House Approves ‘180-degree pivot’ on ESEA

Yesterday the House Education and Workforce Committee approved a partial reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that is “a 180-degree pivot from the current version of the law.”

Yesterday during mark-up, Representative Foxx (R-NC) summed up the goal of the bill. Foxx said that if she had her druthers she “would get the federal government completely out of the education business.” According to Foxx, the next best thing to getting rid of a federal role in education is the current Republican proposal.

For some history about why the federal government is involved in the education business, we have to go back to the beginning of ESEA.  Until 1965, the federal government didn’t provide education funding to the states. After Brown v. Board of Education, schools across the U.S. were slowly beginning integration efforts and the civil rights movement was shining a spotlight on the huge disparities experienced by people of color in their communities and schools. The original ESEA was aimed at correcting that problem and improving the dismal education prospects of poor children. The bill was primarily a civil rights bill, meant to act as a catalyst for ensuring educational equity by closing achievement gaps between rich and poor, black and white.

The problem with the law was that for years the federal government gave schools money but it did not hold them accountable for closing those gaps. In 2002, a bi-partisan coalition that included President George W. Bush and the late Senator Edward Kennedy came together to pass the reauthorization known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB). There is no doubt that there are many problems with NCLB, but there is also evidence that after it passed, white, black and Hispanic students all made gains and the growing gap between these groups was reversed. Additionally, NCLB required schools to gather and report disaggregated data at the school level for the first time. Before that, it was hard to know how good or bad schools were doing because they were not always required to measure. As Rep. George Miller (D-CA) said yesterday “ten years ago we couldn’t even have this conversation.” Knowing what challenges exist is a necessary step for addressing them.

To argue, in the face of that evidence, that the federal government should have no role in the education business is a scary sentiment indeed. The bill, which passed out of committee on a partisan vote, takes dangerous steps toward eliminating the progress advocates for students have achieved over the past decade.

Rep. George Miller (D-CA) offered two amendments that were voted down. NWLC along with 30 other civil rights, disability, business and education groups put out a statement arguing that while Miller’s amendment is not the complete approach we would like to see, it does ensure high expectations for the academic success of all students. The amendment would have required improvement in both overall performance and closing achievement gaps between groups of students; set meaningful graduation rate targets; and insisted that struggling schools get the supports and interventions they need to gain ground.

With history as our guide, it is clear that any effort to reform the law must include strong accountability measures. Because, despite what Rep. Foxx may say, closing achievement gaps and ensuring that all students receive a quality education is what this business is all about.