Overview
Title
To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to enhance teacher and school leader quality partnership grants.
ELI5 AI
H. R. 1331 wants to make sure teachers and school leaders are really good at their jobs by giving them special training, especially if they’re going to work in schools that need a lot of help. It also wants to help bring in more teachers from different backgrounds and help them learn from experienced teachers.
Summary AI
H. R. 1331 aims to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to improve the quality of teacher and school leader preparation programs. The bill enhances partnership grants to support the development and training of teachers and school leaders, focusing on high-need schools and subjects. It addresses recruitment of diverse candidates, mentorship programs, and residency opportunities for aspiring educators. Additionally, it establishes accountability measures for educator preparation programs, ensuring they meet the needs of schools and improve student learning outcomes.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
H.R. 1331 is a legislative proposal aimed at amending the Higher Education Act of 1965 to enhance teacher and school leader quality through partnership grants. This bill seeks to improve the preparation and support of educators by updating definitions, purposes, grant uses, and accountability measures related to educational programs. It also proposes establishing a study to elevate the teaching profession by assessing current state policies and suggesting high entry standards for teachers and school leaders.
Summary of Significant Issues
One of the most critical concerns with the bill is the vague definition of the term "profession-ready." This term is used extensively throughout the bill, particularly in Sections 3, 6, and 11, but lacks a clear, consistent definition. This ambiguity can lead to varying interpretations and may impact the implementation of standards across different educational institutions and states.
Additionally, Section 4 outlines detailed conditions and requirements for using grant funds, which could lead to excessive administrative and compliance costs. There is also a concern over the repayment clause for stipends or salaries if service obligations are not completed, as this might deter participation in these valuable programs due to the financial risk involved.
Moreover, the state-determined criteria for at-risk and low-performing programs, as discussed in Sections 9 and 207, may lead to inconsistencies and biases. States have the discretion to set their standards, which might result in unequal evaluations.
Another important issue is the establishment of broad membership for an Advisory Committee in Section 11. While such inclusivity is essential, it may also introduce inefficiencies and potential financial mismanagement if not properly overseen.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, this bill aims to improve the quality of education by ensuring that educators are well-prepared and ready to manage the challenges of modern classrooms. The introduction of more rigorous standards and accountability measures could lead to better educational outcomes for students nationwide. However, the lack of clarity in key terms and the potential for inconsistent application could undermine these goals and create disparities in teacher and leader preparation across different states.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For educators, the bill lays down additional pathways for professional development and leadership roles, potentially leading to enhanced career opportunities. However, those participating in residency programs might be discouraged by the financial risk associated with the repayment requirement if they fail to meet service obligations.
Educational institutions that partner in these programs might benefit from increased funding and support, allowing for a richer curriculum and better training facilities. However, they must navigate complex compliance requirements stipulated by the bill, which could divert resources away from core educational activities.
For state governments, the bill demands more comprehensive evaluations of educational programs, potentially leading to administrative burdens but also providing an incentive to raise the quality of these programs.
In summary, while H.R. 1331 holds promise for improving educational quality and accountability, careful attention must be given to its implementation to ensure that it benefits educators and students equitably across all states.
Issues
The term 'profession-ready' is used frequently across various sections (SEC. 3, SEC. 6, SEC. 11) without a clear and consistent definition, which could lead to ambiguous interpretations and implementations affecting educators, policymakers, and institutions involved in teacher and leader preparation programs.
In SEC. 4: Partnership grants, the detailed conditions and requirements for grant funds usage could lead to excessive administrative and compliance costs, potentially resulting in wasteful spending.
SEC. 4 imposes a requirement for participants in the teaching and principal residency programs to pay back stipends or salaries if service obligations are not completed, which might deter participation in these programs due to the potential financial risk involved.
The amendment in SEC. 6 regarding the lack of specificity on how 'high-need local educational agency' and 'underrepresented groups' are defined might lead to varying interpretations and inconsistent application, affecting the allocation of resources and support to intended beneficiaries.
In SEC. 9 and SEC. 207, the state-determined criteria for at-risk and low-performing programs might lead to inconsistencies and potential bias across different States, impacting the fairness and efficacy of program evaluations.
The language surrounding 'valid and reliable teacher performance assessments' in SEC. 7 lacks criteria for validity or reliability, which opens the door to inconsistent standards, potentially undermining the assessment process.
The establishment of an Advisory Committee in SEC. 11 could lead to inefficiencies and potential wasteful spending if not managed properly, given its broad membership that may complicate decision-making and accountability.
SEC. 11's lack of specified budget or funding source for the elevation of the education profession study raises concerns about potential long-term financial implications and oversight for the project.
The amendment in SEC. 12 extending appropriation authorization from 2009 to 2026 without reevaluation could signal a lack of reflection on current needs and priorities, potentially resulting in outdated or misaligned funding decisions.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section gives the short title of the law, which is the “Teacher and School Leader Quality Partnership Grants Act.”
2. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The text provides definitions for terms related to education such as "arts and sciences," "blended learning," "digital learning," and more, as amended in the Higher Education Act of 1965. It clarifies these terms to support educational programs, teacher qualifications, and partnerships for improving student outcomes.
200. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides definitions for various terms related to education, such as what constitutes arts and sciences, blended learning, and digital learning, as well as descriptions of different educational roles and programs, like early childhood educators and teacher preparation programs. These definitions are aimed at standardizing the understanding of concepts and entities involved in educational systems and practices.
3. Purposes Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The amendment to the Higher Education Act of 1965 aims to improve teacher and school leader preparation by making sure these programs are accountable, increasing recruitment from diverse groups and other fields, and ensuring schools with high needs have enough staff through partnerships with colleges and universities.
4. Partnership grants Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to improve the preparation and support of teachers and school leaders, especially in high-need schools. It outlines changes to the use of partnership grants, including establishing teaching and leadership residency programs, developing teacher leaders, and ensuring that programs focus on skills necessary for supporting students with disabilities and English learners.
5. Administrative provisions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The amendment to Section 203 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 allows partnerships to receive an additional grant within a five-year period if the grant is used to start a teacher, principal, or school leader residency program. It also updates the language to include "teacher education, school leader preparation, or educator development program" instead of just "teacher preparation program."
6. Accountability and evaluation Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines an amendment to the Higher Education Act of 1965, requiring eligible partnerships applying for grants to create a detailed evaluation plan. This plan must set performance goals and measures for various aspects, including educator achievement, retention, certification pass rates, hiring of diverse and profession-ready educators in high-need areas, and the effective use of technology in teaching.
7. Accountability for programs that prepare teachers or other school leaders Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require teacher and school leader preparation programs to report information such as pass rates, scores, and demographic statistics annually. It also outlines how the information should be organized and the conditions under which certain data about teacher performance assessments can be reported instead. Additionally, the section specifies the types of information states must include in their reports on these programs, like admission rates and how the teachings align with state teacher needs.
8. Teacher development Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to change the term “limited English proficient” to “English learner” in the specified section of the law.
9. State functions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Under the Higher Education Act of 1965, Section 207 outlines the responsibilities of a state in evaluating teacher and school leader preparation programs. To receive federal funds, states must assess these programs to identify those at risk or performing poorly, provide an annual list of such programs, and offer them technical assistance. If sufficient improvement is not made, these programs may lose funding eligibility and must support students during closure.
207. State functions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
States must assess teacher and school leader preparation programs to identify low-performing ones and provide support for improvement. Programs failing to improve may face penalties, such as losing funding and providing transitional support to students if closed.
10. General provisions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Section 10 of the bill amends the Higher Education Act of 1965, specifically updating Section 208(a), to reference "section 205" instead of "sections 205 and 206".
11. Elevation of the education profession study Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill amends the Higher Education Act to create an Advisory Committee for studying the elevation of the teaching profession. This committee will assess current state policies on teacher and school leader education, identify best practices, and recommend new standards to ensure readiness for the profession, ultimately reporting their findings to Congress.
209. Elevation of the education profession study Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill section outlines a study to improve the standards for teaching and school leadership. It aims to evaluate state policies, suggest high standards for entering the education field, and deliver recommendations to Congress, with input from a diverse Advisory Committee.
12. Authorization of appropriations Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section updates the Higher Education Act of 1965 by changing a date in Part A from 2009 to 2026 and increasing the number of "succeeding" years mentioned from two to five while also renumbering a section.