Maybe someone on the House Education Committee Chairman's staff reads edbizbuzz.com, because Representative George Miller of California began his July 30 speech to the National Press Club by comparing the goal of leaving no child behind with President Kennedy's vision of placing a man on the moon and returning him safely to earth.  (Watch webcast here.)

Nevertheless, after the quick bow to a Democratic President, the Chairman, an architect of NCLB I, moved straight to political realities.

Let me be clear.... We didn’t get it all right when we enacted the law. Throughout our schools and communities, the American people have a very strong sense that the No Child Left Behind Act is not fair. That it is not flexible. And that it is not funded. And they are not wrong. The question is what we are going to do next.... I can tell you that there are no votes in the U.S. House of Representatives for continuing the No Child Left Behind Act without making serious changes to it.... My vision for this next bill is to take America’s education policy in a new direction....

What matters about this speech is how Miller approached the substance of reauthorization.  He suggested six themes. Your editor suggests his specific proposals:

Growth Model - Yes

The legislation I will introduce will contain a growth model that gives credit to states and schools for the progress that their students make over time...

Multiple Measures of Accountability - Yes

In addition, many Americans do not believe that the success of our students or our schools can be measured by one test administered on one day. I agree with them..... We will allow the use of additional valid and reliable measures to assess student learning and school performance more fairly, comprehensively, and accurately.  One such measure for high schools must be graduation rates....

Standards - Voluntary

In my bill, we will ask employers and colleges to come together as stakeholders with the states to jointly develop more rigorous standards....  This requires that assessments be fully aligned with these new state standards and include multiple measures of success.... These measures can no longer reflect just basic skills and memorization. Rather, they must reflect critical thinking skills and the ability to apply knowledge....

[I]f states take this step and commit to the students of their state that they will prepare them for the universities and jobs of the future, then we will provide them with incentives and assistance

Performance Pay - Yes

[T]he legislation I will introduce will provide for performance pay for principals and teachers based on fair and proven models, teacher mentoring, teacher career ladders, and improved working conditions....

Differentiated Accountability - Yes

Under current law schools whose students have not made adequate achievement gains are all treated the same under the law today – with the same interventions and sanctions taking place over the same period of time.... We need to distinguish among different schools and the challenges facing them, as well as their needs for addressing those challenges.... Schools with specific problems in specific areas should be allowed to use instructional interventions that are appropriate to their needs. High priority schools, meanwhile, must receive more intensive support and assistance....

More Money - Yes

[F]inally, this legislation will invest in our schools....

Much has been made of the unusual political coalition that developed the No Child Left Behind Act and the important role that President Bush played. Now the discussion has shifted to No Child Left Behind as the most important domestic legacy for this President.... I would only say this: President Bush’s legacy will not be established if he vetoes the education funding in the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bill.

What was left unmentioned: Reading First, public school transfer and Supplemental Educational Services, (as well as vouchers, charters, SBR, EETT and STEM.)

On the whole, not promising for the school improvement industry. Once multiple measures of accountability are introduced into the debate, who knows where it will lead. The lack of any reference to SES, transfer and Reading First says at least that Miller is no diehard supporter of any, and maybe we ought to be grateful that he didn't come out against any of them.

The Chairman is aiming for the House to pass its version of the new law in September. Your editor doubts it's possible. Vacations alone would seem to make it impossible, and unless the Democrats plan to go along with Miller en masse, it's hard to imagine there's enough time to sort the various alterntive provisions out. But if the Chairman is not voicing his own wishful thinking, the school improvement industry is in for a rough time.

If your editor is correct, there's time - maybe not to turn things around to the rosy future too many industry leaders expected Geoge Bush to deliver, but to mitigate the damage that will be done to the marketplace. If you are an investor in k-12, you might wait to see how this turns out before making any big decisions. If you are the CEO of a provider, or on the board, you should not be waiting to see how this turns out;  you should be spending your time trying to do something about it. There will be plenty of time later to decide "who lost China." and reasses industry trade groups, strategy and leadership. You might start thinking about what  to do before then by listening to this editor's podcasts  on political risk, AYP and  the industry's interests in NCLB II.