Federal Update
By David Walrath
Dave Walrath, SSDA Legislative Advocate, attended the National Rural Education Advocacy Coalition meeting, of which SSDA is a founding member, on January 28 in Washington, D.C. The Coalition’s purpose is to advocate on federal issues affecting rural school districts.
Dave met with the following:
- Representatives from Senators Edward Kennedy and Michael Enzi’s offices, the Senate Health Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chair and Ranking Member;
- Representatives from Bill Kildee and Buck McKeon’s offices from the House of Representatives. Representative Kildee is the Chair of the subcommittee that will be reviewing the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Representative McKeon is the Ranking Member on the House Education and Labor Committee where NCLB will be reauthorized;
- Representatives from Senator Roberts’ office and other Senate offices regarding the reauthorization of NCLB and rural issues; and
- Representatives from the United States Department of Education on the Rural Education Achievement Program.
The points SSDA made were focused on the need for flexibility in determining highly qualified teachers. We proposed alternative performance measures, other than simply college coursework, such as peer review and certification of skills. SSDA recommended that more of the program funding allocations be by formula rather than competitive grant with small district minimums. We strongly advocated that Title 1 formulas need to be redone and moved to use free and reduced priced meals or some other poverty measure, rather than the current census data which are flawed.
The Title 1 formulas need to be changed so most of the money does not simply go to large districts while excluding smaller districts and that there needs to be small district minimum Title 1 allocations.
Dave made the same comments on technology regarding the need for more money, allocation by formula, and small school district minimums.
There was a lot of discussion regarding accountability; SSDA advocated for growth models that included smoothing to reflect the small sample sizes.
In all areas of accountability, we supported the concept of a more nuanced program improvement identification and intervention process. Districts and schools which are not meeting any of their goals should be treated differently than those districts meeting almost all of their goals. If there are 20 different goals and a district meets 16, that’s an 80% score – a passing score – and should be treated as a passing score rather than as a failing score for missing four goals.
Finally, we discussed issues ensuring continuation of funding for the Forest Reserve schools and reimbursement from the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid for home-to-school transportation and administrative costs for medical services to special education students from low-income families.
