[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 3, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-10555]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: May 3, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part VI





Department of Education





_______________________________________________________________________




Fund for Innovation in Education: Innovation in Education Program--
Partnerships for Standards-Based Professional Development of K-12 
Educators; Notice of Final Priority for Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

 
Fund for Innovation in Education: Innovation in Education 
Program--Partnerships for Standards-Based Professional Development of 
K-12 Educators

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of final priority for fiscal years 1994 and 1995.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Secretary announces an absolute priority for fiscal years 
1994 and 1995 under the Fund for Innovation in Education (FIE): 
Innovation in Education Program to support innovative projects that 
provide K-12 teachers and other educators with sustained, high quality 
professional development opportunities that are aligned with 
challenging content and professional standards developed at the 
national, State or local levels. The intent of this priority is to 
enable school educators, working with appropriate university, 
community, and business partners, to create and maintain model learning 
environments that will help all students in elementary and secondary 
schools achieve challenging academic standards in subjects such as 
English, mathematics, science, history, geography, civics, foreign 
languages, economics, and the arts.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This priority takes effect either 45 days after 
publication in the Federal Register or later if the Congress takes 
certain adjournments. If you want to know the effective date of this 
priority, call or write the Department of Education contact person.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Jaymie Lewis or Bryan Gray, U.S. Department of 
Education, 555 New Jersey Avenue, NW., room 522, Washington, DC 20208-
5524. Telephone: (202) 219-1496. Individuals who use a 
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 
p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An essential step in achieving our National 
Education Goals is ensuring that we have high academic expectations for 
all students and that each student has the opportunity to fulfill those 
expectations. Current national, State, and local efforts to define high 
standards for what students should know and be able to do in the 
various subject areas provide a starting point for creating the type of 
learning opportunities that an education system of excellence must 
provide for all members of an increasingly diverse student population.
    In order to provide learning opportunities where more rigorous and 
complex learning is expected of all students, teachers will need high-
quality, career-long professional development programs. Other educators 
who help to create teaching and learning environments that better serve 
the academic and other needs of students will need similar high-quality 
professional development opportunities. Such educators might include 
school and district administrators, school and university-based teacher 
educators, curriculum and supervisory personnel, paraprofessionals/
instructional aides, and members of school boards. To provide effective 
professional development programs for teachers and other educators, 
applicants must ensure that their proposed projects are aligned with 
high standards for student learning. Applicants should also consider 
related standards for teacher effectiveness and for the preparation, 
credentialling and continuing development of educators. More 
specifically, in designing policies and practices for professional 
development, applicants are urged to draw on relevant work, as 
appropriate, from groups such as the National Board for Professional 
Teaching Standards, the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support 
Consortium, the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher 
Education, and the National Staff Development Council.
    The Secretary recognizes that successful well-articulated programs 
that provide for continuous improvement of professional educators from 
recruitment to retirement will require educators to work together 
across traditionally separated roles and organizations. Therefore, 
projects must be carried out by partnerships. Finally, the design of 
professional development efforts must incorporate what is known about 
developing and managing high-performance school systems that support 
educational excellence and equity.
    The Secretary proposes to direct financial assistance to projects 
that develop new or further develop existing innovative partnerships of 
school, university, community, and other entities to establish and 
maintain high-quality, standards-based professional development 
programs for teachers and other educators. The purpose of these 
partnerships may be to improve the entire continuum of professional 
development or to focus on one or more points along that continuum 
(e.g., preservice, induction, inservice).
    In accordance with recommendations in the Senate Report that 
accompanied the Fiscal Year 1994 Department of Education Appropriation 
Act, the Secretary supports development of programs based on existing 
strategies, such as creating model professional development schools, or 
applicants' newly designed strategies. The Secretary also recognizes 
the need for professional development efforts, as identified in the 
Senate Report, that prepare educators for working with other human 
service professionals to address non-academic student/family problems 
(e.g., drugs, violence, nutrition, unemployment) as well as other 
conditions that place students at-risk for failure in school. The 
Secretary is particularly interested in projects that provide relevant 
professional development opportunities for educators who work in urban 
school communities.
    The Secretary strongly encourages the development of challenging 
and feasible school-based collaborations that are based upon 
appropriate research results and exemplary teaching and professional 
development practices, as well as the contributions of expert school, 
higher education, and community practitioners. Emphases might include 
collegial strategies such as in-school mentoring for teachers; school-
university teams integrating teacher preparation and school curriculum 
to effectively educate at-risk students; teacher sabbaticals to work in 
model schools; and practitioner-led inquiry and reform activities.

    Note: This notice of final priority does not solicit 
applications. A notice inviting applications under this competition 
is published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.

Analysis of the Comments and Changes

    In response to the Secretary's invitation in the notice of proposed 
priorities, eight of the eleven parties submitting comments made 
recommendations. Three commenters expressed support for the priority 
without any recommendations for change. An analysis of the 
recommendations submitted by eight commenters follows.
    Comments: One commenter recommends that the priority require 
projects to include representatives from State Boards of Education on 
the advisory committee since States set the standards and policies that 
serve as frameworks for professional development.
    Discussion: The priority requires that the advisory committee 
include State education officials. This requirement ensures 
representation of the State and is broad enough to include State board 
members.
    Changes: None.

    Comments: Three commenters recommend that the priority use more 
explicit language to identify the ``other'' potential project partners. 
One commenter believes the priority should explicitly identify national 
organizations or associations as potential partners or applicants. 
Another commenter requests the inclusion of non-profit organizations.
    Discussion: The Secretary supports extensive collaboration. The 
priority states that partnerships must be formed that involve LEAs, 
IHEs, and others. The examples of other potential partners does not 
preclude national organizations, associations, or non-profit entities.
    Changes: None.

    Comments: One commenter requests that the National Staff 
Development Council (NSDC) be cited as a resource to applicants on 
staff development standards in the Supplementary Information section of 
the priority. This same commenter encouraged inclusion of the NSDC's 
Standards for Staff Development under the Required Activities Section 
of the priority.
    Discussion: The Secretary recognizes that many organizations have 
already developed and recommended, or are in the process of developing 
and recommending guidelines and standards for professional development. 
The NSDC is a national organization representing a key professional 
development audience and can appropriately be included as an example in 
the Supplementary Information section of the priority. The priority 
requires that projects consider the applicability of several types of 
standards, including those for teacher preparation and continuing 
development. The Secretary does not wish to specify particular 
documents or sources in the text of the priority.
    Changes: The National Staff Development Council has been added 
under the Supplementary Information section of the priority.

    Comments: Two commenters find the examples of possible ways to 
build upon existing strategies listed in the Supplementary Information 
section of the priority either too limiting or not specific enough, 
e.g., model professional development school, model school, and teacher 
sabbaticals.
    Discussion: The Secretary used these terms in the Supplementary 
Information section to give examples of possible strategies for an 
applicant. The examples are illustrative only.
    Changes: None.

    Comments: One commenter recommends that districts and States be 
allowed to align professional development with performance outcomes in 
order to allow districts to continue to upgrade teacher skills to 
improve student performance in locally developed performance outcomes.
    Discussion: As stated, the priority allows a project to propose 
this type of activity.
    Changes: None.

    Comments: One commenter recommends that grants up to $1 million be 
awarded for up to three years.
    Discussion: The Secretary expects that a project could receive up 
to $1 million over a three-year period.
    Changes: None.

    Comments: One commenter recommends that methodology for teaching 
and understanding the dynamics of at-risk youth be emphasized more.
    Discussion: The priority permits projects to address the needs of 
at-risk youth through this sort of focus.
    Changes: None.

    Comments: One commenter recommends that the Secretary support model 
schools located in the inner city to demonstrate existing or newly 
designed strategies.
    Discussion: The priority does not preclude such projects provided 
they have a professional development focus and other requirements of 
the priority are met.
    Changes: None.

    Comments: One commenter recommends changing the language of the 
required activity to allow an LEA to form a partnership with either one 
or more institutions of higher education or with other qualified 
educational institutions.
    Discussion: The Secretary intends that projects funded under this 
program form cross-institutional partnerships that will enable sites to 
address the career-long development of teachers and other educators in 
an integrated fashion. Therefore, collaboration among those entities 
which influence educator development from recruitment through 
retirement is essential.
    Changes: None.

    Comments: One commenter recommends that training objectives 
highlight the need for teachers to become more effective in motivating 
students to set and achieve their goals, and to help students 
understand the direct relationship of their success in school (i.e., 
traditional academic subjects) and future success in the world of work.
    Discussion: The priority does not preclude projects that help 
teachers motivate students and help students understand the 
relationship between their success in school and future success in the 
world of work.
    Changes: None.

    Comments: Two commenters recommend networking and collaboration to 
promote the interchange of ideas among teachers, community members, 
parents and others involved in education.
    Discussion: The priority as written requires partnerships that 
encourage collaboration and networking.
    Changes: None.

    Comments: One commenter recommends adding language under Required 
Activities that would provide for those with disabilities.
    Discussion: The Secretary intended to emphasize the provision of 
professional development opportunities that are aligned with 
challenging academic content standards for all students.
    Changes: ``All'' has been added to part ``a'' of Required 
Activities.

    Comments: One commenter recommends adding language to part ``c'' of 
Required Activities to include those with expertise in the education of 
children with disabilities.
    Discussion: The Secretary intended that projects funded under this 
program help all students achieve challenging academic standards. The 
Secretary intended that groups such as experts in the field of 
educating children with disabilities be involved.
    Changes: The phrase ``experts in the education of children with 
disabilities'' has been added to part ``c'' of Required Activities.

    Comments: One commenter recommends adding arts and cultural 
organizations as potential partners in these projects.
    Discussion: The priority permits arts and cultural organizations to 
participate as partners in these projects. However, the Secretary 
intended to encourage broad participation.
    Changes: The Absolute Priority section of the notice has been 
revised by adding arts and cultural organizations as potential partners 
in the professional development of teachers.

Priorities:

Absolute Priority

    Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) the Secretary gives an absolute 
preference to applications that meet the following priority. The 
Secretary funds under this competition only applications that meet this 
absolute priority:
    Projects that design and implement innovative, high quality, 
standards-based preservice, induction and/or inservice professional 
development programs for K-12 teachers and other educators. Each 
project must involve one or more local education agencies (LEAs) 
working in partnership with one or more institutions of higher 
education (IHEs) and others such as State education officials and 
representatives from professional organizations, private schools, arts 
and cultural organizations, business, and the community, as 
appropriate. Programs and activities must be built upon relevant and 
current research including a demonstrated relationship between the 
professional development approach and lessons learned from relevant 
research and exemplary practice. A grounding in research findings must 
also be evident in the content of the professional development 
activities.

Required Activities

    Each project must: a. Provide professional development 
opportunities that are aligned with challenging academic content 
standards for all students as developed through voluntary national, 
State, and/or local efforts in one or more subjects such as English, 
mathematics, science, history, geography, civics, foreign languages, 
economics, and the arts.
    b. Consider the implications of available professional standards 
such as those for beginning and expert teachers and other educators, as 
well as for teacher preparation, credentialling, and ongoing staff 
development as appropriate to the particular focus of the project.
    c. Establish an advisory committee composed of school and 
university practitioners; state education officials; experts in the 
education of children with disabilities; parents; professional 
organization, community and business representatives; and others as 
appropriate. The advisory committee must guide the project activities 
to ensure a systemic approach including cross-institutional planning, 
coordination, and resource allocation.
    d. Evaluate the following aspects of the project:
    1. The degree to which the professional development content and 
strategies reflect relevant research and exemplary practice;
    2. The degree to which the project activities were actually 
implemented as compared to the original design; and
    3. The nature and impact of project outcomes related to improved 
teaching and increased student learning and development.
    The evaluation must use state-of-the-art documentation and 
assessment approaches.

Intergovernmental Review

    This program is subject to the requirements of Executive Order 
12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. The objective of the 
Executive Order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a 
strengthened federalism by relying on processes developed by State and 
local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal 
financial assistance.
    In accordance with the order, this document is intended to provide 
early notification of the Department's specific plans and actions for 
this program.
    Applicable Program Regulations: The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 
81, 82, 85, and 86.

    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 3151.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 84.215J Secretary's 
Fund for Innovation in Education: Innovation in Education Program)
    Dated: April 28, 1994.
Sharon P. Robinson,
Assistant Secretary for Educational Research and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 94-10555 Filed 5-2-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P