March, 2001 Contents
 Elementary
and Secondary Education Act Reauthorization
Senate Reaches a Tentative Compromise on ESEA
Reauthorization
The Administration and Senators leaders have reached a tentative
compromise
on a number of controversial issues in S.1, The Best Bill, the
reauthorization
of the Elementary ans Secondary Education Act (ESEA). In exchange for
Senate
Republican agreement to authorize significantly more funding (in the
billions)
for numerous education programs, including special education, Senate
Democrats
have agreed to provisions in the bill that would authorize a
multi-state and
multi-district Straight A’s pilot project and the expenditure of
federal
funds for private tutoring. This agreement was negotiated between the
White
House and Sens. James Jeffords (R-VT), Edward Kennedy (D-MA), Judd
Gregg (R-NH)
and Joseph Lieberman (D-CT).
Specifically, the agreement would allow children in failing schools
to either
move to higher performing public schools or to receive
federally-funded private
tutoring, which could be provided by community-based organizations.
The agreement
also would establish a pilot Straight A’s initiative, under which
seven
states and twenty-five local districts would participate in a Straight
A’s
demonstration project. Participating states would be allowed to
consolidate
federal program funds that they receive by formula and use them for
any reasonable
educational purpose. Because funds disbursed by competitive grant
could not
be consolidated under this scheme, local districts participating in
the pilot
program could not consolidate federal technology funds and use them
for other
purposes. Under S.1, districts must compete at the state level for
federal education
technology funding.
However, the Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology
(PT3) program,
which funds pre-service teacher technology training, remains in
jeopardy. The
White House does not support a separate authorization for the PT3
program, which
the Senate HELP Committee version contains currently, and may seek to
consolidate
it with other education technology programs or eliminate it
altogether.
The Senate is expected to begin floor debate on April 23. The bill
can be accessed
at http://thomas.loc.gov.
House Education Committee Introduces ESEA Bill
The House Education and Workforce Committee, led by Chairman John
Boehner (R-OH)
introduced H.R. 1, No Child Left Behind, the reauthorization of ESEA
on March
22. H.R. 1 mirrors the proposals set out by President Bush. The House
bill would
consolidate all education technology programs into a single education
technology
program and block grant 95% of this combined fund directly to the
states and
the remaining 5% would be reserved for the Secretary of Education.
States, in
turn, would be required to reserve 5% of their block granted funds for
state
activities, and to distribute the remaining 95% to local education
agencies.
The funds reserved for the Secretary would be used to conduct
evaluations, provide
technical assistance, and operate programs of national significance.
All states would receive their block grants based on a formula, split
between
Title I funding allocations and school age population. States would be
required
to distribute funds to districts also based on a formula: 80 percent
of state
funds would be distributed by the state to high need local education
agencies;
and the remaining 20 percent on a competitive basis.
Districts would be allowed to use their technology block grant
dollars to increase
access to technology, improve teacher professional development in
technology,
develop innovative strategies to use technology, and purchase
filtering and
blocking software.
Education technology leaders in the House Education & the
Workforce Committee
have indicated that they will offer an amendment to authorize the
Preparing
Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology program during the markup
of H.R.
1.
The Committee is expected to begin markup of H.R. 1 in early May. The
bill
can be accessed at http://thomas.loc.gov.
House Education & Workforce Committee Hearing on ESEA
Reauthorization
On, March 29, the House Education & Workforce Committee conducted
a full
committee hearing on the reauthorization of the Elementary and
Secondary Education
Act (ESEA). The hearing described three competing reauthorization
proposals:
Chairman Boehner’s (R-OH) H.R.
1, based upon President Bush’s education plan, Leave No
Child Behind;
Ranking Member Rep. George Miller’s (D-CA) H.R.
340, The Excellence in Education Act, and Rep. Tim
Roemer’s
(D-IN) H.R.
345, The Three R’s Act.
Most discussion at the hearing centered on the issues of vouchers and
school
funding. H.R. 1 contains provisions that would permit school districts
to use
federal funds to provide vouchers for private school tuition to
disadvantaged
students in failing public schools. During the hearing, numerous
Republican
members renewed their commitment to this voucher concept, with
Chairman Boehner
and Rep. Schaffer (R-OH) describing vouchers as a critical part of
school reform
and ensuring accountability. Most Democratic committee members
spoke-out against
vouchers, but supported public school choice options.
At the hearing, neither education technology nor the E-rate was
discussed specifically,
although there was some limited discussion on teaching students skills
for tomorrow’s
workforce and improving the quality of teachers’ pre- and
in-service professional
development. In his prepared testimony, Mr. Bailey, Chairman,
President and
CEO of Williams Corporation and a representative of the Business
Coalition for
Excellence in Education, spoke about the need to improve teacher
quality, math
and science education, and the importance of integrating technology
into the
curricula. Mr. Bailey was scored by several Committee members,
including Chairman
Boehner, for BCEE’s support of using the National Assessment of
Educational
Progress (NAEP) tests to evaluate student performance.
Chairman Boehner did not discuss any specific legislative plans or
strategy,
except to say that the Committee would continue to work toward
compromise on
the contentious issues during the coming month.
House
Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness Conducts Ed-Tech
Hearing
On March 15, the House of Representatives Committee on Education and
the Workforce
Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness held a hearing
on the
use of technology to improve education. Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA)
called the
hearing to highlight successful education technology efforts and
discuss the
proposals advanced by the U.S. Web-based Education Commission. The
hearing,
however, was most notable for its exploration of obstacles to the
roll-out of
technologies, including broadband. Rep. Isakson (R-GA) gained
agreement from
all of the Subcommittee’s witnesses when he suggested that the
federal
government establish a virtual clearinghouse to aggregate best
educational technology
practices. Rep. Isakson also advocated “tearing down”
barriers to
technology expansion. He agreed wholeheartedly with AOL representative
Mark
Nixon that business is moving at the “speed of light” but is
being
hindered by outdated bureaucratic processes (e.g. state text book
programs and
course accreditations).
The issue of high-speed Internet access, particularly in rural areas,
received
significant attention. Dennis Doyle of SchoolNET praised the E-rate
for speeding
deployment of advanced technologies. Mark Nixon stated that although
we have
made progress in connecting schools, many classrooms lacked Internet
connections
and had insufficient hardware. Mr. Nixon recommended leveraging the
technology
already in place by opening up schools after hours and investing in
technology
for libraries and community centers. Related to that subject, Rep.
Goodlatte
noted with approval AOL’s support for PowerUP, the non-profit
program that
has established more than 300 after-school technology sites across the
country.
Budget News
The Bush Administration will not attempt to consolidate the E-rate
program
with the Department of EducationÕs educational technology programs,
according
to the testimony of Secretary of Education Rod Paige at the House
Education
& Workforce Committee hearing on March 7th. President Bush had
initially planned
to consolidate the E-rate program, currently administered by the
Federal Communications
Commission, with educational technology programs administered by the
Department
of Education.
Paige did not elaborate further on current plans for the E-rate, but
Thomas
Skelly, Director of Budget Services at the Dept. of Education added
that the
Administration was still interested in streamlining the E-rate program
which
has been criticized as overly complicated and time-consuming. He did
note, though,
that the E-rate would not be part of the department's budget.
Possible reasons for the Bush Administration's apparent policy
reversal may
include the strong opposition it encountered from original E-rate
sponsors and
EdLiNC, the Education and Library Networks Coalition groups, of which
ISTE is
a member. Also, during the Feb. 15th Senate HELP Committee hearing on
President
Bush's education plan, Sen. Barbara Mikulsi (D-MD) voiced strong
support for
maintaining the specific and predictable funding available through the
Universal
Service Program and pressed the issue with Sec. Paige.
Senate Judiciary Committee Holds Hearings On Bill
Addressing
Distance Learning And Copyright
On March 13, the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on
legislation that
would update existing copyright law to accommodate distance learning.
Cosponsored
by Judiciary Chairman Hatch (R., UT) and Ranking Member Leahy (D.,
VT), the
Technology, Education, and Copyright Harmonization (TEACH) Act, would
allow
educators to use the same material in distance learning via the
Internet that
they use in face-to-face classroom interaction.
Distance learning advocates, educators, and content providers offered
testimony
regarding the bill (S. 487). Among them was Gerald E. Heeger,
President of the
University of Maryland University College, who testified on behalf of
organizations
including the Association of American Universities, the American
Council on
Education, the National Association of State Universities and
Land-Grant Colleges,
the American Library Association, the International Society for
Technology
in Education, and the Consortium for School Networking. Heeger
suggested
that the legislation is needed to correct deficiencies in present
copyright
law, which was not written with the Internet or the virtual classroom
in mind.
“Current law does not fully accommodate the technical aspects of
delivering
instructional content over computer networks,” he said.
Notably, the bill would:
- Eliminate the requirement for a distance learning copyright
exemption that
instruction occur in a physical classroom or that special
circumstances prevent
the attendance of students in the classroom.
- Extend the distance learning exemption to the temporary copies,
often known
as “ephemeral” copies, necessarily made in networked
services when
transmitting material over the Internet.
- Amend current law to allow distance learning educators to show
limited
portions of dramatic literary and musical works, audiovisual works,
and sound
recordings, in addition to the complete versions of nondramatic
literary and
musical works currently exempted. This change applies only to
educators
in an online distance learning setting and students officially
enrolled in
a distance learning class.
- Require distance educators to implement technological safeguards
to ensure
that the dissemination of material covered under the exemption is
limited
only to the students who are intended to receive it.
- Direct the Copyright Office to conduct a study on the state of
licensing
for private and public school digital distance education programs
and the
use of copyrighted works in such programs, as well as to convene a
conference
to develop guidelines for the use of copyrighted works in digital
distance
education.
Transcripts from the hearings and more information about the
legislation are
available at www.senate.gov/~judiciary/.
E-rate Updates
Federal Internet Filtering Mandate: Lawsuits Filed & FCC Rule
Released
There has been considerable activity around the ChildrenÕs Internet
Protection
Act (CIPA) during the past several weeks. The American Library
Association and
the American Civil Liberties Union each filed lawsuits challenging the
ActÕs
constitutionality, the House Committee on Energy & Commerce,
Subcommittee on
Telecommunications and the Internet held a hearing on filtering, and
the Federal
Communications Commission issued rules to implement CIPAÕs E-rate
provisions.
CIPA, enacted in 2000, mandates that schools and libraries receiving
E-rate
discounts and certain other federal technology funding, put into place
Internet
safety policies that include installation and use of Internet
filtering software
preventing access to “visual depictions” of material that is
obscene,
child pornography, and when minors are using the computer, material
that is
harmful to minors.
Lawsuits
In their lawsuits, the ALA and ACLU were joined by a number of
libraries,
library associations, individual library users, and Internet
publications that
have been or are concerned about being inappropriately filtered. No
schools
or school districts are involved with either lawsuit. The ACLU has
indicated
a willingness to challenge the school provisions, but as of now, there
is no
ongoing legal action that would prevent CIPAÕs school-based
restrictions from
being enforced.
The main points that the lawsuits raise include concerns that CIPA
violates
the First Amendment, overrides grassroots-based local decisions about
how to
manage Internet access in libraries, and will be ineffective because
the filtering
products currently available are both under- and over- inclusive,
missing material
that the law requires to be blocked, and blocking material that is
clearly protected
by the First Amendment.
Congressional Hearing
The House subcommittee hearing focused on the implications of the
CIPA in regard
to libraries and the E-rate. It began to explore issues raised in the
lawsuits
filed by the ACLU and the ALA, against enforcement of this Act.
In his opening statement, Subcommittee Chairman Upton (R-MI) said
that he
supported “the goals” of CIPA but noted with approval the
non-filtering
protections utilized by the Kalamazoo Public Library. Upton stated
that libraries
should be responsible for preventing children from accessing
pornography and
that parents should be able to send their children to libraries with
an expectation
that they will not be exposed to such inappropriate material. Rep.
Harmon (D-CA)
indicated that she was concerned with this law because it places
control over
content decisions not with parents, as with the V-chip, but with the
federal
government. Rep. Pickering (R-MS), an author of CIPA, described the
Act as “a
common-sense, mainstream, constitutional” way to protect children
from
sexual predators and obscenity. He noted that it is considerably
narrower than
the CDA or COPA statutes, and because it is tied to funding, it is
analogous
to seatbelt laws.
The Subcommittee heard testimony on the Act's constitutionality from
ACLU attorney
Marvin Johnson and Bruce Taylor, President of the National Law Center
for Children
and Families. Taylor strongly supported Pickering's interpretation,
while Johnson
explained the grounds underlying the ACLU lawsuit. The Subcommittee
also heard
from two librarians with starkly different opinions of CIPA: Laura
Morgan, a
Chicago Public Library librarian who is suing her employer for
allowing a hostile
working environment by refusing to filter Internet access; and Carolyn
Caywood,
from Virginia Beach, VA, whose testimony focused on the success of her
library's
partial filtering strategy and how CIPA's implementation would
overturn that
strategy. Finally, the Subcommittee heard testimony from
representatives of
two filtering companies, both of who insisted that filtering
technologies are
extremely effective. However, Susan Getgood of SurfControl indicated
that filtering
should not be mandatory.
FCC Rule Implementing CIPA for E-rate Recipients
The FCC's order on CIPA includes the following specifics:
- The provisions of CIPA will apply the rules beginning with Year
4—which
commences July 1, 2001.
- Schools and libraries must certify, during Year 4, that they are
either
in compliance with the filtering and blocking requirements, or that
they are
“undertaking such actions, including any necessary procurement
procedures,
to put in place” the required measures.
- Schools and libraries must make one of the certifications no
later than
October 28, 2001. HOWEVER, it is important to note that they will
not receive
discounts for services until one of the certifications is received.
- Certifications pursuant to CIPA will be made on modified versions
of Form
486, which is already used by applicants to notify the USAC that
services
have commenced. It must be filed with USAC within 10 days of the
commencement
of the service.
- Certifications will consist of a simple check-box where
recipients indicate
that they have complied with CIPA, will comply with CIPA, or need
not comply
with CIPA because they only receive E-rate support for services
classified
by USAC as telecommunications services.
- Any applicants in a consortium must submit signed certifications
to the
billed entity that leads the consortium. These certifications will
use a new
form, 479. Mere certification from a representative of a consortium
is not
sufficient.
Moving Forward
A more detailed analysis of the newly released FCC rules will be
forthcoming.
As the lawsuit begins to move forward, additional analyses of the
lawsuit will
also be provided.
Chairman Tauzin Attacks E-rate, Proposes Investigative
Commission
Although the E-rate appears safe from the Administration's earlier
plans to
consolidate it with education technology programs as part of ESEA
reauthorization,
the E-rate continues to come under fire from House Energy and Commerce
Committee
Chairman Billy Tauzin (R-LA). While announcing the publication of his
paper,
entitled “Telecom Deregulation, Broadband Deployment, and
Economic Growth”,
Tauzin made the following comments about the E-rate program:
“When the
FCC gave us the E-rate, a massive tax upon telephone consumers to
carry out
a building program in the education and hospital and library areas of
our country,
there was a blurring of all kinds of lines that our founding fathers
attempted
to draw in our basic structure of government. Here, the FCC is passing
taxes;
directing corporations to spend money without Congressional oversight
or review,
or appropriation; and, in fact, executively deciding who gets and who
doesn't
get the benefit of these dollars in a way that I believe offends the
basic structure
of our government.... That sort of activity by the FCC has to
stop.” He
proposed a “blue ribbon commission to work with the General
Accounting
Office and provide recommendations.” In the coming months,
Chairman Tauzin
plans to take-up FCC reform legislation, which might prove to be a
vehicle for
altering the E-rate.
© ISTE, 2001
|
