inflexible, unreasonable and 
unhelpful to students. Furthermore, the law is not only failing to help 
teachers do their best in the classroom, it also reflects, along with 
other Administration policies and pronouncements, a neglect and even 
hostility towards members of the teaching profession.
  Worse still, the Administration's promise of sufficient resources to 
implement No Child Left Behind's much needed reforms is a promise that 
has yet to be kept. Indeed, the current budget proposed by the Bush 
Administration underfunds No Child Left Behind by $12 billion. Since 
passage three years ago, the law has been funded at a level that is 
more than $39 billion below what was promised when the President signed 
the Act into law.
  As a result of the failures of the current Administration to fulfill 
its commitment to our nation's school children under this law, those 
children and their teachers are today shouldering new and noteworthy 
hardships. Throughout the State of Connecticut, for example, students, 
teachers, administrators and parents are struggling to implement 
requirements that are often confusing, inflexible and unrealistic. And 
they are struggling to do so without the additional resources they were 
promised to put them into place. According to a recent report put 
together by the Connecticut State Department of Education, through 
2008, it will cost the State of Connecticut $41.6 million over and 
above what the Federal Government is going to supply to meet the 
requirements of No Child Left Behind. Of that $41.6 million, $8 million 
will need to spent on testing alone. That is a significant amount of 
money--a significant amount of money that is going to fall on 
Connecticut taxpayers trying to simultaneously pay for their mortgage, 
basic health care and the rising cost of their children's tuition.
  As I have said on numerous occasions in the past, resources without 
reforms are a waste of money. By the same token, reforms without 
resources are a false promise--a false promise that has left students 
and their teachers grappling with new burdens and little help to bear 
them.

  The legislation I am introducing today proposes to make three changes 
to the No Child Left Behind Act. These changes will ease current 
burdens on our students, our teachers and our administrators without 
dismantling the fundamental underpinnings of the law.
  First, the No Child Left Behind Reform Act will allow schools to be 
given credit for performing well on measures other than test scores 
when calculating student achievement. Test scores are an important 
measure of student knowledge. However, they are not the only measure. 
There are others. These include dropout rates, the number of students 
who participate in advanced placement courses, and individual student 
improvement over time. Unfortunately, current law does not allow 
schools to use these additional ways to gauge school success in a 
constructive manner. Additional measures can only be used to further 
indicate how a school is failing, not how a school is succeeding. This 
legislation will allow schools to earn credit for succeeding.
  Second, the No Child Left Behind Reform Act will allow schools to 
target school choice and supplemental services to the students that 
actually demonstrate a need for them. As the current law is being 
implemented by the Administration, if a school is in need of 
improvement, it is expected to offer school choice and supplemental 
services to all students--even if not all students have demonstrated a 
need for them. That strikes me as a wasteful and imprecise way to help 
a school improve student performance. For that reason, this legislation 
will allow schools to target resources to the students that actually 
demonstrate that they need them. Clearly, this is the most efficient 
way to maximize their effect.
  Finally, the No Child Left Behind Reform Act introduces a greater 
degree of reasonableness to the teacher certification process. As it is 
being implemented, the law requires teachers to be ``highly qualified'' 
to teach every subject that they teach. Certainly none of us disagree 
with this policy as a matter of principle. But as a matter of practice, 
it is causing confusion and hardship for teachers, particularly 
secondary teachers and teachers in small school districts. For example, 
as the law is being implemented by the Administration, a high school 
science teacher could be required to hold degrees in biology, physics 
and chemistry to be considered highly qualified. In small schools where 
there may be only one 7th or 8th grade teacher teaching all subjects, 
these teachers could similarly be required to hold degrees in every 
subject area.
  Such requirements are unreasonable at a time when excellent teachers 
are increasingly hard to find. The legislation I introduce today will 
allow states to create a single assessment to cover multiple subjects 
for middle grade level teachers and allow states to issue a broad 
certification for science and social studies.
  In my view, the changes I propose will provide significant assistance 
to schools struggling to comply with the No Child Left Behind law all 
across America. As time marches on and more deadlines set by this law 
approach--including additional testing, a highly qualified teacher in 
every classroom and 100% proficiency for all students--we have a 
responsibility to reassess the law and do what we can to make sure that 
it is implemented in a reasonable manner. In doing so, we must also 
preserve the basic tenets of the law--providing a world class education 
for all American students and closing the achievement gap across 
demographic and socioeconomic lines. Again, no child should left 
behind--no special education student, no English language learning 
student, no minority student and no low-income student. I stand by this 
commitment.

  Obviously, funding this law is beyond the scope of this bill. I would 
note, however, that efforts to increase education funding to authorized 
levels have thus far been unsuccessful. Despite this, I remain 
committed to work to change this outcome as well. Clearly, our children 
deserve the resources

[[Page S3295]]

needed to make their dreams for a better education a reality.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 724

       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 ``No Child Left Behind Reform 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS.

       (a) Definition of Adequate Yearly Progress.--Section 
     1111(b)(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (C)(vii)--
       (A) by striking ``such as'';
       (B) by inserting ``such as measures of individual or cohort 
     growth over time based on the academic assessments 
     implemented in accordance with paragraph (3),'' after 
     ``described in clause (v),''; and
       (C) by striking ``attendance rates,''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (D)--
       (A) by striking clause (ii);
       (B) by striking ``the State'' and all that follows through 
     ``ensure'' and inserting ``the State shall ensure''; and
       (C) by striking ``; and'' and inserting a period.
       (b) Academic Assessment and Local Educational Agency and 
     School Improvement.--Section 1116(a)(1)(B) of the Elementary 
     and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(a)(1)(B)) 
     is amended by striking ``, except that'' and all that follows 
     through ``action or restructuring''.

     SEC. 3. GRANTS FOR INCREASING DATA CAPACITY FOR PURPOSES OF 
                   AYP.

       Subpart 1 of part A of title I of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 1120C. GRANTS FOR INCREASING DATA CAPACITY FOR 
                   PURPOSES OF AYP.

       ``(a) Grant Authority.--The Secretary may award grants, on 
     a competitive basis, to State educational agencies to enable 
     the State educational agencies--
       ``(1) to develop or increase the capacity of data systems 
     for accountability purposes; and
       ``(2) to award subgrants to increase the capacity of local 
     educational agencies to upgrade, create, or manage 
     information databases for the purpose of measuring adequate 
     yearly progress.
       ``(b) Priority.--In awarding grants under this section the 
     Secretary shall give priority to State educational agencies 
     that have created, or are in the process of creating, a 
     growth model or proficiency index as part of their adequate 
     yearly progress determination.
       ``(c) State Use of Funds.--Each State that receives a grant 
     under this section shall use--
       ``(1) not more than 20 percent of the grant funds for the 
     purpose of increasing the capacity of, or creating, State 
     databases to collect information related to adequate yearly 
     progress; and
       ``(2) not less than 80 percent of the grant funds to award 
     subgrants to local educational agencies within the State to 
     enable the local educational agencies to carry out the 
     authorized activities described in subsection (d).
       ``(d) Authorized Activities.--Each local educational agency 
     that receives a subgrant under this section shall use the 
     subgrant funds to increase the capacity of the local 
     educational agency to upgrade databases or create unique 
     student identifiers for the purpose of measuring adequate 
     yearly progress, by--
       ``(1) purchasing database software or hardware;
       ``(2) hiring additional staff for the purpose of managing 
     such data;
       ``(3) providing professional development or additional 
     training for such staff; and
       ``(4) providing professional development or training for 
     principals and teachers on how to effectively use such data 
     to implement instructional strategies to improve student 
     achievement.
       ``(e) State Application.--Each State educational agency 
     desiring a grant under this section shall submit an 
     application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, 
     and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
       ``(f) LEA Application.--Each local educational agency 
     desiring a subgrant under this section shall submit an 
     application to the State educational agency at such time, in 
     such manner, and containing such information as the State 
     educational agency may require. Each such application shall 
     include, at a minimum, a demonstration of the local 
     educational agency's ability to put such a database in place.
       ``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this part 
     $80,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006, 2007, and 2008.''

     SEC. 4. TARGETING TRANSFER OPTIONS AND SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES.

       (a) Targeting Transfer Options and Supplemental Services.--
     Section 1116 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316) is amended--
       (1) in paragraphs (1)(E)(i), (5)(A), (7)(C)(i), and 
     (8)(A)(i) of subsection (b), by striking the term ``all 
     students enrolled in the school'' each place such term 
     appears and inserting ``all students enrolled in the school, 
     who are members of a group described in section 
     1111(b)(2)(C)(v) that fails to make adequate yearly progress 
     as defined in the State's plan under section 1111(b)(2),'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(1), by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(G) Maintenance of least restrictive environment.--A 
     student who is eligible to receive services under the 
     Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and who uses the 
     option to transfer under subparagraph (E), paragraph (5)(A), 
     (7)(C)(i), or (8)(A)(i), or subsection (c)(10)(C)(vii), shall 
     be placed and served in the least restrictive environment 
     appropriate, in accordance with the Individuals with 
     Disabilities Education Act.'';
       (3) in clause (vii) of subsection (c)(10)(C), by inserting 
     ``, who are members of a group described in section 
     1111(b)(2)(C)(v) that fails to make adequate yearly progress 
     as defined in the State's plan under section 1111(b)(2),'' 
     after ``Authorizing students''; and
       (4) in subparagraph (A) of subsection (e)(12), by inserting 
     ``, who is a member of a group described in section 
     1111(b)(2)(C)(v) that fails to make adequate yearly progress 
     as defined in the State's plan under section 1111(b)(2)'' 
     after ``under section 1113(c)(1)''.
       (b) Student Already Transferred.--A student who transfers 
     to another public school pursuant to section 1116(b) of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6316(b)) before the effective date of this section and the 
     amendments made by this section, may continue enrollment in 
     such public school after the effective date of this section 
     and the amendments made by this section.
       (c) Effective Date.--This section and the amendments made 
     by this section shall be effective for each fiscal year for 
     which the amount appropriated to carry out title I of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 for the fiscal 
     year, is less than the amount authorized to be appropriated 
     to carry out such title for the fiscal year.

     SEC. 5. DEFINITION OF HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS.

       Section 9101(23)(B)(ii) of the Elementary and Secondary Act 
     of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801(23)(B)(ii)) is amended--
       (1) in subclause (I), by striking ``or'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (2) in subclause (II), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:

       ``(III) in the case of a middle school teacher, passing a 
     State approved middle school generalist exam when the teacher 
     receives the teacher's license to teach middle school in the 
     State;
       ``(IV) obtaining a State social studies certificate that 
     qualifies the teacher to teach history, geography, economics, 
     and civics in middle or secondary schools, respectively, in 
     the State; or
       ``(V) obtaining a State science certificate that qualifies 
     the teacher to teach earth science, biology, chemistry, and 
     physics in middle or secondary schools, respectively, in the 
     State; and''.

                                 ______