[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 204 (Friday, October 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54795-54800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25600]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

RIN 1810-AB09


Race to the Top Fund

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.395C.
AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of public meetings and request for input to gather 
technical

[[Page 54796]]

expertise pertaining to a possible Race to the Top program, and provide 
technical assistance for the development and implementation of high-
quality assessments based on common standards.

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

SUMMARY: By March 2010, the Secretary of Education (Secretary) intends 
to announce a competition for a program that would support one or more 
consortia of States that are working toward jointly developing and 
implementing common, high-quality assessments aligned with a 
consortium's common set of K-12 standards that are internationally 
benchmarked and that build toward college and career readiness by the 
time of high school completion. To inform the design of this program 
and the development of a notice inviting applications that establishes 
the requirements for this competition, and to provide technical 
assistance to States, the Secretary is seeking input from States, 
technical experts, and members of the public through public meetings 
and written submissions. Following the public meetings and review of 
the written submissions, the Department intends to publish a notice 
inviting applications for such a competition.

DATES: Public meetings will be held on the dates and at the locations 
specified later in this notice. Written submissions must be received by 
the Department on or before 5:00 p.m., Eastern time, on Wednesday, 
December 2, 2009.

ADDRESSES: For those submitting written input, we encourage submissions 
by e-mail using the following address: 
[email protected]. You must include the term ``Race 
to the Top Assessment Program'' in the subject line of your e-mail. If 
you prefer to send your input by mail, address it to Office of 
Elementary and Secondary Education, Attention: Race to the Top 
Assessment Program--Public Input Meetings, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3E108, Washington, DC 20202.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. Department of Education, 400 
Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3E108, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: 202-
453-7246 or by e-mail: [email protected].
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the 
Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: The Race to the Top Fund, authorized under the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), Public Law 111-5, 
provides $4.35 billion for competitive grants to States to encourage 
and reward States that are creating the conditions for education 
innovation and reform; implementing ambitious plans in the four 
education reform areas described in the ARRA; and achieving significant 
improvement in student outcomes, including making substantial gains in 
student achievement, closing achievement gaps, improving high school 
graduation rates, and ensuring student preparation for success in 
college and careers.
    The Department is considering implementing two separate programs 
under the Race to the Top Fund. The first, a general program, will be 
announced later this Fall through a notice inviting applications and 
notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection 
criteria. Under this general program, the Department will award 
approximately $4 billion to State applicants that have demonstrated 
that they have created certain conditions for reform and for increased 
student achievement and propose to develop and implement comprehensive 
reform strategies that are integrated across the four ARRA education 
reform areas.
    Through this notice, we are seeking input on a second proposed 
program (Assessment Program), which would provide for approximately 
$350 million in grants to consortia of States for the development of 
common, high-quality assessments aligned with an applicant consortium's 
common set of K-12 standards that are internationally benchmarked and 
that build toward college and career readiness by the time of high 
school completion. In addition, at least 50 percent of the award to 
States under this proposed competition must be used to provide 
subgrants to local educational agencies (LEAs), including public 
charter schools identified as LEAs under State law, based upon LEAs' 
relative shares of funding under Part A of Title I of the Elementary 
and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA).
    At a later date and depending upon the input from the public 
meetings and written submissions described in this notice, the 
Secretary intends to issue a notice inviting applications for a 
competition for this second program that will set forth the 
requirements and criteria for the submission of applications. If the 
Secretary determines that it is not feasible to conduct this second 
program, the $350 million designated for this program will revert to 
fund additional grants under the general Race to the Top program.
    Because requirements for an assessment program are highly 
technical, the Department wishes to solicit input from assessment 
experts, directors of large-scale assessment programs, States, other 
key stakeholders, and members of the public to inform the design and 
development of this program, including the notice inviting applications 
and to provide technical assistance to States. Therefore, the 
Department will hold a series of public meetings at which invited 
experts and members of the public will have the opportunity to provide 
input, as well as the opportunity to submit written input. Should we 
decide to implement this Assessment Program by holding a competition, 
we do not intend to conduct notice and comment rulemaking. Section 
437(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions Act, 20 U.S.C. 
1232(d)(1), allows the Department to waive rulemaking for the first 
grant competition under a new or substantially revised program 
authority. This would be the first competition for an Assessment 
Program under the Race to the Top Fund.
    In addition to informing the design and development of the 
potential competition and the notice inviting applications, the 
Department anticipates that these meetings will also enable both the 
Department and States to learn more about the design, development, and 
implementation of high-quality assessments and will support State 
consortia in developing the highest-quality proposals with the greatest 
likelihood of impact. We anticipate that States, in particular, will 
acquire critical knowledge about best practices in assessments, and 
then be able to employ that knowledge in developing their applications 
and in designing high-quality assessments.

Details of Public Meetings

Structure of Public Meetings

    The Department anticipates that each meeting will have two 
components as follows:
    (1) Input from invited panels of experts and stakeholders:
    [cir] Each meeting will have an invited set of panelists who will 
have a set amount of time to respond individually to the questions in 
this notice.
    [cir] The Department representatives will then ask questions of 
individual panelists and facilitate cross-panelist discussion.
    (2) Open opportunity to share input:
    [cir] Each meeting will have 60 to 90 minutes dedicated to 
opportunities for interested members of the public, who

[[Page 54797]]

have registered to speak, to respond to the questions in this notice.
    [cir] Each individual scheduled to speak will have 5 minutes to 
provide oral input.
    [cir] Written submissions will also be accepted as described in the 
``Submission of Written Input'' section.

Each meeting will likely focus on a particular topic as indicated in 
the next section. The Department will share any updates, including 
posting additional questions, online at http://www.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-assessment.index.html.

Topic Areas, Dates, Times, Locations, and Registration Information

    The public meetings will occur on the following dates at the times 
and locations indicated below.

 Topic Area: General Assessment:
    [cir] Thursday, November 12; in Boston, MA; at the Embassy Suites 
Boston at Logan Airport, 207 Porter Street, Boston, MA; from 10 a.m. to 
5 p.m.
    [cir] Tuesday, November 17; in Atlanta, GA; at the Atlanta Airport 
Marriott, 4711 Best Road, Atlanta, GA; from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    [cir] Tuesday, December 1; in Denver, CO; at the Grand Hyatt 
Denver, 1750 Welton Street, Denver, CO; from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
 Topic Area: High School Assessments:
    [cir] Friday, November 13; in Boston, MA; at the Embassy Suites 
Boston at Logan Airport, 207 Porter Street, Boston, MA; from 1:30 p.m. 
to 5 p.m.
 Topic Area: Assessment of Students with Disabilities:
    [cir] Wednesday, November 18; in Atlanta, GA; at the Atlanta 
Airport Marriott, 4711 Best Road, Atlanta, GA; from 9 a.m. to 12:30 
p.m.
 Topic Area: Assessment of English Language Learners:
    [cir] Wednesday, December 2; in Denver, CO; at the Grand Hyatt 
Denver, 1750 Welton Street, Denver, CO; from 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
 Topic Area: Technology and Innovation in Assessment:
    [cir] Friday, November 13; in Boston, MA; at the Embassy Suites 
Boston at Logan Airport, 207 Porter Street, Boston, MA; from 9 p.m. to 
12:30 p.m.
    Attendance: If you are interested in attending an event, you must 
register by sending an e-mail to [email protected]. You 
must include in the subject line of your email the city in which you 
wish to attend, and the date(s) on which you wish to attend. 
Registrations will be processed on a first-come, first-served basis 
with space reserved for State participants.
    Providing input: If you are interested in speaking during the open 
input portion of the meeting, you must register by sending an e-mail to 
[email protected]. You must include in the subject 
line of your email the word ``Speaker'', the city in which you wish to 
speak, and the topic area to which you wish to respond. Registrations 
will be processed on a first-come, first-served basis. People who are 
unable to attend a meeting in person or who do not register early 
enough to speak during the meeting are encouraged to submit written 
input.

Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities at the Public Meetings

    The meeting sites will be accessible to individuals with 
disabilities and sign language interpreters will be available. If you 
need an auxiliary aid or service other than a sign language interpreter 
to participate in the meeting (e.g., interpreting service such as oral, 
cued speech, or tactile interpreter; assisted listening device; or 
materials in alternate format), notify the contact person listed under 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT at least two weeks before the scheduled 
meeting date. Although we will attempt to meet a request we receive 
after this date, we may not be able to make available the requested 
auxiliary aid or service because of insufficient time to arrange it.

Submission of Written Input

    All interested parties, including those who cannot attend a meeting 
or from whom we do not have time to hear at a meeting, may submit 
written input in response to this notice.
    Written input will be accepted at the meeting site or via e-mail 
and mail at the addresses listed in the ADDRESSES section of this 
notice. Written input must be submitted by the date listed in the DATES 
section.
    When submitting input at the meetings, we request that you submit 
three written copies and an electronic file (CD or diskette) of your 
statement at the meeting. Please include your name and contact 
information on the written and electronic files.
    Both at the meetings and in your written submission, we encourage 
you to be as specific as possible. To ensure that your input is fully 
considered, we urge you to identify clearly the specific question, 
purpose, and characteristic that each of your suggestions addresses and 
to arrange your submission in the order of the questions listed later 
in this notice. Please also include a description of your involvement, 
if any, in statewide assessment practices.

Sharing Input Publicly

    The Department is committed to gathering and sharing publicly the 
input from the meetings and written submissions. Each meeting will be 
video-taped and/or transcribed, and the video and/or transcript will be 
available for viewing at http://www.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-assessment.index.html. All written input received will be available for 
viewing via this Web site, as well.

Assessment Program Design and Questions

    The Assessment Program is intended to support consortia of States 
working toward jointly developing and implementing a next generation of 
common summative assessments that are aligned with a common set of 
kindergarten-through-grade-12 internationally benchmarked, college and 
career ready standards that model and support effective teaching and 
student learning. Such summative assessments would allow students, 
including students with disabilities and English language learners, to 
demonstrate at each grade level tested their mastery of knowledge and 
skills and the extent to which each student is on track to college and 
career readiness by the time of high school graduation.
    In designing the requirements for this program, the Secretary is 
particularly interested in innovative and effective approaches to 
assessment that will assist States in creating powerful and useful 
systems of assessment that meet these requirements.
    In the following paragraphs, we have provided a framework that 
outlines the characteristics we believe should be required or 
encouraged in assessment systems supported by a grant under this 
proposed program. We then list the specific questions on which we seek 
input, taking into account this framework. In addition, at least 50 
percent of the award to States under any Race to the Top competition 
must be used to provide subgrants to local educational agencies (LEAs), 
including public charter schools identified as LEAs under State law, 
based upon LEAs' relative shares of funding under Part A of Title I of 
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). 
This notice also highlights potential uses and questions for the LEA 
portion of the funding.
    It is important to note that this proposed program, the public 
meetings,

[[Page 54798]]

and the framework below would focus on the design and quality of 
assessment systems and not accountability policies, such as those 
described in section 1116 of the ESEA. Given the pending 
reauthorization of the ESEA, we intend that the Assessment Program 
would support the development of the best possible assessments that 
could be not only appropriately used by States under the current ESEA 
assessment and accountability requirements, but could also serve 
additional purposes as outlined later in this notice.

Framework

Design of Assessment Systems--General Requirements

    The Department is particularly interested in supporting the 
development of summative assessments that measure--
     Individual student achievement as measured against 
standards that build toward college and career readiness by the time of 
high school completion;
     Individual student growth (that is, the change in student 
achievement data for an individual student between two or more points 
in time); and
     The extent to which each individual student is on track, 
at each grade level tested, toward college or career readiness by the 
time of high school completion.
    At a minimum, we would expect that the common assessments would 
measure each of these elements in the subject areas of reading/language 
arts and mathematics, and would provide information for each student 
annually in grades 3 through 8, and provide information at the high 
school level about each student's college and/or career readiness. The 
assessments need not be limited to a single end-of-year assessment but 
could include multiple summative components administered at different 
points during the school year. Moreover, the assessments might be 
viewed as replacing rather than adding to the assessments currently in 
use in States participating in the consortia.
    Information gathered from the assessments should be useable in 
informing--
     Teaching, learning, and program improvement;
     Determinations of school effectiveness;
     Determinations of principal and teacher effectiveness to 
inform evaluation and the provision of support to teachers and 
principals; and
     Determinations of individual student college and career 
readiness, such as determinations made for high school exit decisions, 
college course placement in credit-bearing classes, or college 
entrance.

Design of Assessment Systems--Required Characteristics

    With respect to the design of the assessment system, the Department 
would likely require that the assessments, at a minimum, meet the 
following characteristics:
    (1) Reflect and support good instructional practice by eliciting 
complex responses and demonstrations of knowledge and skills consistent 
with the goal of being college and career ready by the time of high 
school completion;
    (2) Be accessible to the broadest possible range of students, with 
appropriate accommodations for students with disabilities and English 
language learners;
    (3) Contain varied and unpredictable item types and content 
sampling, so as not to create incentives for inappropriate test 
preparation and curriculum narrowing;
    (4) Produce results that can be aggregated at the classroom, 
school, LEA, and State levels;
    (5) Produce reports that are relevant, actionable, timely, 
accurate, and displayed in ways that are clear and understandable for 
target audiences, including teachers, students and their families, 
schools, LEAs, communities, States, institutions of higher education, 
policymakers, researchers, and others;
    (6) Make effective and appropriate use of technology;
    (7) Be valid, reliable, and fair;
    (8) Be appropriately secure for the intended purposes;
    (9) Have the fastest possible turnaround time on scoring, without 
forcing the use of lower-quality assessment items; and
    (10) Be able to be maintained, administered, and scored at a cost 
that is sustainable over time.

Design of Assessment Systems--Desired Characteristics

    In addition, the Department is particularly interested in 
assessment systems in which--
    (1) Teachers are involved in scoring of constructed responses and 
performance tasks in order to measure effectively students' mastery of 
higher-order content and skills and to build teacher expertise and 
understanding of performance expectations;
    (2) The assessment approach can be easily adapted to include 
summative assessments in other content areas (e.g., science, social 
studies) in the future;
    (3) The technology ``platform'' created for summative assessments 
supports assessment and item development, administration, scoring, and 
reporting that increases the quality and cost-effectiveness of 
assessments; and
    (4) The technology infrastructure created for summative assessments 
can be easily adapted to support practitioners and professionals in the 
development, administration, and/or scoring of high-quality interim 
assessments.

Design of Assessment Systems--LEA-Level Activities

    With funds that are directed to LEAs under this program, the 
Department is interested in supporting LEA-level activities that are 
designed by the State consortium to support development and 
implementation of its assessment system. With respect to LEA-level 
funds, the Department would likely require that the funds be used to 
support the following types of activities conducted by LEAs that choose 
to participate:
     Pilot testing of the new assessments with different 
populations, including English-language learners and students with 
disabilities;
     Designing systems to support and enable effective and 
consistent teacher scoring, providing professional development support 
for these activities, and implementing them statewide;
     Statewide transition to the consortium's K-12 common, 
college and career ready, internationally benchmarked standards, with 
new high-quality assessments (consistent with the State plans described 
in the notice of proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and 
selection criteria for the Race to the Top Fund general program (74 FR 
37804, July 29, 2009). Such LEA activities might include: developing a 
rollout plan for implementation of the standards and assessments 
together with all of their supporting components; developing or 
acquiring, disseminating, and implementing high-quality instructional 
materials and assessments; developing or acquiring and delivering high-
quality professional development to support the transition to new 
standards and assessments; and engaging in other strategies that 
translate the standards and information from assessments into classroom 
practice for all students; and
     Development of formative or interim assessments that align 
with State summative assessments as part of a comprehensive assessment 
system.

Questions for Input

    The specific questions on which the Department seeks input are 
listed

[[Page 54799]]

below. All input, including expert presentations and discussions, 
public input, and written submissions, should be primarily focused on 
responding to these questions in the context of the framework outlined 
above, and may also provide input on the framework itself. We encourage 
you to make your input as specific as possible, to provide evidence to 
support your proposals, and to present the information in a context and 
format that will be helpful to States implementing high-quality 
assessments. Questions focus on the topics of general assessment, high 
school assessment, assessment of English language learners, assessment 
of students with disabilities, technology and innovation in assessment, 
specific technical assessment questions, and project management.
    To ensure that your input is fully considered in the development of 
the notice inviting applications, we urge you to identify clearly the 
specific question, purpose, or characteristic that you are addressing, 
and to arrange your input in the order of the questions as they are 
listed in the next section.

General Assessment Questions

    (1) Propose an assessment system (that is, a series of one or more 
assessments) that you would recommend and that meets the general 
requirements and required characteristics described in this notice. 
Describe how this assessment system would address the tensions or 
tradeoffs in meeting all of the general requirements and required 
characteristics. Describe the strengths and limitations of your 
recommended system, including the extent to which it is able to validly 
meet each of the requirements described in this notice. Where possible, 
provide specific illustrative examples.
    (2) For each assessment proposed in response to question (1), 
describe the--

     Optimal design, including--
    [cir] Type (e.g., norm-referenced, criterion-referenced, adaptive, 
other);
    [cir] Frequency, length, and timing of assessment administrations 
(including a consideration of the value of student, teacher, and 
administrative time);
    [cir] Format, item-type specifications (including the pros and cons 
of using different types of items for different purposes), and mode of 
administration;
    [cir] Whether and how the above answers might differ for different 
grade levels and content areas;
     Administration, scoring, and interpretation of any open-
ended item types, including methods for ensuring consistency in teacher 
scoring;
     Approach to releasing assessment items during each 
assessment cycle in order to ensure public access to the assessment 
questions; and
     Technology and other resources needed to develop, 
administer, and score the assessments, and/or report results.
    (3) ARRA requires that States award at least 50 percent of their 
Race to the Top funds to LEAs. The section of this notice entitled 
Design of Assessment Systems--LEA-Level Activities, describes how LEAs 
might be required to use these funds. What activities at the LEA level 
would best advance the transition to and implementation of the 
consortium's common, college and career ready standards and 
assessments?
    (4) If a goal is that teachers are involved in the scoring of 
constructed responses and performance tasks in order to measure 
effectively students' mastery of higher-order content and skills and to 
build teacher expertise and understanding of performance expectations, 
how can such assessments be administered and scored in the most time-
efficient and cost-effective ways?
    (5) Given the assessment design you proposed in response to 
question (1), what is your recommended approach to competency-based 
student testing versus grade-level-based student testing? Why? How 
would your design ensure high expectations for all students?
    (6) Given the assessment design you proposed in response to 
question (1), how would you recommend that the assessments be designed, 
timed, and scored to provide the most useful information on teacher and 
principal effectiveness?

Specific Technical Assessment Questions

    (1) What is the best technical approach for ensuring the vertical 
alignment of the entire assessment system across grades (e.g., grades 3 
through 8 and high school)?
    (2) What would be the best technical approach for ensuring external 
validity of such an assessment system, particularly as it relates to 
postsecondary readiness and high-quality internationally benchmarked 
content standards?
    (3) What is the proportion of assessment questions that you 
recommend releasing each testing cycle in order to ensure public access 
to the assessment while minimizing linking risk? \1\ What are the 
implications of this proportion for the costs of developing new 
assessment questions and for the costs and design of linking studies 
across time?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Michael J. Kolen and Robert L. Brennan, Test Equating, 
Scaling, and Linking: Methods and Practices (2nd ed), 2004, New 
York: Springer-Verlag. See especially: Chapter 6, ``Item Response 
Theory Methods,'' Section 9, ``Using IRT Calibrated Item Pools''; 
and Chapter 8, ``Practical Issues in Equating,'' Section 1, 
``Equating and the Test Development Process'' and Section 6, 
``Conditions Conducive to Satisfactory Equating.''
    See also Hedges, L. V., and Vevea, J. L. (1997). A study of 
equating in NAEP. http://www.air.org/publications/documents/hedges_rpt.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

High School Assessment

    Provide recommendations on the optimal approach to measuring each 
student's college and career readiness by the time of high school 
completion. In particular, consider--
    (1) How would you demonstrate that high school students are on 
track to college and career readiness, and at what points throughout 
high school would you recommend measuring this?

Discuss your recommendations on the use of end-of-course assessments 
versus comprehensive assessments of college and career readiness.

    Note: If you recommend end-of-course assessments, please share 
your input on how to reconcile the fact that college and career 
ready standards might not include all of the topics typically 
covered in today's high school courses.

Assessment of English Language Learners

    (1) Provide recommendations for the development and administration 
of assessments for each content area that are valid and reliable for 
English language learners. How would you recommend that the assessments 
take into account the variations in English language proficiency of 
students in a manner that enables them to demonstrate their knowledge 
and skills in core academic areas? Innovative assessment designs and 
uses of technology have the potential to be inclusive of more students. 
How would you propose we take this into account?
    (2) In the context of reflecting student achievement, what are the 
relative merits of developing and administering content assessments in 
native languages? What are the technical, logistical, and financial 
requirements?

Assessment of Students With Disabilities

    (1) Taking into account the diversity of students with disabilities 
who take the assessments, provide recommendations for the development

[[Page 54800]]

and administration of assessments for each content area that are valid 
and reliable, and that enable students to demonstrate their knowledge 
and skills in core academic areas. Innovative assessment designs and 
uses of technology have the potential to be inclusive of more students. 
How would you propose we take this into account?

Technology & Innovation in Assessment

    (1) Propose how you would recommend that different innovative 
technologies be deployed to create better assessments, and why. Please 
include illustrative examples in areas such as novel item types, 
constructed response scoring solutions, uses of mobile computing 
devices, and so on.
    (2) We envision the need for a technology platform for assessment 
development, administration, scoring, and reporting that increases the 
quality and cost-effectiveness of the assessments. Describe your 
recommendations for the functionality such a platform could and should 
offer.
    (3) How would you create this technology platform for summative 
assessments such that it could be easily adapted to support 
practitioners and professionals in the development, administration, 
and/or scoring of high-quality interim assessments?
    (4) For the technology ``platform'' vision you have proposed, 
provide estimates of the associated development and ongoing maintenance 
costs, including your calculations and assumptions behind them.

Project Management

    (1) Provide estimates of the development, maintenance, and 
administration costs of the assessment system you propose, and your 
calculations and assumptions behind them.
    (2) Describe the range of development and implementation timelines 
for your proposed assessment system, from the most aggressive to more 
conservative, and describe the actions that would be required to 
achieve each option.
    (3) How would you recommend organizing a consortium to achieve 
success in developing and implementing the proposed assessment system? 
What role(s) do you recommend for third parties (e.g., conveners, 
project managers, assessment developers/partners, intermediaries)? What 
would you recommend that a consortium demonstrate to show that it has 
the capacity to implement the proposed plan?
    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this 
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, 
audiotape, or computer diskette) on request to the program contact 
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Electronic Access to This Document: You can view this document, as 
well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal 
Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the 
Internet at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.
    To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available 
free at this site. If you have questions about using 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.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html.


    Dated: October 20, 2009.
Arne Duncan,
Secretary of Education.
[FR Doc. E9-25600 Filed 10-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P