Duncan's Waiving (Not Waving) the School Reform Flag

by Frederick M. Hess  •  Jul 9, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Cross-posted from The Enterprise Blog

http://www.frederickhess.org/2009/07/duncan-school-reform

Back in April, the U.S. Department of Education released proposed guidance for waivers related to the use of No Child Left Behind Title I funding. The comment period is drawing to a close, with comments due by July 13. Sounds promising, no? In the midst of tough budgetary times, a reform-minded Secretary of Education who's pledged to take a bite out of bureaucracy and promote smart problem-solving is pushing to let states and districts be more creative about how they spend federal largesse.

The guidances makes clear that states and districts may request a waiver of pretty much any Title I, Part A, statutory or regulatory requirement–except those that are expressly prohibited. Sounds even better, huh? Well, it does, until one sees what's expressly prohibited. That's where it's made clear that states and districts are prohibited from doing anything different when it comes to comparability of services; the requirement that federal dollars supplement and not supplant other spending; the "equitable" participation of private school students and teachers; requirements regarding parental participation; the full suite of applicable civil rights rules; requirements for charter schools; and the selection of school attendance areas.

So, what exactly are Secretary Duncan and his team of reformers empowering states and districts to waive? They can seek to waive the requirement that parents be notified of their public school choice options at least 14 days before school starts. Districts or schools which are currently prohibited from providing "supplemental educational services" due to low performance could seek permission to provide SES services. Districts with schools identified as "needs improvement" would face reduced pressure to spend federal Title I dollars on public school choice or supplemental services.

The proposals leave untouched the rules and regulations governing inputs, even as they encourage states and districts to undermine key NCLB provisions intended to offer school choice and alternative tutoring services to kids in low-performing schools. Like much of NCLB, these provisions aren't especially well-designed and haven't exactly wowed. But one could readily make the same point, in spades, about the input regs that the Department rules off-limits. More disconcertingly, this is one more indicator that Obama school reform agenda thus far adds up to pleasing rhetoric and to ameliorating the concerns of vocal state and local officials, while kicking the hard stuff down the road.

receive the latest by email: subscribe to frederick m. hess's free mailing list