[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 11, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19572-19577]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-8933]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


National Awards Program for Effective Teacher Preparation

AGENCY: Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), 
Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of Eligibility And Selection Criteria.

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

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for OERI announces eligibility and 
selection criteria to govern competitions under the National Awards 
Program for Effective Teacher Preparation for fiscal year (FY) 2000 and 
future years. Using these criteria, the awards program will recognize 
programs that effectively prepare elementary school teachers or 
secondary school mathematics teachers and that lead to improved student 
learning.

EFFECTIVE DATE: These eligibility and selection criteria are effective 
May 11, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon Horn, Office of Educational 
Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, 555 New Jersey 
Avenue, NW., room 506E, Washington, DC 20208-5644. Telephone: (202) 
219-2203 or FAX to (202) 219-2198. Inquiries also may be sent by e-mail 
to: [email protected]
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call 
the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an 
alternate format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer 
diskette) on request to the contact person listed in the preceding 
paragraph.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces eligibility and 
selection criteria to govern applications for recognition that are 
submitted under the National Awards Program for Effective Teacher 
Preparation. The criteria established in this notice would be used to 
select award recipients in the program's initial year, FY 2000, and in 
subsequent fiscal years.
    This new program, which is part of a continuing effort to honor 
excellence in education, is the result of an increased emphasis across 
the country on teacher quality and the well-established principle that 
high-quality K-12 teachers are critical to the ability of children in 
our nation's schools to achieve to high standards. The program 
represents the first systematic approach for identifying entities that 
have successfully linked their programs for preparing teachers to 
improved student

[[Page 19573]]

achievement at the K-12 level. We believe that the current emphasis on 
heightened academic standards for elementary and secondary students and 
the need for teachers to gain the knowledge and skills necessary to 
teach to those standards makes this program, which focuses attention on 
those teacher preparation programs that are particularly effective in 
preparing teachers who, in turn, are effective in helping students 
improve their learning, all the more timely.
    The Assistant Secretary for OERI published a Notice of Proposed 
Eligibility and Selection Criteria for this program in the Federal 
Register on January 21, 2000 (65 FR 3427). As stated in that notice, we 
recognize that demonstrating the link between teacher preparation 
programs and the ability of program graduates to improve student 
learning is not an easy task. Nevertheless, the difficulty involved 
makes that link no less critical. We intend to select for awards no 
more than five pre-service teacher preparation programs that are on the 
leading edge in this effort. Our chief goal in recognizing these 
programs is to foster an understanding of how these noteworthy programs 
design their teacher preparation activities to increase K-12 student 
achievement and how their approaches can be replicated or built upon by 
other institutions that prepare teachers. For that reason, the criteria 
for selecting award recipients, as described in this notice, focus 
significantly on the ability of applicants to provide compelling 
evidence of effectiveness in preparing teachers who positively impact 
student learning.
    The timeliness of this new awards program is also supported by the 
fact that institutions producing teachers, and the states that certify 
them, are increasingly coming under scrutiny as the public seeks higher 
standards and greater accountability for public schools and school 
teachers. The Department, as well as many States, is currently 
implementing new accountability measures and reporting requirements for 
States and for colleges and universities receiving Federal grants to 
support teacher training programs. Some institutions have already 
implemented accountability measures, while others have started to take 
steps to improve and to become accountable for the teachers they train. 
We hope that bringing attention to those teacher preparation programs 
that are effective in this area will serve to assist other programs in 
their efforts to improve their level of accountability.
    In order to align the program with nation-wide efforts to improve 
achievement levels in math and reading, this awards program will focus, 
in its initial year, on programs that prepare elementary teachers 
(since elementary school teachers often teach both math and reading) 
and programs that prepare middle or high school mathematics teachers or 
both. Thus, to be selected for an award, applicants must be able to 
show that their graduates are effective in helping all students improve 
their learning in reading and mathematics at the elementary level or 
mathematics at the middle and high school level or both. By ``all 
students,'' we mean the diverse population of students that graduates 
of teacher education programs may encounter in the classroom or other 
educational setting, including regular and special education students, 
students from diverse backgrounds, and students with limited English 
proficiency. The selection process will also depend on the ability of 
applicants to demonstrate that their graduates have a depth of content 
knowledge in mathematics and reading or both, acquire general and 
content-specific pedagogical knowledge and skills, and develop skills 
to examine attitudes and beliefs about learners and the teaching 
profession.

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

Analysis of Comments and Changes

    In response to the Assistant Secretary's invitation in the notice 
of proposed eligibility and selection criteria, two parties submitted 
comments. An analysis of the comments and of the changes in the 
eligibility and selection criteria since publication of the notice of 
proposed criteria follows.
    Generally, we do not discuss technical and other minor changes; nor 
do we discuss comments that are unrelated to the content of the 
eligibility or selection criteria. Substantive issues are addressed 
below under the appropriate section to which they pertain.

Eligible Applicants

    Comments: One commenter questioned whether the proposed eligibility 
(and selection) criteria placed greater emphasis on achievement in 
reading, as opposed to mathematics, at the elementary school level.
    Discussion: As noted in the preamble discussion above, and in the 
notice of proposed eligibility and selection criteria, the National 
Awards Program for Effective Teacher Preparation is focused, in this 
first year, on the preparation of both reading and mathematics teachers 
at the K-12 level. It is anticipated that an entity that prepares 
elementary school teachers will focus its application on increased 
student learning in reading and mathematics since program graduates 
teaching in elementary schools typically teach both subjects. Each 
discipline--reading and math--is given equal emphasis in this awards 
program. On the other hand, entities that prepare middle school 
teachers or high school teachers (or both) must focus their 
applications on increased student learning in mathematics, a discipline 
routinely taught in middle and high schools.
    Changes: None.

Background and Program Description

    Comment: One commenter suggested that applicants be required to 
consider addressing, as part of the background description of their 
program, any applicable State or district policies affecting their 
efforts in preparing teachers.
    Discussion: In addition to requiring applicants to provide the 
mission statement, goals and objectives, and components of their 
teacher preparation program, the Background section of the proposed 
selection criteria instructed applicants to consider including certain 
types of information (e.g., recruitment policies, program structure, 
resources, etc.) as part of a full description of their program. We 
agree that teacher preparation programs also may be affected by State 
or local policies regarding, for example, academic course requirements 
for teachers, or other factors that relate to the training of teachers 
in a certain geographic region. Thus, we have amended the proposed 
criteria to include applicable State or district policies among the 
list of items applicants can consider addressing in their applications. 
We also note, however, that the list of items to be considered, other 
than the mission, goals and objectives, and program components, are 
provided only as examples. Applicants are advised to address any one or 
more of the identified factors, or other factors, that are most 
pertinent to their teacher preparation program.
    Changes: This section of the proposed selection criteria has been 
amended to refer to State or district policies as an area that 
applicants may address as part of the description of their program.

Program's Criteria for Effectiveness

    Comment: One commenter suggested that the proposed criteria under 
this section be modified to require an explanation of the specific 
standards on

[[Page 19574]]

which the applicant's program is based. The commenter indicated that 
requiring applicants to explain the standards they follow--whether they 
be State licensure, higher education, K-12, or other applicable 
standards--will draw attention to the criteria used by award recipients 
in their efforts to prepare effective teachers.
    Discussion: In this section of the proposed selection criteria, the 
question is posed to applicants, ``What are the criteria the program 
uses to evaluate [the effectiveness of its teacher preparation 
program]?'' This question is designed to ensure that each applicant 
describes the relevant standards that it uses to evaluate its program 
and guide improvements and modifications. Nevertheless, we agree that 
referring to specific examples of standards that might be used in this 
regard (e.g., the standards issued by the National Council for 
Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) as identified by the 
commenter, state teacher licensure standards, or other criteria) will 
further guide applicants in addressing this question.
    Changes: This section of the proposed selection criteria has been 
amended to identify some examples of the types of standards that 
entities use for purposes of evaluating the effectiveness of their 
teacher preparation program.

Evidence of Effectiveness

    Comment: One commenter asked that applicants be required to 
demonstrate the impact that their teacher preparation program has on 
learning for all students and not just on certain populations of 
students.
    This commenter also pointed out that applicants may face certain 
obstacles in collecting data on teachers, or on K-12 students, that is 
needed to demonstrate the effectiveness of their program. For instance, 
the commenter noted that it may be difficult for entities preparing 
teachers to track graduates who teach in other geographic regions, 
while data on reading or math achievement by K-12 students, if used by 
an applicant, will vary by State depending upon how often, and the 
extent to which, students in the State are tested. For these reasons, 
the commenter suggested that applicants be asked to discuss in the 
application any intervening factors that impact the evaluation of their 
teacher preparation program.
    Discussion: We fully agree with the concern expressed by the 
commenter that applicants focus on improved learning for all students 
and believe that the proposed criteria made clear that selection for an 
award will be based significantly on the extent to which an applicant 
can demonstrate that their program for preparing teachers leads to 
improved student achievement for all students taught by program 
graduates. As noted above, and in the preamble guidance to the notice 
of proposed criteria, ``all students'' refers to the diverse population 
of students that teachers may work with in the classroom (or other 
appropriate educational setting). Thus, applicants should provide 
evidence of their program's effectiveness on learning for regular 
education students, students receiving special education, students from 
diverse ethnic backgrounds, students with limited English proficiency, 
students in urban and rural areas, and any other identified population 
of students, to the extent that program graduates teach such 
populations and to the extent that such evidence is available.
    In addition, we agree with the commenter that applicants are likely 
to encounter different challenges in collecting data and compiling 
their evidence of effectiveness. Consequently, this section of the 
final selection criteria will invite applicants to discuss those 
challenges and how they have overcome any such obstacles in order to 
evaluate their program.
    Changes: This section of the proposed selection criteria has been 
amended to include a note inviting applicants to discuss factors 
affecting their data collection efforts and their success in dealing 
with these factors in the course of evaluating the effectiveness of 
their graduates.

Eligibility, Application, and Selection Criteria

Eligible Applicants

    Eligible applicants are institutions in the States (including the 
District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the outlying areas) that prepare 
elementary teachers, or middle or high school mathematics teachers, for 
initial certification. Institutions of higher education as well as 
institutions that are not part of a college or university are eligible 
to apply. Since this program focuses on initial preparation of 
teachers, alternative certification programs are eligible, while in-
service programs are not.
    For purposes of this notice, a ``teacher preparation program'' 
refers to a defined set of experiences that, taken as a whole, prepares 
participants for initial (or alternative) certification to teach. 
Detailed instructions for applying for this award, including formatting 
instructions, are provided within the application package and must be 
followed to receive an award.

Application Content Requirements

    Applicants are free to develop their application in any way they 
choose as long as they comply with the requirements set out in the 
application package. In evaluating applications for the National Awards 
Program for Effective Teacher Preparation, reviewers will look to see 
whether the application, taken as a whole, demonstrates that the 
applicant's teacher preparation program leads to improved teacher 
effectiveness and increased student achievement at the K-12 level. In 
doing so, reviewers will be guided by the extent to which and how well 
applicants address the following components of the application, the 
most important of which concern objective evidence of effectiveness 
under Section C of the application.
    Sections A, B, and D of the application provide reviewers with 
information describing the teacher preparation program and its 
potential as an example for others. Reviewers will use the information 
in these three sections to determine the extent to which there is a 
logical connection between the various aspects of the program and the 
results achieved. In other words, they will check for consistency 
between the information provided in these sections and the applicant's 
claims of effectiveness under section C.
    In section C, applicants provide formative, summative, and 
confirming evidence that their program is effective in preparing 
graduates who are able to help all K-12 students improve their learning 
in reading and mathematics at the elementary level or mathematics at 
the middle or high school level.
    Where appropriate, the following sections of the application 
include one or more questions that are designed to help applicants 
formulate their responses.

A. Background and Program Description

    In this section, applicants must provide the mission statement, 
goals and objectives, and the components of their teacher preparation 
program and explain how these items relate to the effective preparation 
of elementary teachers or middle and/or high school mathematics 
teachers.
    In responding to this section, applicants are encouraged to provide 
information about:
    1. Recruitment policies for faculty and candidates.
    2. Selection procedures for faculty and candidates.

[[Page 19575]]

    3. Program structure (e.g., course and field experiences, support 
for preservice and novice teachers, mechanisms for monitoring 
participants' progress).
    4. State or district policies or mandates that affect the 
components of the teacher preparation program.
    5. Resources that support the program.
    6. Methods for collaboration between the program and K-12 schools.
    7. Graduation or completion criteria and rates.
    8. Job placement and retention rates of graduates.

B. Program's Criteria for Effectiveness

    In this section, applicants must describe the principles, 
standards, or other criteria that the applicant uses to judge the 
effectiveness of its teacher preparation program.

    Note: Applications are not being evaluated against a given set 
of principles for all programs, but are expected to include relevant 
criteria for guiding program improvement and modifications).

    In responding to this section, applicants should consider the 
following questions:
    1. What are the criteria or standards (e.g., NCATE, INTASC, NBPTS, 
NCTM, state teacher licensure requirements and other appropriate 
standards) the program uses to evaluate its effectiveness?
    2. How does the program ensure that program components such as 
courses and instructional practices are consistent with the evaluation 
criteria or standards under Question 1?

C. Evidence of Effectiveness

    In this section, applicants must provide three separate types of 
evidence that demonstrates the effectiveness of their teacher 
preparation program: formative, summative, and confirming evidence.
    ``Formative evidence'' refers to the use of data to make 
adjustments to the program throughout its various stages. These data 
are collected as participants (i.e., preservice teachers) move through 
the program.
    ``Summative evidence'' demonstrates that the program is effective 
in helping graduates acquire the necessary knowledge and skills to 
improve student learning. Summative evidence is collected as preservice 
teachers complete the program.
    ``Confirming evidence'' links teacher preparation and K-12 student 
learning by demonstrating that program graduates are effective in 
helping all K-12 students improve their learning. Confirming evidence 
is collected on graduates who are employed by schools or districts.
    Applicants would supply a brief description for each evidence item 
submitted. This description must include information about the nature 
of the data, the methods used to collect the data, and a summary of the 
data analysis.
    In responding to this section, applicants must consider the 
following questions:
    1. What evidence is there that the program, described in section A, 
gathers data about the effectiveness of the various stages of the 
program and uses that data to make improvements to the program? 
(Formative evidence)
    2. What evidence is there that the program is effective in helping 
graduates acquire the knowledge and skills needed to improve student 
learning in reading and mathematics for all elementary school students 
or in mathematics for all middle or high school students? (Summative 
evidence)

    Note: Summative evidence in this section should address 
graduates' content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and skills, and 
skills to examine beliefs about learners and teaching as a 
profession.

    3. What evidence is there that the program's graduates are 
effective in helping all K-12 students improve their learning in 
reading and mathematics at the elementary level or mathematics at the 
middle or high school level? (Confirming evidence)

    Note: If there are obstacles that affect data collection (e.g., 
local or State regulations prohibit the release of student data), 
applicants may describe these factors and explain how they have 
overcome any obstacles to collecting data for purposes of evaluating 
the effectiveness of their program.

D. Implications for the Field

    A primary goal of this awards program is to share with the public 
effective examples that might be adopted or otherwise used by others to 
improve teacher preparation programs throughout the country. In this 
section, applicants must discuss the challenges they have faced and 
overcome in administering their teacher preparation program, as well as 
the resulting lessons they have learned.
    In responding to this section, applicants should consider the 
following:
    1. What is at least one significant challenge that the program 
encountered within the last five years and how was it overcome? (Note: 
Since demonstrating the link between teacher preparation and K-12 
student learning is a primary focus of the awards program, applicants 
should consider describing challenges related to this issue.)
    2. What lessons that would benefit others have been learned about 
designing, implementing, or evaluating a program that prepares 
graduates who are effective in helping improve student learning for all 
K-12 students?
    3. What program materials (e.g., videos, Web sites, course 
outlines, manuals, strategies, processes) are available that could 
benefit others?
    4. How have or could you help others adapt the aspects of your 
program that contribute most to graduates' effectiveness with K-12 
students?

Selection Criteria

    Reviewers will evaluate the information provided in each 
application based on three criteria: rigor, sufficiency, and 
consistency. These criteria, and the performance levels applicable to 
each, are identified in the rubric shown in Figure 1. Reviewers will 
use this rubric as the review instrument to judge the quality of each 
application.
    The Evidence of Effectiveness provided by an applicant under 
section C, the most critical portion of the application, will be 
evaluated on the basis of its rigor and sufficiency. The level of 
``rigor'' applied to the evidence submitted will be determined by the 
extent to which the qualitative or quantitative data presented is found 
to be valid and reliable. The level of ``sufficiency'' applied to the 
evidence submitted will be determined by the adequacy and the extent of 
the data provided.
    The application as a whole will be evaluated on the basis of its 
consistency. The level of ``consistency'' of the application will be 
based on the extent to which there is a logical link between various 
aspects of the program as described in Sections A, B, and D of the 
application and the evidence of effectiveness provided under Section C. 
For example, if an applicant indicates in sections A, B, or D of its 
application that field experiences are important to the preparation of 
teachers, then the application should describe the variety of field 
experiences that are spread over the duration of the program and also 
include, for purposes of ``consistency,'' documentation of the 
effectiveness of these experiences.
    The rubric in Figure 1 identifies a range of performance levels, 
from 1 to 4, that reviewers will use to judge the quality of an 
application with regard to the three criteria--rigor, sufficiency, and 
consistency. Reviewers will assign a level of the rubric, 1 to 4, for 
each criterion based on their judgment of how well the information 
provided in the application matches the descriptions in the rubric of 
the relevant performance levels. Prior to reviewing applications,

[[Page 19576]]

reviewers will receive extensive training in using the rubric to ensure 
inter-rater reliability.

                            Figure 1.--Rubric for Evaluating Evidence of Effectiveness
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Selection criteria
          Performance levels          --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Rigor                 Sufficiency              Consistency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4....................................  The evidence is highly   There are extensive      Components of the
                                        credible. The data are   data that support        program are consistent
                                        valid and indicators     claims of                with the vision of the
                                        are free of bias.        effectiveness. The       program. Program
                                        Reliability is           evidence includes data   components are
                                        supported by multi-      from multiple sources    monitored to determine
                                        year data from several   with multiple            if they are being
                                        sources.                 indicators.              instituted as
                                                                                          designed. Evidence
                                                                                          supports an intended,
                                                                                          logical link between
                                                                                          the program components
                                                                                          and the outcomes. The
                                                                                          evidence supports the
                                                                                          link between program
                                                                                          components and program
                                                                                          success. The
                                                                                          consistencies support
                                                                                          the credibility of the
                                                                                          evidence.
3....................................  The evidence is          There are adequate data  There are minor
                                        credible. Validity has   to support the claims    inconsistencies
                                        been addressed for       of effectiveness.        between the vision of
                                        most of the data.        There are multiple       the program and
                                        There may be some        sources of evidence      program components.
                                        questions of bias.       and multiple             Some components of
                                        Reliability is           indicators for at        program may not be
                                        supported by two or      least one source.        monitored or there may
                                        more years of data                                be some
                                        from at least one data                            inconsistencies
                                        source.                                           between the evidence
                                                                                          provided and the
                                                                                          identified successful
                                                                                          components of the
                                                                                          program. The
                                                                                          inconsistencies do not
                                                                                          weaken the credibility
                                                                                          of the evidence.
2....................................  The evidence has         There are limited data   There are several
                                        limited credibility.     to support the claims    inconsistencies
                                        The rigor is             of effectiveness. The    between the vision of
                                        compromised by issues    data are collected       the program and
                                        of bias or validity/     from only one or two     program components.
                                        reliability. There are   sources. There are no    There are significant
                                        no multiyear data from   multiple indicators      inconsistencies
                                        any source.              for the data             between the evidence
                                                                 source(s).               provided and the
                                                                                          identified successful
                                                                                          components of the
                                                                                          program. The
                                                                                          inconsistencies raise
                                                                                          questions about the
                                                                                          credibility of the
                                                                                          evidence.
1....................................  The evidence has little  There are not enough     There are numerous
                                        or no credibility. The   data to support claims   inconsistencies
                                        rigor is significantly   of effectiveness.        between the vision of
                                        compromised by issues    There is only a single   the program and its
                                        of bias, or there is     source of data.          components. The
                                        not enough information                            evidence provided is
                                        to determine rigor.                               not linked to the
                                        The data lack validity/                           components of the
                                         Reliability. There is                            program that have been
                                        no multi-year data.                               identified as
                                                                                          contributing to the
                                                                                          program's success. The
                                                                                          inconsistencies raise
                                                                                          significant questions
                                                                                          about the credibility
                                                                                          of the evidence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Selection Procedures

    Award recipients will be selected through a five-stage process.
    Stage 1. During the first stage, applications will be initially 
screened by Department staff to determine whether the submitting party 
meets the eligibility requirements and whether the application contains 
all necessary information (including the three types of evidence 
required under section C) and meets the formatting requirements.
    Stage 2. The second stage of review, to determine up to 10 semi-
finalists, will be conducted by non-Departmental teams representing a 
broad range of teacher educators, practitioners (e.g., mathematicians, 
mathematics educators, K-12 teachers, reading specialists), and 
policymakers (e.g., superintendents, school board members, principals) 
who will evaluate the quality of the applications against the selection 
criteria and applicable performance levels.
    Stage 3. In the third stage, non-Department expert teams (team 
members would differ from the reviewers involved in Stages 2) will 
conduct site visits to verify information presented in the semi-
finalists' applications and, to the extent available, to collect 
additional information. These teams will draft site-visit reports of 
their findings.
    Stage 4. During the fourth stage, a non-Departmental national 
awards panel (panel members will differ from the reviewers involved 
Stages 2 and 3) will review the semi-finalist applications and site 
visit reports. Panel members will then present final recommendations to 
the Department on which teacher preparation programs merit national 
recognition.
    Stage 5. In the fifth and final stage, the Department will review 
data collected throughout the review process and select for national 
recognition no more than 5 applications of the highest quality. The 
Secretary intends to publicly honor and recognize these awardees at a 
national ceremony in Washington, DC.

Goals 2000: Educate America Act

    The Goals 2000: Educate America Act (Goals 2000) focuses the 
Nation's education reform efforts on the eight National Education Goals 
and provides a framework for meeting them. Goals 2000 promotes new 
partnerships to strengthen schools and expands the Department's 
capacities for helping communities to exchange ideas and

[[Page 19577]]

obtain information needed to achieve the goals.
    These eligibility and selection criteria address the National 
Education Goal that the Nation's teaching force will have the content 
knowledge and teaching skills needed to instruct all American students 
for the next century.

Intergovernmental Review

    This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the 
regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive 
order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened 
federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State 
and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal 
financial assistance.
    This document is intended to provide early notification of our 
specific plans and actions for this program.
    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 8001.

Electronic Access to This Document

    You may review this document, as well as all other Department of 
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe 
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at either of the 
following sites:

http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm
http://www.ed.gov/news.html

    To use the PDF you must have the Adobe Acrobat Reader Program with 
Search, which is available free at either of the previous sites. If you 
have questions about using the PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing 
Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC 
area, at (202) 512-1530.

    Note: The official version of this document is the document 
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the 
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal 
Regulations is available on GPO Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html.


    Dated: April 6, 2000.
C. Kent McGuire,
Assistant Secretary for Educational Research and Improvement.
[FR Doc. 00-8933 Filed 4-6-00; 1:51 pm]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-U