by Lisa Cosseboom, M.Ed. & C.A.G.S School Psychologist & Special Education Evaluation Team Chairperson
Published: Lifelines for Health Spring 2017
Important Events in Public Education:
April 11, 1965: President Lyndon B. Johnson signs the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) which expanded the federal role in k-12 education. Title 1 was implemented that enabled the Federal Government to assist with providing funding to school districts to help disadvantaged students.
1968: Congress expands on ESEA to provide programs for immigrant children, neglected children and passed the Bilingual act.
1973: The Rehabilitation Act becomes law in which the Section 504 ensures civil rights for people with disabilities requiring school districts to accommodate for students with disabilities to access buildings, programs and activities.
1974: Equal Educational Opportunities Act passes. This Act requires school districts to take action and overcome barriers which would provide equal protection for students.
1975: The Education of All Handicapped Children Act (PL-94-142) becomes Federal Law. This law provided that handicapped children and adults ages 3-21 be educated in the “least restrictive environment” to the maximum extent appropriate, meaning that they are educated with children who are not handicapped and that special classes, separate schools or other removal of children from their regular educational environment, occurs only when the severity of the handicap is such that education in regular classes cannot be achieved.
1978: President Jimmy Carter reauthorized ESEA and changed Title 1 rules allowing school- wide Title 1 programs when 75% or more of the students are low-income.
1979: President Ronald Regan reauthorized ESEA and changed funding into one block grant and reduced regulatory requirements by states.
1988: Student testing and accountability takes hold and regulations require districts to test annually and to create improvement plans.
Recent Education Bills Passed:
House Joint Resolution 58: Passed House on 2/7/17, Senate on 3/8/2017: Rejected a Department of Education regulation that imposed a new federal standard for the education and preparation of teachers which linked teacher preparation to eligibility for federal grants.
House Joint Resolution 57: Passed House on 2/7/2017, Senate on 3/9/2017: This resolution overturns a regulation by the Department of Education that placed federal restrictions on systems developed by states to hold schools accountable to parents and taxpayers for their performance.
New Bills introduced:
What is H.R. 610?
Termed “Choices in Education Act of 2017” according to Congress.gov, this Act “Repeals the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and limits the authority of the Department of Education” to nothing but the power to award block grants to qualified states.
The repeal of ESEA would essentially eliminate every education act noted in the timeline...
including Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) under Obama and No Child Left Behind under Bush. The more recent ESSA promotes equality in education and provides federal protections for disadvantaged and disabled students. The block grants would distribute federal funding to eligible states to award in the form of vouchers for eligible students to use in school choice. Additionally, this Act repeals
the rules surrounding established nutrition standards (availability of fruits, vegetables, reduction of sodium etc.) for the national school lunch and breakfast programs. This Act was introduced to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce on 1/23/2017.
Thinking behind H.R. 610:
Proponents behind the Choices in Education Act believe that this Act would provide better competition between public and private schools and therefore increase the quality of public education through the spirit of competition. They feel that disadvantaged students would have access to private or religious schools through the voucher system where they would not have had access freely because of their poverty levels. Families who tend to be financially well-off, tend to live in identified communities that are known for quality education, or can afford to send their children to private schools.
Nuts & Bolts of Choices in Education Act:
Title 1 is federal funding provided to public school systems based on the number of disadvantaged students that are enrolled in their districts. The funds are distributed in public schools to assist in educating the disadvantaged. H.R. 610 would remove Title 1 funds to public schools and transform this funding into the voucher system that would follow an eligible child to whatever school they are attending (including religious, private, charter schools or students being home-schooled). Many states have laws in place separating church from state and the voucher system could allow for public funding to be funneled to religious organizations.
The proposal is assuming that states would contribute approximately 110 billion dollars into the voucher system which would ultimately provide approximately $12,000 per year to each student who qualifies for the voucher system. Additionally, the vouchers are geared towards students whose family fall in the poverty level and may not cover the complete cost of private schools and would require the families to pay the difference. The very families that have met poverty levels. There are a lot of proposals on how this voucher system would work, but none seem very clear. States hold local control over education policy and regulation, and would need to “buy-in”, literally and figuratively, with the federal proposal. The Act appears to be the beginning of an attempt to privatize education and dismantle public education. Essentially, it reallocates federal funding leaving public school districts scrambling to make cuts and find funding.
Voucher programs have existed on a smaller scale in this country for a long time. Some of the research points to inconclusive or contradictory results. Some states have reported better success of student on vouchers in testing and graduation and some have noted no increase in testing scores or graduation.
The second component of H.R. 610 introduces the “No Hungry Kids Act.” While on the surface this seems like a positive Act, it is actually removing the previous “Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act which purpose was to improve child nutrition through the school lunch and breakfast programs. The Healthy Act was requiring the schools to increase availability of fruits, vegetables, whole-grains, low-fat milk and reduce levels of sodium, trans-fats and saturated fats in school breakfast/lunch The prosed act would prohibit the USDA from rationing calories to children and remove the previous Healthy act requirements.
Effect of H.R. 610 Special Needs Students:
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 has been reauthorized every 5 years since its inception and has changed names several times. Whatever name it was at a given time did not matter to special education students, as it always provided protection. The ESEA provided that schools who receive federal funding must provide support for students with disabilities. Under the new proposal, federal funding in the form of grants, would not require the schools receiving the vouchered students to provide services. Private and religious schools are not required to provide special education services. Removing funding from public schools that offer a spectrum of services and place it in the hands of private or religious schools further impacts public education and decreases funding for special education services.
Summary:
If H.R. 610 passes, essentially it removes federal funding to public education and repeals the ESEA which protects programs for special education students, students in poverty, gifted students, ESL programs, rural education and school safety. Providing a free and appropriate education to all and ensuring special education students access to the curriculum and accommodations will cease to exist. The goal of H.R. 610 is to privatize education and defund public education. To dismantle fifty years of progress in education and rely on inconsistent research of school vouchers is a dangerous path and may leave many disabled, under-privileged and middle-class students abandoned.