When the No Child Left Behind Act was passed in 2001, Senator Judd Gregg, “old school” (limited government) conservative Republican of New Hamphsire, was the ranking member of the Education Committee chaired by Senator Kennedy. When control of the Senate shifted to the Republicans, he and Kennedy switched places until 2005 when Gregg became chair of the Budget Committee and was replaced by Senator Mike Enzi of Wyoming.

Gregg is credited as being one of NCLB’s authors, had a key oversight role in its implementation and remains a member of the committee. Gregg has credibility with Republicans from just right of center to just short of the party’s Ron Paul wing, so this proposal matters. It is also worth pointing out that Gregg stood in for both Al Gore and then John Kerry in George W. Bush’s practice sessions for the presidential debates. He knows his interlocutors on the other side of the aisle very well, and knows which parts of this proposal will be bargained away, and which are nonnegotiable.

Gregg is joined by fellow education committee member Richard Burr (R-NC). After a decade in the House, he was elected to the Senate seat vacated in 2005 by John Edwards, defeating former Clinton Administration Erskine Bowles. He is not a terribly powerful player, but he has been a very loyal supporter of the President.

Burr’s comment in the press release (attached below) is sleep-inducing, but Gregg’s is instructive:

“While the bill preserves the NCLB accountability system, it also provides additional flexibility to help schools target resources and interventions to students and schools most in need of assistance.”      

Any air between this proposal and the President’s would be worthy of attention. We’ll need to read the bill, but the summary suggests a proposal the Administration would not debate, indeed might have written. The proposal:

• Maintains the goal that all children reach grade-level proficiency by 2014….

• Maintains accountability without the addition of multiple measures and keeps a laser-like focus on grade-level achievement in math and reading….

• streamlines the accountability timeline to make it easier for schools to develop and implement plans to improve student achievement and to focus on what matters most—teaching and learning.
 
• allows for differentiated consequences to ensure that schools where a majority of students are not performing at grade-level are treated differently from schools where a small segment of the school population is not meeting state standards….

• expands the Department’s seven state growth model demonstration to all 50 states….

• Accelerates access to supplemental tutorial services….
 
• Expands time period parents can enroll their children for tutorial services.
 
• Authorizes a new “money follows the child” program – program provides financial assistance to districts that permit Title I dollars to follow the child to the public school of his or her choice….

• maintains the current definition of highly qualified teachers;
 
• emphasizes alternative certification, incentive, differential, and performance and merit pay….

• Allows school districts and principals to renegotiate collective bargaining agreements….

• Requires states to establish a rigorous high school graduation rate by 2011…

• Authorizes a new high school program designed to increase graduation rates....

They key points for the industry are:

• "Differentiated consequences" which might open up a new protect market, similar to SES, but hopefully involving programs proven to improve student performance.

• The new time line - which is unclear given the intent to keep the 100X2014 goal.

• The areas of give and take probably include •  “money follows the child” ; alternative certification, incentive, differential, and performance and merit pay; and renegotiating collective bargaining agreements.