Washington Times - "Spellings opposes No Child changes"

Spellings opposes No Child changes
By Amy Fagan
September 6, 2007

Education Secretary Margaret Spellings yesterday said she won't support changes that weaken accountability for schools under the No Child Left Behind law.

"We need to stay the course," Mrs. Spellings said of the 2002 law, which is up for renewal this year. "We don't need to water this law down or change direction now."

Her remarks officially kicked off what are shaping up to be vigorous negotiations over how much to change the law, touted by President Bush as one of his signature accomplishments.

NCLB requires states to test and track students annually in reading and math and holds schools accountable if they fail to make adequate yearly progress. Educators have criticized it for being far too inflexible.

"There's a very clear perception in this country that this law isn't fair or flexible," said Rep. George Miller, California Democrat and chairman of the House education committee. "We want to make what we think are important and positive changes."

Mrs. Spellings expressed concern about a draft proposal Mr. Miller is circulating along with Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon of California, the ranking Republican on the committee. Mr. Miller said the proposal would make "significant improvements" to NCLB. The education secretary, however, says the act only needs "perfecting tweaks."

The draft would retain the law's requirement that students reach proficiency in reading and math by 2014. But it would allow states to use other factors to determine adequate yearly progress, such as graduation rates, the percentage of students completing college-preparatory courses and test scores in other subjects.

"We think this gives a more accurate view of students, schools and teachers," Mr. Miller said.
Mrs. Spellings said that setup means reading and math scores "would no longer be accurate reflections" of student ability in those areas.

She also criticized the proposal's new system of handling schools that don't make adequate yearly progress, which she said would treat those schools that barely miss the mark more harshly than those who miss it by a large margin.

Mrs. Spellings said she fears that means "a low-performing school might never be held accountable for real change."

And she said it's "unacceptable" to allow students learning English to be tested in their native language for up to five years, with the possibility of an additional two-year waiver. The draft includes such a provision.

Teachers unions, advocacy groups, policy-makers and the business community are all weighing in.

"Some feel it doesn't go far enough; some feel it goes too far," Mr. McKeon said of the draft, which he hasn't officially endorsed. "I'm hopeful that we're going to come out with a great product."

Mr. Miller and Mr. McKeon are expected to reveal more proposed changes to the law today.

The panel will hold a hearing on the topic Monday, and Mr. Miller intends to send legislation to the House floor before the end of the month.

Meanwhile, some argued yesterday the law should be scrapped completely.

Rep. Scott Garrett, New Jersey Republican, has crafted a bill that would let states opt out of NCLB. More than 30 Republicans have signed on, while more than 60 have signed on to a similar Republican bill.

"NCLB ... has taken authority away from the local level, where it should be," Mr. Garrett said yesterday at an event at the libertarian Cato Institute. "That's my goal — return authority where it belongs."