Legislative Action Team Advisory

Use This New LAT Blog Link!

2008-12-16T13:13:00.000-05:00

From now on click this new link for the latest and best LAT news and issues:

http://sites.google.com/site/iralatupdate/

Legislative Update November 7, 2008

2008-11-07T11:21:00.000-05:00

In this issue:

IRA Letter to President-Elect Obama
New Regulations Finalized for NCLB
Changes at ED re: Title III
Issues Early 2009: Audio Call November 18, 8 PM EST

IRA Letter to President-Elect Obama to Emphasize Professional Development

The IRA board of directors approved sending a letter to the president-elect. Linda Gambrell chairs the letter-drafting committee that includes Jay S. Blanchard, William T. Hammond, Marsha E. Lewis, Maryann M. Manning, James E. Newkirk, Brenda J. Overturf, Ray Reutzel, and advisor Richard C. Anderson. Staff members on the committee are Alan Farstrup, Richard Long, Cathy Roller, and Barbara Tierney. The Legislative Action Team supplied input via the September 2008 survey. Look for an article outlining survey responses in the November 2008 Reading Today.

Recommendation to President-Elect: Emphasize Professional Development.
Professional development is one of many tools a teacher should have access to with the goal of helping all of their students. Not all teachers need a massive amount of professional development. Target date to send the letter: mid-November. We will send the letter to the Legislative Action Team (LAT) when it is released. It will also be posted on the LAT blog at http://www.latadvisory.blogspot.com/.

New Regulations Governing Title I of NCLB

On October 29th, 2008 the U.S. Department of Education (US ED) issued new regulations governing parts of Title I of No Child Left Behind. Among the key elements: graduation requirements, growth models, supplemental education services, public school choice, and school improvement. For a copy of the regulations and a summary from US ED: http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2008/10/10282008.html

These regulations are over 400 pages long and take effect on December 1, 2008. The graduation rate requirement will hold schools accountable for dropouts and others who do not graduate from high school with a regular diploma. Schools must have written confirmation that the student has enrolled in another school or educational program that culminates in a regular high school diploma. The schools can also use a separate formula (other than the primary four-year formula) to reflect that some students need more than four years to graduate. The regulations also cover areas such as when buildings don’t need to withhold 20% of their Title I Part A funds for Supplemental Education Services (SES) and public school choice. The regulations outline how a building can reallocate their 20% obligation and also what the penalty is for claiming that they don’t need these monies but later find they need them for SES and/or public school choice.

While the U.S. Department of Education claims that many of these regulations reflect a new state of practice in implementing NCLB, others see that the new regulations will require a significant amount of time to implement. It is possible that the new Congress or Administration may make changes in the coming year. How likely this is to happen is hard to tell since many in Congress did not publicly raise any issues when comments were solicited at the notice of proposed rule making in April 2008.

Changes at US ED and Title III

In June 2008, the U.S. Department of Education (US ED) announced that it would change the program monitoring of Title III of NCLB. Title III is the section of NCLB that provides funds to those schools which apply and meet the criteria to provide English language acquisition programs to students who are ELLs.

U.S. ED hopes to better coordinate both monitoring visits and how different facets of NCLB are integrated. However, some are worried that the ELL program may lose emphasis - either by a funding cut or by a loss of leadership at the U.S. Department of Education. While the monitoring function has shifted to Title I, the Office of English Language Acquisition will still be doing policy work.

On October 2, 2008, U.S. ED sent a policy letter to the Chief State School Officer of each state outlining U.S. ED’s concerns around the use of funds for assessment programs and how they are –– or are not –– impacted by the supplement/not supplant requirements. The letter outlined how some schools are using federal funds to conduct assessments and points out that this is a local responsibility. The federal funds are designed to be used in addition to the local funds –– and not to replace the local funds.

Issues in Early 2009: Audio Call Nov. 18, 8 PM EST

The new president will face a wide range of challenges. He will create and submit a new budget shortly after he takes office, and deal with the funding for the current fiscal year. (Funding runs out in early March for most government agencies.) The new president and Congress will allocate resources and either change the funding plan for the balance of the fiscal year - or simply allow for the old policy to be maintained. Few expect that the old funding plan will simply be extended.

Audio call: “What Is the Likely Education Agenda for President Obama?” – Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 8 PM EST. For more information contact btierney@reading.org.

I:\GR IRA\monthly updates\November 7 2008.doc

June 25-27, 2009 Legislative Workshop

2008-11-05T15:59:00.000-05:00

Save the Date!
International Reading Association
2009 Government Relations Workshop
June 25-27, 2009
Washington, DC

Ø Strengthen your advocacy efforts
Ø Actively impact legislation such as the reauthorization of NCLB
Ø Learn about federal and state legislative issues
Ø Directly communicate with your congressional leaders or their staffs

Fully refundable $50.00 registration fee required. (Refunded upon notification of cancellation or when attending the conference. This policy is to provide an accurate meal count to IRA. IRA provides breakfast and working lunch on Friday, June 26th.) All expenses (transportation, lodging, food, and entertainment) are responsibility of workshop attendees. (Many participants get funding from their state councils.)

Hotel rooms: We have a block of rooms at the luxurious Liaison Capitol Hill for a bargain $189 a night (single or double). You must call to book your own reservation:
The Liaison Capitol Hill
415 New Jersey Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001T: 202-434-0121/F: 202-347-1813

Questions? 202-624-8800 or irawash@reading.org

Updates: www.reading.org

We look forward to seeing you in June 2009!

Final Regulations for Title I

2008-10-28T12:05:00.001-04:00

U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings, on October 28, 2008, announced final regulations to strengthen and clarify No Child Left Behind (NCLB), focusing on improved accountability and transparency, uniform and disaggregated graduation rates and improved parental notification for Supplemental Education Services and public school choice.

This is a pre-publication copy of the final regulations for Title I. The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. This document will be published in the Federal Register on October 29, 2008.

http://federalregister.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2008-25270_PI.pdf

Audio Conference: Impact of New Regulations for NCLB

2008-10-27T14:52:00.000-04:00

Audio Conference: Impact of New Regulations for NCLB
October 29, 7:30 pm EDT

How will the new regulations to NCLB impact education in 2009?
Join Richard Long, IRA Director of Government Relations, as he discusses the impact of new regulations for NCLB that will effect NCLB's cell size calculations, use of growth models, graduation rates and other parts of NCLB.

This will be a free service, but registration is limited.

Register by Tuesday, October 28 (the day the new regulations are being announced) with btierney@reading.org to receive the call-in number and a Power Point set of slides that will be sent 10/29. Dr. Long will brief callers for 20 minutes and then answer questions.
E-mail concise questions in advance to btierney@reading.org. (We cannot guarantee that all questions will be answered during the call. We will try to answer all questions by e-mail.) Include your name and affiliation when posting your questions.
__________________________________________________________________________________________If Listen in to the US Department of Education's briefing on the new regulations-- sign up for one of these services:

1) IN-PERSON BRIEFING
When: Tuesday, October 28, 2:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m. ET
Where: U.S. Department of Education's Auditorium (400 Maryland Ave.,S.W., Washington, D.C.)
Deputy Secretary Ray Simon, Assistant Secretary for Elementary andSecondary Education Kerri Briggs, and Assistant Deputy Secretary forInnovation and Improvement
RSVPs are not required.

2) CONFERENCE CALL
When: Tuesday, October 28, 3:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m. ET
Phone #: 1-800-779-8307
Passcode: EDUCATION
Deputy Secretary Ray Simon, Assistant Secretary for Elementary andSecondary Education Kerri Briggs, and Assistant Deputy Secretary forInnovation and Improvement
Again, RSVPs are not required.

3) LIVE WEBCAST
When: Thursday, October 30, 1:00 p.m.-2:00 p.m. ET
Senior Department officials will host this event. More details to follow.

<http://www.ed.gov/>http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2008/10/10282008.html.

Election Education Issues

2008-10-23T13:50:00.001-04:00

Candidates Differ on Key Issues for Principals

NASSP has a new website section that showcases responses from the Obama and McCain campaigns to a recent presidential questionnaire on pressing school reform issues.

To view the questionnaire and responses, visit www.principals.org/s_nassp/sec.asp?CID=1621&DID=58461.

NASSP asked the education advisers to the presidential candidates to weigh in on issues that would affect you and your school. Along with the candidates’ positions on each issue, the advisers were asked to submit quotes or links to verbiage that support that position. The following documents contain their verbatim responses.

Documents
No Child Left Behind and Adequate Yearly Progress
Federal Education Funding and Professional Development
National Standards and Graduation Rates
Addressing the Dropout Crisis
Literacy and Numeracy
School Safety, Charter Schools, and Vouchers

The National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP) is a non-partisan 501(c)(3) organization that does not endorse, support, advocate for, or encourage people to vote for any political candidate or party. The information provided on the 2008 presidential candidates does not reflect the opinion of or endorsement by NASSP.

Webcast Archive: Education and the Next President

Register to view the archive of this Webcast now.
View “Education and the Next President,” a live debate that took place at Teachers College, Columbia University, between

Linda Darling-Hammond, education adviser to Barack Obama, and

Lisa Graham Keegan, education adviser to John McCain.

The event was exclusively Webcast by edweek.org. Campaign '08 Coverage: See Education Week's continuing coverage and interactive resources of the 2008 presidential campaign to learn more about where the two candidates and their running mates stand on education. Also read the edweek.org blog, Campaign K-12, for more analysis of the candidates' views. -->Register for the Archived Webcast now. Read the Full Transcript

http://www.edweek.org/ew/marketplace/webinars/webcast_ed_next_president_transcript.html

Education and the Election Tuesday 10/21 7pm est

2008-10-20T13:50:00.000-04:00

Education and the Election
Two must-see events on edweek.org --
Live Debate: Education and the Next President
Exclusive webcast, Tuesday, October 21, 7 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Eastern time.
Live from Teachers College, Columbia University: "Education and the Next President," a debate between Linda Darling-Hammond, education adviser to Democratic nominee Barack Obama, and Lisa Graham Keegan, education adviser to Republican nominee John McCain.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/collections/campaign08/index.html
Register now to watch the live debate at
https://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/EventLobbyServlet?target=registration.jsp&eventid=122206&sessionid=1&key=F133A5219746027376C0662466473BDD&sourcepage=register

****************************
Analyzing the Election: What’s at Stake for Schools?
Check back here (http://www.edweek.org/ew/collections/campaign08/index.html)
on Wednesday, Oct. 22, noon Eastern time for a post-debate discussion with leading education analysts, moderated by Education Week's David Hoff.
Available online Wednesday, Oct. 22, 12 p.m. Eastern time
Education Week’s David J. Hoff moderates a post-debate discussion with leading education analysts.

2008-10-01T13:29:00.002-04:00

International Reading Association

Monday, September 29, 2008

Legislative Action Team Legislative Update
IRA Washington Office
irawash@reading.org
(202) 624-8800

Legislative Workshop
June 25 – 27, 2009

Overview

>Funding
>Revised Americans with Disabilities Act
>Recently enacted Higher Education Act’s impact on reading
>New National Technical Council.
>Looking ahead

Funding

The Congress, while working on the finance bailout bill, passed and sent to the president a massive continuing resolution bill that rolled together 12 appropriations bills to fund the government for FY 2009 from October 1st to March 6th. While the Congress did deal with a Pell Grant shortfall, almost everything else was left at last year’s levels. This means that the increases proposed during the summer for Title I Part A and IDEA were not realized. Equally, the zeroing out of Reading First was not enacted either. However, the money for many K-12 education programs are forward funded, which means the money being talked about now will not be sent to the schools until July 1st. Thus the new Congress and new president will have to set the spending levels early next year.

In addition, a supplemental stimulus package that included money for school construction failed to be enacted. The $ 700 billion bailout package will also have an impact on education funding. During the Sunday September 28, 2008 edition of Meet the Press, the chief strategist for Senator Obama said that if elected the new president would be looking for programs that failed and cut them, and he cited the president’s reading program.

Revised Americans with Disabilities Act

Reading and the new ADA:
On September 11, 2008 Congress passed the ADA Amendments Act (S.3406) which greatly expands the number of individuals covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA Amendments Act suggests changes for Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 which prohibits discrimination for individuals with disabilities by organizations, such as schools, that receive federal funding. President Bush is expected sign the law and the Act will go into effect January 1, 2009.

There is a small group of students with health or cognitive problems who might be covered by Section 504 protections, but are not eligible under IDEA. Examples of pupils who might need a “504 plan” are students with diabetes who need accommodations to maintain proper blood-sugar levels, or students with ADHD who may need more time to complete tests.

S.3406 protects the rights of children to be eligible under 504, just as adults would be under the ADA. The Act includes provisions to protect schools against inappropriate disability claims. S.3406 will not cause schools to face any major changes in determining IDEA eligibility. Two main factors play into eligibility. First, is there a physical or mental impairment? Second, does that physical or mental impairment substantially limit one or more major life activities? While the regulations provide no definition of a “substantial limitation”, the LEAs are to define the phrase and may look to the ADA for guidance.

Some of the significant changes under The ADA Amendments Act include:
> The Act expands the definition of “major life activities” to specifically include such things as standing, lifting, bending, reading and concentrating, along with performing manual tasks, thinking, working, caring for oneself, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, speaking, breathing, learning, and communicating.
> Under the Act, an individual will be considered disabled if the individual is substantially limited in a major life activity in his unmedicated state even though the limitations may be corrected by medication.
> An individual may also now be disabled even if the individual’s impairment or condition does not currently substantially limit a major life activity. Under the Act, an impairment that is episodic or in remission will be considered a disability if, when active, it would substantially limit a major life activity.

What Should Educators Do?
Schools will need to re evaluate the manner in which they determine whether a student qualifies for an accommodation or other protections under the ADA. Students who may not have been disabled under the prior law may now have protections afforded by the ADA. Under the ADA, schools must reasonably accommodate and provide modifications for their students with disabilities. Under the ADA Amendments, disability discrimination claims will now likely hinge on whether a particular duty is an essential function and whether the organization has offered a reasonable accommodation, instead of whether an individual is disabled.

The issue comes down to what it means to be "substantially limited" in the activity of reading and if the education profession will offer a way of creating standards that would then be applicable to this issue. Response to Intervention is one strategy that can help to distinguish children who are unable to read because they have a disability from those who have simply received poor instruction. The bill will prompt schools to pay more attention to reading and create an opportunity for reading professionals to create a better understanding of what students need.

Recently enacted Higher Education Act’s impact on reading

Results of IRA’s Advocacy on Literacy Training in the Higher Education Reauthorization: College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2008 (HR 4137)

The Higher Education Act was passed on July 29, 2008. While the majority of the bill is on student loans and grants as well as new accountability for institutions of higher education, IRA had a fundamental role in impacting the reading and literacy sections by having very specific language included in the process. The idea of this language was the result of an IRA board committee which drafted a set of legislative recommendations to improve professional development opportunities and programs in reading. Members of the IRA were then able to reinforce the importance of reading pre-service and in-service programs during their congressional visits at the IRA Legislative Workshop.

This advocacy resulted in several key changes in literacy training to provide additional literacy instruction for elementary and secondary teachers, principals and administrators. These changes are included in HEA’s Title II - Teacher Quality Enhancement and include:
> establishing reading as a high need area for support,
> expanding the understanding of preparation of reading teachers to include more emphasis on high need students with a well-educated teacher.

Specific Language in HEA Related To Literacy
Definitions:
Early childhood education programs will address the children's cognitive (including language, early literacy) development.
1) Literacy coaches will have teaching experience and a master's degree with a concentration in reading and writing education; will have demonstrated proficiency in teaching reading and writing in a content area; will provide professional development related to literacy; and may provide students with reading or writing diagnosis, instruction, and assessment.
2) Teacher will have the teaching skills to focus on …students with low literacy levels,
3) Teacher mentoring of new or prospective teachers will include instructional strategies for literacy instruction.

Teacher Quality Partnership Grants Program:
Teacher Quality Partnership Grants will be awarded to programs that include:
> strategies to meet the needs of students with low literacy level
> successfully employ effective strategies for reading instruction using the essential components of reading instruction;
> an evaluation plan that includes objectives and measures for increasing the percentage of such teachers who teach high-need academic subject areas (such as reading…);

Literacy Training:
Teacher Quality Partnership Grant Programs must:
> Provide reading instruction for elementary and secondary teachers and literacy coaches;
> Provide evidenced-based reading curricula aligned with State academic content standards and with postsecondary standards for reading and writing;
> Provide training for principals so they understand the teaching of reading, and
> Select mentor teachers who have skills in the essential components of reading instruction and teacher training in literacy instructional strategies across core subject areas.

Allowable use of Funds:
Partnership grant funds may be used to
> upgrade curriculum with high-quality instructional strategies for teaching reading
> develop teacher preparation programs that emphasize the essential components of reading instruction
> address early intervention strategies for students with reading difficulty
Partnership grant funds may be used by community colleges to:
> develop associate's degree programs with an emphasis on the essential components of reading instruction to train pre-service teachers, paraprofessionals, speech-language pathology assistants, and tutors to teach students with reading difficulties
> develop licensure programs for early childhood educators that emphasize the essential components of reading instruction
> address strategies for early screening and early intervention for students with reading difficulty

Next steps:
The passage of the literacy training provisions in HEA provides teacher education programs the opportunity to expand their programs for high quality reading education.

The U.S. Department of Education will seek feedback in proposing regulations for the law, including Title II which encompasses the literacy training pieces in the Teacher Quality Partnership Grants and other new grant programs, including Preparing General Education Teachers to Teach Students With Disabilities.

ED will hold hearings around the country to give the public an opportunity to comment. Those interested may also submit written comments to Wendy Macias, U.S. Department of Education, 1900 K Street N.W., Room 8017, Washington, D.C. 20006. Respondents may also e-mail comments to http://xsuite.thompson.com/SF_Module/newsletter/pr_e.cfm?m=479018.4953.1764649. Comments are due Oct. 8.

The National Technical Advisory Council

The National Technical Advisory Council has been formed by the U.S. Department of Education to advise on state standards, assessments and accountability systems. The Council will offer expert advice on such things as the use and applicability of minimum subgroup sizes for proficiency calculations, confidence intervals and the principles necessary for ensuring that performance indexes are consistent with the Title I statute and regulations. The 16 member group includes psychometricians, researchers, and past-and-present state education agency officials.

Tom Fisher, former Florida state director of testing, will chair the Council. Members will serve staggered terms, ranging from one to three years. The Council will meet twice a year and additional meetings may be called at the request of the Secretary.

The group first met in Washington DC on September 16, 2008. Proceedings from the meeting will be made available to the public on the U.S. Department of Education's Website, http://www.ed.gov/.

Looking ahead…

The US Department of Education is expected to issue new regulations governing parts of Title I sometime before November 1st. These regulations will impact states and how they determine cell sizes for AYP calculations at the local school building, graduation rates, supplemental education services and other issues related to implementation of No Child Left Behind. In addition, with the Congress setting March 6th for when a new funding bill will be needed it means that the Congress will have to decide on education spending levels for the upcoming school year.

###

Richard M. Long, Ed.D.
Director, Government Relations
International Reading Association
Suite 523
444 North Capitol Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 624-8800
(202) 624-8826 (fax)

IRA Legislative Update, August 11, 2008

2008-08-13T11:03:00.001-04:00

Overview

The Congressional session only has a few short weeks left before it ends on 26 September. During that time it is anticipated that the funding process for education will change from the appropriations process to the emergency spending plan called the continuing resolution. The first section of this report on appropriations/funding will cover these issues.

After years of delay, the Higher Education Act’s Reauthorization passed the House and Senate is now awaiting the president’s signature. While the majority of the bill is on student loans and grants as well as new accountability for institutions of higher education, there are several sections that impact reading and literacy. The second section is the Higher Education Act which will cover these points, and IRA’s role in the literacy language.

The third section will look at some possible, but unlikely action that could result in several education initiatives move through at least the House or Senate. The bill that is most likely to move is the adolescent literacy bill.

Appropriations/Funding

The Congress has partially moved the regular spending bill for the Department of Education programs. It is hung up on a number of partisan issues. The result looks to be that the appropriations process will give way to the wide-ranging continuing resolution (CR). The CR will set government spending for at least until after the first of the year, but may well go through the entire fiscal year. It will use three points as its guide posts, first what each chamber’s appropriation committee has set as their spending level by program; and it will take into account the previous year’s spending level. This means when you look at the attached chart you will notice that a handful of programs have gone up – Part A (LEA programs) of Title I and IDEA specifically, in contrast Reading First has been zeroed out.

Reading First was zeroed out after the release of the Institute for Education Sciences report on Reading First was issued in late April. The key finding was the lack of improvement in comprehension scores. This was on top of the findings by the investigative arm of the US Department of Education. The US Department of Education had changed of how Reading First is administered; but the fallout from the various reports has had a significant impact. Currently, many Congressional offices are saying that teachers are writing letters of support of Reading First and the Administration is hoping to see some money for Reading First in the CR. However, while it is possible, it is unlikely as there are no funds that haven’t been spoken for, which means to fund Reading First money will have to be taken from other programs. This isn’t likely to occur, but it is possible.

Higher Education Reauthorization: College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2008

After over four years of work, the Congress has sent to the president a rewritten higher education act. This act contains many changes to the student loan and grants program. In addition it also requires public and private institutions to make public several reports on graduation rates, retention and cost. This is in the name of accountability. Many in the higher education community are against these requirements because of their costs. IRA did not take a position on these issues.

IRA was able to have very specific language included in the process. The idea of this language was the result of board appointed committee that drafted a set of legislative recommendations to improve professional development opportunities and programs in reading. This resulted in several key areas of the Higher Education Act’s Teacher Quality Enhancement being changed. These changes included: establishing reading as a high need area for support, expanding the understanding of preparation of reading teachers to include more emphasis on high need students with a well-educated teacher. (See attachment for more specific information.) We will be providing a more detailed report on how best to use this initiative to help teacher education programs expand their offerings in the area of high quality reading education.

Movement on education bills in September?

When Congress reconvenes in September they hope to finish their work on or about September 26^th. The entire agenda will be tied up in the election. While it is highly unlikely that any additional education measures will be enacted, it isn’t impossible that one or more measures may pass one house or the other. The most likely candidate is the House version of adolescent literacy legislation, HR 2289 the Striving Readers Act of 2007. This measure has 51 co-sponsors and is supported by a wide range of groups. It was originally introduced by Congressman John Yarmuth (KY-3). There is a companion version in the Senate (S. 958) sponsored by Senators Sessions (AL) and Murray (WA) and Sessions (AL). Another possibility is the HR 1623 the Graduation for All Act sponsored by Congressman Ruben Hinojosa.

H.R.4137

College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2008 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)

`TITLE II--TEACHER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT

`SEC. 200. DEFINITIONS.

`For purposes of this title:

`(4) EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAM- The term `early childhood education program' means--

`(C) a State prekindergarten program (including a program authorized under section 619 or part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) that serves children from birth through kindergarten and that addresses the children's cognitive (including language, early literacy, and pre-numeracy), social, emotional, and physical development.

`(7) ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF READING INSTRUCTION- The term `essential components of reading instruction' has the meaning given such term in section 1208 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

`(14) LITERACY COACH- The term `literacy coach' means an individual--

`(A) who--

`(i) has teaching experience and a master's degree with a concentration in reading and writing education; and

`(ii) has demonstrated proficiency (as determined by the principal of the individual's school) in teaching reading and writing in a content area such as math, science, or social studies;

`(B) whose primary role with teachers and school personnel is--

`(i) to provide high-quality professional development opportunities for teachers and school personnel related to literacy;

`(ii) with respect to the areas of reading and writing, to collaborate with paraprofessionals, teachers, principals, and other administrators, and the community served by the school; and

`(C) who may provide students with--

`(i) reading or writing diagnosis and instruction; and

`(ii) reading and writing assessment, including assessment in cooperation with other professionals (such as special education teachers, speech and language teachers, and school psychologists).

`(18) TEACHING SKILLS- The term `teaching skills' means skills that enable a teacher to--

`(C) employ strategies grounded in the disciplines of teaching and learning that--

`(iii) focus on the identification of students' specific learning needs, particularly students with disabilities, students who are limited English proficient, students who are gifted and talented, and students with low literacy levels, and the tailoring of academic instruction to such needs;

`PART A--TEACHER QUALITY PARTNERSHIP GRANTS

`SEC. 201. PURPOSES; DEFINITIONS.

`(b) Definitions- In this part:

`(4) TEACHER MENTORING- The term `teacher mentoring' means the mentoring of new or prospective teachers through a new or established program that--

`(B) provides high-quality training for such mentors, including instructional strategies for literacy instruction and classroom management;

`SEC. 202. PARTNERSHIP GRANTS.

`(d) Partnership Grants for Pre-Baccalaureate Preparation of Teachers- An eligible partnership that receives a grant to carry out an effective program for the pre-baccalaureate preparation of teachers shall carry out a program that includes all of the following:

`(aa) meet the specific learning needs of all students, including students with disabilities, students who are limited English proficient, students who are gifted and talented, students with low literacy levels and, as applicable, children in early childhood education programs;

`(bb) differentiate instruction for such students; and

`(cc) effectively teach high-order analytical, evaluative, problem solving and communications skills appropriate for the teacher's content or specialty area;

`(VI) can successfully employ effective strategies for reading instruction using the essential components of reading instruction;

`(6) LITERACY TRAINING- Developing and implementing a program to strengthen content knowledge and teaching skills of elementary and secondary school teachers or literacy coaches that--

`(A) provides teacher training in reading instruction for elementary or secondary school teachers or literacy coaches who--

`(i) train classroom teachers to implement literacy programs; or

`(ii) tutor students with intense individualized reading, writing, and subject matter instruction during or beyond the school day;

`(B) develops or redesigns rigorous evidenced-based reading curricula that are aligned with challenging State academic content standards, as required under section 1111(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and with postsecondary standards for reading and writing;

`(C) provides opportunities for teachers to plan and assess instruction with other teachers, school leaders, and faculty at institutions of higher education;

`(D) provides training and professional development for principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement; and

`(iv) The establishment of clear criteria for the selection of mentor teachers based on measures of teacher effectiveness and the appropriate subject area knowledge. Evaluation of teacher effectiveness shall be based on, but is not required to include all of, the observations of such domains of teaching, which may include the following:

`(V) In the case of mentor candidates who will be mentoring current or future literacy and mathematics coaches or instructors, appropriate skills in the essential components of reading instruction, teacher training in literacy instructional strategies across core subject areas, and teacher training in mathematics instructional strategies, as appropriate.

`SEC. 204. ACCOUNTABILITY AND EVALUATION.

`(a) Eligible Partnership Evaluation- Each eligible partnership submitting an application for a grant under this part shall establish and include in such application an evaluation plan that includes strong performance objectives. The plan shall include objectives and measures for increasing--

`(4)(A) the percentage of highly qualified teachers hired by the high-need local educational agency participating in the eligible partnership;

`(B) the percentage of such teachers who are members of underrepresented groups;

`(C) the percentage of such teachers who teach high-need academic subject areas (such as reading, mathematics, science, and foreign languages, including less commonly taught languages and critical foreign languages);

`PART C--ENHANCING TEACHER EDUCATION

`Subpart 1--Recruiting Teachers With Math, Science, or Language Majors

`SEC. 241. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

`(c) Use of Funds- Grant funds made available under this subpart--

`(2) may be used to upgrade curriculum to provide all students studying to become teachers with high-quality instructional strategies for teaching reading and teaching the English language to students who are limited English proficient, and for adopting, modifying, and differentiating instruction to teach students with disabilities;

`(7) may be used to develop innovative teacher preparation programs that emphasize the essential components of reading instruction and other strategies based on scientifically valid research and that address early intervention strategies for students with reading difficulty or language processing differences.

`Subpart 2--Community Colleges as Partners in Teacher Education Grants

`SEC. 251. GRANTS TO COMMUNITY COLLEGES.

`(b) Authorized Uses of Funds- Grant funds provided under this subpart shall be used to carry out the activities described in subsection (a), and may be used to--

`(12) develop associate's degree programs with an emphasis on the essential components of reading instruction to train educators such as pre-service teachers, paraprofessionals, speech-language pathology assistants, and tutors to teach students with reading difficulties and students who learn to read differently than their peers; and

`(13) develop licensure programs for early childhood educators that emphasize the essential components of reading instruction and other strategies based on scientifically valid research, and that address strategies for early screening and early intervention for students with reading difficulty and who learn to read differently than their peers.

NCLB UPDATE

2008-07-18T09:58:00.000-04:00

from U.S. Department of Education
ED REVIEW
July 18, 2008

The Department has published Fiscal Year 2008 Title I allocations by school district. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, districts must spend an amount equal to 20% of their Title I, Part A allocation to cover public school choice-related transportation costs and pay for supplemental educational services (SES). Districts have some discretion to determine the allocation of funds between the activities, but they must use at least one-quarter (5%) of the 20% "reservation" on each activity, if the cost of satisfying demand for each exceeds 5%. Moreover, for each student receiving SES, districts are required to pay the lesser of the actual cost of such services or an amount equal to the district's Title I, Part A allocation divided by the number of poor children within the district, as determined by Census Bureau estimates. FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE GO TO http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/titlei/fy08/. (Note: Due to state-level adjustments of Title I allocations, the amounts received by districts will be smaller than shown.)

Speaking of SES, on July 7, the Department's Office of Innovation and Improvement (OII) announced a new grant competition to encourage the establishment or expansion of partnerships between supplemental educational services programs and 21st Century Community Learning Centers projects, in order to increase the academic achievement of low-income students in Title I schools identified for improvement, correction action, or restructuring. Through this demonstration, OII will fund proposals that will serve as national models of how these two federally authorized after-school initiatives can be coordinated so that a greater number of students enroll in, participate in, and complete academic after-school services. A "notice of intent" to apply is due July 21, while the deadline for applications is August 12. FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE GO TO http://www.ed.gov/programs/sesdemo/. (Note: In the near future, the Department will be holding a technical assistance conference call for interested applicants. Details will be posted on the program's web site.)
______________________________________________________________________

Statement of the International Reading Association on Reading First

2008-05-23T08:15:00.000-04:00

The national debate on reading in the United States has never wavered on one clear point, that excellent reading ability is essential for the success of students. Furthermore, most agree on the critical importance of teachers in fostering student success in reading. What has been under debate is determining how to create excellent readers.

The latest report on Reading First highlights the need to develop policy that schools and teachers can effectively implement. This preliminary report indicates that Reading First has not yet had a statistically significant impact on student reading comprehension test scores in grades 1-3. This finding does not come as a surprise to reading educators, given the program’s emphasis in many states on instructional areas other than comprehension.

National policymakers need to look at a wider range of indicators in determining what works. These indicators should include data from individual states and school districts. By drawing on the data from individual states and districts, we will gain a much better picture of the conditions that helped, or did not help, teachers to advance children’s learning of comprehension and other reading proficiencies. We need to support teachers by providing them with the detailed information about best practices that can be culled from continued research on Reading First.

When teachers are given flexibility, resources, and evidence as to what is effective they can and do improve student reading. The data suggest that we must build programs that provide:
· the long-term professional development of teachers that is based on evidence and experience,
· the expansion of links between high-need K-12 schools and colleges of education to enhance the reading instruction in those schools,
· the flexibility for schools and school districts to meet the increasing needs of ELL students, struggling readers, and others who need reading instruction tailored to their needs and circumstances,
· middle and high school reading instruction that builds on the already improved elements of elementary school reading instruction, and
· a range of assessments to improve instruction.

The International Reading Association knows that teacher quality makes a difference. However, the policy community must help by changing both statutes and regulations to provide for more research on what is effective instruction, flexibility for teachers in determining how best to meet the needs of their students, and support for the effective implementation of reading programs.

The latest data on Reading First should be seen for what they are—a call to look closely at reading instruction in our schools and how we can support our children and our teachers. We need to work together to develop policies in an open and transparent environment that will result in improvements in reading instruction and achievement.

We can make a difference with our children. But it will require collaboration between policy makers and educators.

Decision on Connecticut NCLB lawsuit

2008-04-29T14:53:00.000-04:00

Judge Kravitz's April 28th , 2008 decision on the administrative appeal aspects of Connecticut's NCLB suit is linked here: C:\Documents and Settings\mbell\Desktop\NCLB DECISION on summary judgment 4-28-2008 (3).htm
The decision finds that the Secretary’s decisions denying Connecticut’s requests to test ELL students after three years and to test students with disabilities at their instructional rather than grade level, per their IEP, are consistent with the statute and regulations and thus not arbitrary and capricious.
The ruling finds that Connecticut waived any claim with regard to a hearing on those requests and that it never presented to the Secretary (and so could not have decided in court) a claim under the Unfunded Mandates provision with regard to those requests.

IRA Government Relations Update, April 11, 2008

2008-04-16T08:30:00.000-04:00

Overview

The House of Representatives has all but given up any hope of passing a new No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) this year. The Senate is still saying that they are working on a new version. What we have heard is that the Senate’s bill may not be comprehensive but rather reflect where there is consensus on changing NCLB. The House may take some of the programs of NCLB and pass them individually, but even this is unclear. What is happening is that the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act is moving ahead and is being actively discussed by the education committee staffs of both chambers with the expectation that they may be able to pass a compromised version soon.

Funding

Funding for education is currently being debated in two separate, yet related Congressional processes. First is the budget where overall spending levels are fixed. Both the House and Senate are pushing for budget allocations for education that would be increases over this year’s level, both are planning for modest increases. Parallel to this process is the appropriations process which takes the overall allocation and distributes it to the specific programs. Currently the House and Senate appropriators are taking testimony from government and non-government experts. Next week the Senate appropriators are going to talk with the Department about teacher programs. It is anticipated that the House and Senate will propose increased levels but at the end of the year that they will not have an appropriations bill that the president will sign.

Selected Reading Legislative Issues

Reading First
Reading First is a part of No Child Left Behind that has been highly controversial. Over the past several years the U.S. Department of Education issued several inspector general reports that found fault with how the program was administered. Last year, the Secretary of Education reorganized the program and stated that she would follow all of the recommendations. However, Congress cut the program by over 61%. Now there is a push to take many of the procedural recommendations from the inspector general reports and codify them into federal law. There is both a Democratic and a Republican proposal to accomplish this task. What is unclear is whether or not this legislation will need to wait for the full reauthorization of NCLB or whether it may move alone.

Striving Readers
Striving Readers is the name of a small adolescent literacy program administered by the US Department of Education and a legislative imitative long backed by IRA. The legislation, when passed, would provide funds to high-need school districts to support new reading programs designed to help "struggling readers" to become proficient readers. It has been hoped that when NCLB is rewritten that this new legislative initiative would be passed. The legislation has a wide range of bipartisan support.

Higher Education Reauthorization (HEA)

Currently staff members from the Senate, Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee (HELP) and the House Education and Labor Committee are meeting to iron out any differences between the House (HR 4137) and Senate(S 1642) bill. They are working against an April 30th deadline (which can be extended).
Of particular IRA interest is the literacy training provision for elementary and secondary school teachers and literacy coaches along with a definition of literacy coach.
In the current House HEA draft is a section defining partnership grants. It establishes:
` (6) LITERACY TRAINING- Establishing and implementing a program that strengthens content knowledge and teaching skills of elementary and secondary school teachers or literacy coaches that--
`(A) provides teacher training in reading instruction for elementary or secondary school teachers or literacy coaches who train classroom teachers to implement literacy programs; or who tutor students with intense individualized reading, writing, and subject matter instruction during or beyond the school day;
`(B) develops or redesigns rigorous evidenced-based reading curricula that are aligned with challenging State academic content standards, as required under section 1111(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and with postsecondary standards for reading and writing;
`(C) provides opportunities for teachers to plan and assess instruction with other teachers, school leaders, and faculty at institutions of higher education;
`(D) Provides training and professional development for principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement.; and
‘(E) establishes an evaluation and accountability plan for activities conducted under this paragraph to measure the impact of such activities.
One draft definition for a literacy coach being proposed includes the following:
The term `literacy coach' means a professional:
whose primary role with teachers and school personnel is to--
(i) provide high-quality professional development opportunities for teachers and school personnel;
(ii) collaborate with paraprofessionals, teachers, administrators, and the community served by the school in the areas of reading and writing; and
(iii) work cooperatively and collaboratively with other professionals in planning programs to meet the needs of diverse population learners, including children with disabilities and students who are limited English proficient; and
(C) who may provide students with--
(i) reflective, inquiry-based reading or writing diagnosis, instruction, and assessment; and
(ii) reading and writing assessment, in cooperation with other professionals (such as special education teachers, speech and language teachers, and school psychologists).

IRA Professional Development Initiative

During the February 2008 Legislative Workshop IRA members went to meet with their representatives. Ten reported back that they thought that their member had an interest in championing IRA’s Professional Development Initiative. Currently, staff is meeting to follow-up.
The initiative proposes that professional development funds for reading be available for all grade levels plus pre-service teacher education. The purpose would be to provide for:
*Resources to Ensure That Reading Instruction Is Continuously and Effectively Improved,
*Recruiting and Retaining High Quality Teachers in High Needs Schools,
*Identifying, Implementing, and Disseminating Effective Evidence-Based Reading Practices, and
*Raising Reading Performance and Closing the Achievement Gap Through High Quality Professional Development.

Regulations from US ED

In late March, Secretary Spellings of the US Department of Education issued a statement outlining a new program to allow ten states to apply for a new program that would change how schools identified for school improvement are treated. Specifically, states will be able to differentiate how schools with many groups of students who are not making AYP are treated with respect to intervention in contrast to the schools that have only one or two groups that are failing to make AYP. Both groups will still need to be eligible for public school choice and supplemental education services. Any state that chooses to apply must state how their program will insure that high need students are receiving the high levels of instruction that they need. Applications are due to the US Department of Education by May 2nd.

Next steps

Questions about when the Higher Education Act may be finalized and whether or not the provisions IRA supports are included in the final version are still open. The lack of a full reauthorization of NCLB is stimulating discussion around the idea that some parts may move this year while other more controversial parts await a future debate. Meanwhile, the US Department of Education continues to issue guidance on areas of NCLB where there is a consensus that change needs to be pushed such as on the differentiated accountability pilots (this follows the changes that have allowed for growth models to be used). Even when there is little going on, there are changes taking place.

IRA responds to NAEP writing results

2008-04-03T16:29:00.000-04:00

Media contact: John Micklos, Editor, Reading Today
Telephone 302-731-1600, ext. 250
E-mail: jmicklos@reading.org; website www.reading.org

Time, Resources Needed to Bridge the Gap in Writing Scores:
International Reading Association Responds to NAEP Writing Results

NEWARK, DELAWARE, USA –"As educators, we need to devote time and resources to writing instruction if we want to see continued improved scores and a narrowing of the achievement gap," said Cathy Roller, Director of Research and Policy for the International Reading Association, responding to today's release of The Nation's Report Card: Writing 2007. "Teachers also need access to high-quality materials and ongoing professional development. This is especially important in urban schools, which often face challenges created by high levels of poverty and student bodies with large numbers of Black and Hispanic students, who continue to score at lower levels than Whites and Asians."

We need to place emphasis on both reading and writing in order to raise overall writing scores and to narrow racial/ethnic achievement gaps and gaps between students in urban schools and students in other settings, said Roller. Results of the nationwide assessment showed gains among both 8th- and 12th-graders, as well as gains among most racial/ethnic groups and in several large school districts that participated in the Trial Urban District Assessments. However, significant gaps remain between girls and boys, White students and Black and Hispanic students, and large urban districts and the nation as a whole.

The 2007 NAEP writing assessment was administered between January and March 2007 to approximately 140,000 students at grade 8 and 28,000 students at grade 12. The assessment provided an overview of student achievement in narrative writing, informative writing, and persuasive writing. Results were presented nationally for both 8th- and 12th-grade students, and in 10 participating urban districts for 8th-graders only.

The International Reading Association is a community of reading professionals with more than 80,000 members in nearly 100 countries, dedicated to promoting higher achievement levels in literacy, reading, and communication worldwide. A network of 1,250 councils and more than 40 national affiliates forms the working foundation for the Association. The Association has spotlighted urban education issues in a number of ways. For further information, visit the Association's website at www.reading.org and click on the Quick Links box. Once inside that page, click on Urban Education for recommended readings and other resources.

IRA Legislative Update, March 14, 2008

2008-03-17T08:49:00.000-04:00

Overview
The Congress has recessed for the next two weeks. Each chamber has finished their version of the budget for the upcoming year. When they come back they will meet to finish that work and write one budget. The rewriting of the Higher Education Act is coming close to the end and when members return it is expected that they will finish. Sitting in the wings is the rewriting of the No Child Left Behind Act. While most now think there is little to no chance of finish rewriting it this year, there is still some discussion of taking parts out and seeing if they could pass. All of this is taking place in an election year, which means that the number of legislative workdays is fewer, and the willingness to compromise is smaller. As the days tick off, legislators begin to wonder if they will get a better deal by finishing their task now or by waiting a year.

Budget and Appropriations
Both the House and Senate have finished working on their individual versions of the budget. The budget is a congressional blueprint that allocates money between various areas (mandated programs, defense and non-defense discretionary) and, in theory, balances spending in these areas against anticipated revenues. They do this by planning in five year segments. These overall categories are then used to allocate money to the appropriators.

During this debate both chambers stated that they wanted to spend more money on education than the president proposed in his budget and what was spent last year. Several key areas were voted on. One was to put more money in the budget for high school and drop out prevention programs. While this doesn’t have the force of law, it does indicate what many members of Congress think is important.

When the Congressional members get back to DC, they will then discuss both bills and create a joint budget document. The next step is appropriations.

This year the appropriations process will have a special twist. Most Democrats believe that if they wait until next January they will have a larger majority in the Congress AND someone different in the White House. This last point is important because the President has said he will veto any appropriations bill that is higher than his recommendation.
Clearly it will be important to push for higher amounts for literacy and education programs. Pushing for higher amounts now will result in Congress having to build from this base.

Higher Education Act
Usually this Act has moderate interest to IRA. Generally speaking, the bill provides money for student loans and grants, with some attention to other areas such as teacher education. Over the last five or six years, the awareness that teacher education is important has impacted how this bill is structured. In the current House and Senate drafts there is language to support literacy coaches and increased reading education programs for elementary and secondary teachers. As this language is debated we may be asking for support from the IRA Legislative Action Team. During the recent IRA Legislative Workshop, several members of the IRA were able to reinforce the importance of reading pre-service and in-service programs to their state representatives.

No Child Left Behind Act
At the beginning of the year, most pundits in education policy were saying that there was no chance for NCLB would be rewritten this year. It looks like they were right. Every day that ticks by means that there is less chance of passing this massive bill. Still, Senator Kennedy (D-MA) is saying that his staff is drafting a bill that will be released soon. The question now is: will they be moving a comprehensive bill or a slimmed down version that would only include areas of agreement. Congress has until early October to finish their legislative work, but realistically the summer will be shortened with the two presidential party conventions in addition to adjourning for the fall elections (which includes the entire House and 1/3rd of the Senate).

IRA Professional Development Initiative
IRA believes that there must be a major national investment in teacher preparation and professional development to ensure that high-need students are provided continuous high-quality reading instruction throughout their schooling experiences.

Therefore, IRA has developed a set of legislative recommendations for a new federal program to provide funds to consortiums of local school districts, state education agencies, and higher education teacher preparation programs to support and sustain the reading professional development of educators.

This comprehensive initiative will include all grade levels plus pre-service teacher education to ensure that every teacher is competent to teach reading to students of various ability levels through:
* Resources to Ensure That Reading Instruction Is Continuously and Effectively Improved,
* Recruiting and Retaining High Quality Teachers in High Needs Schools,
* Identifying, Implementing, and Disseminating Effective Evidence-Based Reading Practices,
* Raising Reading Performance and Closing the Achievement Gap Through High Quality Professional Development,
* Developing Community Partnerships

Currently we are following up with a set of meetings with ten members of Congress who told their IRA Legislative Action Team members who visited them during the Legislative Workshop that they would be interested in considering sponsoring this measure.

IRA to Propose New Legislative Initiative

2008-02-14T11:21:00.000-05:00

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act has been rewritten eight times since it was originally signed into law in 1965. With each change the bill has shifted more and more from being a source of funds to supplement the amount of money local school districts in the United States can spend on high-need children to a statute that has an increasingly wider set of requirements for what is being taught.
Unfortunately, the act hasn’t enhanced the capacity of the system to progressively expand the quality of the education the neediest youths are receiving. IRA is proposing to change that.
In December 2007 the IRA Board of Directors passed a motion to proceed with the development of a set of legislative recommendations to expand the capacity of local schools to improve their educational programs. The recommendation is to establish a new federal program that provides funds to schools to support multi-year professional development of teachers to expand and improve their knowledge of reading instruction. The proposed program would provide money to local school districts, state education agencies, and higher education teacher education programs over several years to enhance professional development and teacher education.
IRA’s Government Relations Legislative Workshop, scheduled for February 21–22 in Washington, DC, is expected to emphasize this new initiative, and attendees will work to expand Congressional support for it. The IRA Legislative Action Team (LAT) will also be asked to lend its voice to explaining the need and raising awareness of why professional development is critical to the success of any literacy initiative. In addition, IRA state council legislative chairs will be asked to support this initiative by providing information to IRA state council members.
This is a presidential and Congressional election year in the United States, and most observers believe that large-scale legislation is almost impossible to pass. However, there is also a tradition of smaller, more bipartisan initiatives passing during election years. The key for passage is to focus on a common area of need—such as education—and provide a focused initiative that demonstrates leadership. A professional development program that covers all grade levels plus pre-service teacher can be such an initiative.
For more information contact the IRA Washington Office at irawash@reading.org. Watch future issues of Reading Today for updates on this initiative.

IRA Audio Call: Update on the President's FY 09 budget request and NCLB reauthorization

2008-02-06T15:49:00.000-05:00

Join Richard Long, IRA Director of Government Relations, in a live audio-conference on Tuesday, February 19, at 8:00 pm EST as he gives an update on the President's FY 09 budget request and NCLB reauthorization.

This will be a free service, but registration is limited. Participants are asked to register by February 14 with irawash@reading.org to receive the
call-in number and a Power Point set of slides.

Dr. Long will brief callers for about 20 minutes and then answer questions. Participants are asked to e-mail their questions in advance to irawash@reading.org. We cannot guarantee that all questions will be answered during the call. We will try to answer all questions by e-mail. Concise questions are encouraged. Please be sure to include your name and affiliation when posting your questions.

FY 2009 President's Education Budget

2008-02-04T15:05:00.000-05:00

On February 4, 2008, President Bush unveiled his FY 2009 Budget. Information on the President's FY 2009 Education Budget Request includes summary and background information by program area, detailed budget tables, and State tables.
http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget09/summary/index.html

State tables show how funds will be distributed under State formula-allocated and selected student aid programs. State allocations for fiscal years 2008 and 2009 are preliminary estimates based on currently available data. Allocations based on new data may result in significant changes from these preliminary estimates.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy09/bis.html

HEA Reauthorization: Building Capacity for Student Achievement

2008-01-17T13:26:00.000-05:00

The rewriting of the Higher Education Act is now awaiting House floor action. IRA has been working to include provisions for literacy training. Currently, the House version (HR 4137) contains a literacy training provision. The Senate version (S.1642) does not include a literacy provision.

After the House finishes working on their version, the next stage in the process is when the House and Senate assign members to a committee to workout the differences between each chambers’ versions. When we know who the members of the committee are, we will be asking you to write your member of Congress and the Senate to support the literacy training provision in the House draft. The committee is expected to meet in mid to late February.

(House) Higher Education Reauthorization Act Literacy Training Provision:

Purpose: To provide additional literacy instruction for elementary and secondary coaches, principals and administrators.

Goal: To retain in the final higher education reauthorization act the following provisions:

HR 4137 Title II Teacher Quality Enhancement
Section 200 Definitions:
`(15) LITERACY COACH- The term `literacy coach' means a professional--
`(A) who--
`(i) has teaching experience and a master's degree with a concentration in reading and writing education;
`(ii) has demonstrated proficiency as determined by the principal of the individual's school in teaching reading and writing in a content area such as math, science, or social studies;
`(B) whose primary role with teachers and school personnel is to--
`(i) provide high-quality professional development opportunities for teachers and school personnel related to literacy;
`(ii) with respect to the areas of reading and writing, collaborate with paraprofessionals, teachers, principals, and other administrators, and the community served by the school; and
`(iii) work cooperatively and collaboratively with other professionals in planning programs to meet the needs of diverse population learners, including children with disabilities and limited English proficient individuals; and
`(C) who may provide students with--
`(i) reading or writing diagnosis, instruction, and assessment; and
`(ii) reading and writing assessment, in cooperation with other professionals (such as special education teachers, speech and language teachers, and school psychologists).

Section 202 State Partnership Grants
6) LITERACY TRAINING- Developing and implementing a program to strengthen content knowledge and teaching skills of elementary and secondary school literacy coaches that--
`(A) provides teacher training in reading instruction for literacy coaches who--
`(i) train classroom teachers to implement literacy programs; or
`(ii) tutor students with intense individualized reading, writing, and subject matter instruction during or beyond the school day;
`(B) develops or redesigns rigorous evidenced-based reading curricula that are aligned with challenging State academic content standards, as required under section 1111(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and with postsecondary standards for reading and writing;
`(C) provides opportunities for teachers to plan and assess instruction with other teachers, school leaders, and faculty at institutions of higher education;
`(D) provides training and professional development for principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement; and
`(E) establishes an evaluation and accountability plan for activities conducted under this paragraph to measure the impact of such activities.

IRA Audio-Conference, January 15

2008-01-07T14:00:00.000-05:00

What is happening with NCLB and how will the President's new FY 08 budget impact reading education?

Join Richard Long, IRA Director of Government Relations, in a live audio-conference on Tuesday, January 15, at 8:00 pm EST as he discusses the status of NCLB as well as the new federal budget and its impact on reading education.

This will be a free service, but registration is limited. Participants are asked to register by January 11 with irawash@reading.org to receive the
call-in number and a Power Point set of slides.

Dr. Long will brief callers for about 20 minutes and then answer questions. Participants are asked to e-mail their questions in advance to irawash@reading.org. We cannot guarantee that all questions will be answered during the call. We will try to answer all questions by e-mail. Concise questions are encouraged. Please be sure to include your name and affiliation when posting your questions

IRA Legislative Update December 19, 2007

2007-12-19T12:16:00.000-05:00

Funding

The Congress is still in session; it is finalizing the funding bill for the current fiscal year. The Labor/Health and Human Services/Education appropriations bill was passed by the Congress, vetoed by the president, and the veto was sustained. This has resulted in education funding program that is now part of the FY08 Omnibus Spending Bill. Within the spending bill is also language that is intended to put into law several of the ethnical procedural issues outlined in the Inspector General’s reports pertaining to Reading First.

Head Start Reauthorization signed – changes impacting literacy

On Wednesday, December 13, President Bush signed into law a renewal of Head Start through 2012. The Head Start Reauthorization will help more children arrive at kindergarten ready to succeed by raising the eligibility ceiling, setting clear standards and measures for Head Start programs, improving coordination with other early childhood education programs and strengthening program accountability. The controversial assessment, the Head Start National Reporting System, has been eliminated.
Key points of interest to IRA in the law include:
· Improvement of teacher qualifications by requiring half of all Head Start teachers to hold bachelor’s degrees by 2013, but it would not penalize any program that did not meet that goal.
· Requirement of Head Start agencies to implement research-based early childhood curricula that promote young children’s school readiness in the areas of language and early reading.
· Requirement that each Head Start agency ensure that all of its teachers receive ongoing training in language and emergent literacy. Adds language detailing use of training funds to support enhanced early language and preliteracy development of children in Head Start programs.

For a summary description of the changes go to:
http://www.reading.org/downloads/resources/071218_HeadStartReauth.pdf

Higher Education Reauthorization: House HR 4137 Senate S 1642

A provision in the House version (HR 4137) of the Higher education Reauthorization Act will allow state partnership grants for developing and implementing a program to strengthen content knowledge and teaching skills of elementary and secondary school literacy coaches. The grants will, if enacted,
· provide teacher training in reading instruction for literacy;
· develop reading curricula that are aligned with State academic content standards;
· provides opportunities for teachers to plan and assess instruction with other teachers; school leaders, and faculty at institutions of higher education; and
· provide training and professional development for principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement, and establish an evaluation and accountability plan for activities.

HR 4137 is expected to be brought to the House floor for a vote and passed in early 2008. IRA will lead an effort to retain the House provision through lobbying efforts, coalition building and grassroots advocacy.

Looking ahead

2008 will open with the House and Senate education committees focused on No Child Left Behind, the Congressional funding committees expecting fewer allocations for the upcoming year, the US Department of Education continuing to make regulatory changes on NCLB, a continued push to implement Response to Intervention, new literacy requirements being implemented for Head Start, a new panel to look at reading research still waiting to be announced, and many states having smaller budgets to work with as the impact of the sub prime mortgage market continues to impact the US economy.

Legislative Update November 16, 2007

2007-11-16T14:46:00.000-05:00

Quick Report

Override Vote

The House of Representatives by a vote of 277-141 failed to override the president’s veto of the Appropriations for the Departments of Labor/Health and Human Services/Education for the current fiscal year. The Senate will not push for a vote. There is a plan circulating in the Senate to redraft the spending plan splitting the difference between what the Congress proposed and vetoed and what the President’s budget outlined. In round figures this results in a loss of about $2.25 billion in funds from the Congressional proposal. Currently, the government is functioning under a continuing resolution which expires on December 14.

House Committee Action on Higher Education Act

The House Education and Labor Committee passed, 45- 0, a reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. It is expected that this bill will be acted on by the full House when they return in January. During the debate, which stretched over two days, the Committee accepted 12 Republican amendments.

Head Start Reauthorization Going to President’s Desk

The House and Senate have agreed to the same set of changes to Head Start and the legislation now goes to the president for his expected signature. In this revised Head Start is a new focus on literacy. A background memo is being prepared to brief IRA members as to the new literacy sections of this Act.

Reports

NAEP’S 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA)

NAEP’S 2007 Trial Urban District Assessment (TUDA) was released Thursday, November 15, 10:00 am. (The participating urban districts’ scores in reading and math are reported separately from the NAEP states results.)

Reading scores for 4th and 8th graders are generally the same or have increased slightly since 2002, when the TUDA began collecting these statistics from volunteer urban public school districts. The exception: Houston’s 4th grade reading scores dropped since 2005 to the same level recorded for 2002. Only Atlanta and DC posted reading gains in both 4th and 8th grade.

The Nation’s Report Card Reading 2007: Trial Urban District Assessment and the Nation’s Report Card Mathematics 2007: Trial Urban District Assessment are at http://nationsreportcard.gov/

National Assessment of Title I: Final Report

This Congressionally mandated two-volume report, “Summary of Key Findings,” presents findings on the implementation and impact of the Title I program. Volume I contains key findings on the implementation of the program under No Child Left Behind, and Volume II reports on follow-up findings from Closing the Reading Gap, an evaluation of the impact of supplemental remedial reading programs on the achievement of 3rd and 5th grade students. For the summary and full report go to:http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20084012/index.asp

Register Now! IRA Government Relations Workshop, February 21 and 22, Washington DC

2007-11-14T10:25:00.000-05:00

You are invited to participate in the 2008 Governmental Relations Workshop hosted by the International Reading Association and the Government Relations Committee in Washington, D.C. The workshop will be held on February 21, from 12:00 pm – 7:00 pm and February 22, from 8:00 am - 3:00 pm.

The goals of the workshop are to strengthen your and your council’s ability to impact legislation by providing training and information. The 2008 Legislative Workshop will focus on training workshop participants to be effective advocates on both federal and state issues. Participants will have the opportunity to meet with their Members of Congress and/or their staffs on Capitol Hill.

This is a no-cost workshop to IRA members. There is a fully refundable $50.00 registration fee which is returned on notification of cancellation or when attending the conference. This policy is to provide an accurate count to IRA. We will provide lunch on Thursday and breakfast and lunch on Friday. All other expenses are the responsibility of the attendees. Many participants receive funding from their state councils to help pay for costs. The workshop will be held at the Hall of the States building on Capitol Hill. We have a block of rooms at the Hyatt Regency Capitol Hill. The rates are $289.00 single and $314.00 double. The hotel telephone is 202-737-1234. Be sure to mention you are part of the IRA group. The cut-off date to reserve a room is January 21st.

Questions? Call 202-624-8800 or e-mail irawash@reading.org
________________________________________________________

House Mark-up of Higher Education Act

2007-11-13T14:53:00.000-05:00

As reported earlier, the Higher Education Act (HEA) is scheduled to be reauthorized. The House Committee on Education and Labor has released its most current draft and is planning a mark-up (the time when the committee opens the text to change by members of the House Education and Labor Committee) for Wednesday, November 14th. The Senate has a separate bill. There are several sections of the Higher Education Act that are of significant interest to IRA. This short note is to highlight those sections.

General background on the Higher Education Act Amendments of 2007
The House Education and Labor Committee announced introduction of an HEA reauthorization bill and intend to mark it up in committee on November 14. A press release announcing the bill’s introduction asserts that the bill would:
· Streamline the federal student financial aid application;
· Make textbook costs more manageable for students;
· Expand college access for low-income and minority students;
· Increase college aid and support programs for veterans and military families;
· Create safer college campuses for students and faculty;
· Ensure equal college opportunities and fair learning environments for students with disabilities; and
· Help strengthen our nation’s workforce and economic competitiveness.

The term “literacy coach” is defined in the new HEA and means “a professional ‘‘(A) who ‘‘(i) has teaching experience and a master’s degree with a concentration in reading and writing education; ‘‘(ii) has demonstrated proficiency as determined by the principal of the individual’s school in teaching reading and writing in a content area such as math, science, or social studies; ‘‘(B) whose primary role with teachers and school personnel is to ‘‘(i) provide high-quality professional development opportunities for teachers and school personnel related to literacy; ‘‘(ii) with respect to the areas of reading and writing, collaborate with paraprofessionals, teachers, principals, and other administrators, and the community served by the school; and ‘‘(iii) work cooperatively and collaboratively with other professionals in planning programs to meet the needs of diverse population learners, including children with disabilities and limited English proficient individuals; and ‘‘(C) who may provide students with ‘‘(i) reading or writing diagnosis, instruction, and assessment; and ‘‘(ii) reading and writing assessment, in cooperation with other professionals (such as special education teachers, speech and language teachers, and school psychologists).”

Of particular interest to IRA is Title II of the HEA – specifically, the Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants – which enables K-12 schools and institutions of higher education to form partnerships for improving teacher preparation. This Title includes:
· LITERACY TRAINING – “Developing and implementing a program to strengthen content knowledge and teaching skills of elementary and secondary school literacy coaches that - ‘‘(A) provides teacher training in reading instruction for literacy coaches who ‘‘(i) train classroom teachers to implement literacy programs; or ‘‘(ii) tutor students with intense individualized reading, writing, and subject matter instruction during or beyond the school day; ‘‘(B) develops or redesigns rigorous evidenced-based reading curricula that are aligned with challenging State academic content standards, as required under section 1111(b) (1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and with postsecondary standards for reading and writing…(D) provides training and professional development for principals to prepare them to understand the teaching of reading, guide instruction, and foster school improvement.”
· TEACHING RESIDENCY PROGRAMS – “Evaluation of teacher effectiveness
shall be based on observations of such domains of teaching as the following: (V) “Evaluation of teacher effectiveness for choosing mentor candidates who will be mentoring current or future literacy and mathematics coaches or instructors, “appropriate skills in the essential components of reading instruction, teacher training in literacy instructional strategies across core subject areas...”

It is important to note that certain definitions in HEA Reauthorization Act are reliant on the meanings given the terms in section 1208 the ESEA Act of 1965 (which are expected to be changed when NCLB is reauthorized):
· ESSENTIAL COMPONENTS OF READING INSTRUCTION - The term essential components of reading instruction' means explicit and systematic instruction in — (A) phonemic awareness; (B) phonics; (C) vocabulary development; (D) reading fluency, including oral reading skills; and (E) reading comprehension strategies.
· READING- The term reading' means a complex system of deriving meaning from print that requires all of the following: (A) The skills and knowledge to understand how phonemes, or speech sounds, are connected to print. (B) The ability to decode unfamiliar words. (C) The ability to read fluently. (D) Sufficient background information and vocabulary to foster reading comprehension. (E) The development of appropriate active strategies to construct meaning from print. (F) The development and maintenance of a motivation to read.
· SCIENTIFICALLY BASED READING RESEARCH- The term scientifically based reading research' means research that - (A) applies rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain valid knowledge relevant to reading development, reading instruction, and reading difficulties; and (B) includes research that - (i) employs systematic, empirical methods that draw on observation or experiment; (ii) involves rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the stated hypotheses and justify the general conclusions drawn; (iii) relies on measurements or observational methods that provide valid data across evaluators and observers and across multiple measurements and observations; and (iv) has been accepted by a peer-reviewed journal or approved by a panel of independent experts through a comparably rigorous, objective, and scientific review.

The House Education and Labor Committee’s higher education subcommittee is interested in whether the HEA and NCLB laws are working together at the federal, state and local level, and whether they are aligned with respect to teacher preparation. Title II of NCLB provides grants to states to improve teacher quality. The reauthorization of the two laws will provide Congress an opportunity to consider the relationships between the goals for each.

Government Relations Update - November 7, 2007

2007-11-08T10:36:00.000-05:00

Overview
There are three issues addressed in this update, the funding bill and what happens next; the status of NCLB and the expected pending action on the Higher Education Act. The backdrop driving all three of these issues is the calendar. The First Session of the 110th Congress is scheduled to adjourn sometime this month. The House hopes to be finished by November 16th and the Senate is planning on coming back after Thanksgiving. This means that there is very little time to finish anything. The second conundrum is that next year is both a presidential and Congressional election year. Interestingly enough, after the first week of February, both parties may know who their presidential nominee will be. There may be a bit of a window for Congressional action on several measures including the re-write of NCLB.

Funding
The House and Senate Conferees met and came to an agreement on funding for school year 2008-09 (Fiscal Year 2008). The president has said that he will veto this spending level when it is presented to him. Congressional leaders are creating a funding bill that will include not only the traditional Labor/Health and Human Service/Education spending bill with two other spending bills, Military Construction and Veterans. This large appropriations bill will most likely be vetoed and the Congress will then move for an override. The bill originally passed the Senate with enough votes to override a veto but not enough to override in the House. The override fight will be in the House. A chart from the IRA supported Committee for Education Funding can be viewed at www.reading.org/association/advocacy/updates.html.
Please note several key points: first, Title I funding is increased; Reading First is decreased, as is Even Start; Striving Readers received a small increase. It is expected that the entire education, health, and other communities will push for a veto override because this bill increases funding over all for education. The president’s spending recommendations were over $2 billion less than this measure.

If the override vote isn’t successful, then Congress is likely to pass another emergency spending bill that will keep the spending levels at last year’s levels for at least the next three months.

NCLB
The House and Senate Education Committee chairs have acknowledged that moving a reauthorization of NCLB this year will not happen. At the same time, Senator Kennedy (D-MA) and Senator Enzi (R-WY), the chair and ranking member on the Senate Education Committee, have said that they will be moving a proposal early in the new year. Senator Kennedy has said they might have until the spring of 2008 to finish it. The Senate Education Committee has released a draft proposal, but without the sections of Title I, covering literacy, adequate yearly progress, growth models, and other controversial areas.

Higher Education
The House and Senate Education committees have announced that they are now going to focus their time for the balance of the session on reauthorizing the Higher Education Act. We are expecting new language to be introduced in the next week and will update you on the literacy sections.

Next Steps
The next big step for the education community will come if the president vetoes the education spending bill. While the veto may not be overridden, the amount of attention it gets is. It is important to get members of Congress on record as to whether or not they support funding for education programs. Please watch the IRA Legislative Action Team blog for updates at http://www.latadvisory.blogspot.com/.