By Della B. Cronin

With the excitement of the debate and passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) almost a distant memory, the Department of Education is currently taking on the task of developing regulatory guidance related to the implementation of the new law. While the wonky proceeding is the kind of thing Washington insiders live for, it is a process that can be as much fun as watching paint dry. Seriously. 

At the beginning of March, the Department of Education announced that 24 individuals had been selected to serve as “negotiators” or alternates on the negotiated rulemaking committee. That means that these folks will engage in debate with the Department of Education and each other on how best to implement certain provisions of ESSA to best meet the goals of the law while maintaining the intentions of the Congress who wrote and passed the law. The new statute specifically requires engaging in this process on the law’s “supplement, not supplant” provisions and certain assessment requirements. (The term “supplement, not supplant” refers to a requirement for state and local agencies to use only federal funds they receive under Title I of the law to supplement any resources they would invest in serving at-risk populations—rather than supplanting those investments.) The assessment provisions at issue include one related to exempting certain 8th grade students from required mathematics assessments. For example, under the new law, a student taking algebra or geometry in the 8th grade could skip the state’s standard assessment for 8th graders in mathematics that year and instead take the end-of-year test for the advance course they are taking. (You can see Department’s Issue Paper here.)

The committee met for three days in Washington, this month and while the session was largely collegial, subtle differences in positions are becoming clear. It could be argued that some of the civil rights representatives would like the supplement, not supplant conversation to address comparability (ensuring that all students have access to the same quality teachers, resources and facilities) as well—an issue that administrators say is inappropriate in a discussion that is purely financial, in their view. Regardless, this first session was more about establishing procedures and getting to know each other than deciding the details of difficult issues. That will come later as the committee meets twice more and then the Department of Education draft regulations that will be subject to comment from the community. NCTM will be watching the process closely and weighing in on issues that affect its members and the teaching and learning of mathematics.

Over on Capitol Hill, the annual exercise of developing, debating, and passing a budget for the federal government is underway and already controversial. House Republicans and Senate Democrats are at odds over the total amount of money that should be spent on federal programs—a familiar situation. Leadership has to balance the views of disparate parties and the desire to pass a budget, even though almost everyone concedes that final spending for the next fiscal year won’t be decided until after the November elections during a presumed lame-duck session.

The House and Senate are also debating how to improve federal career and technical education programs and revising the Higher Education Act. The America COMPETES bill, as well as budgets for important research agencies and programs are also on the collective Congressional to-do list. That list will be difficult to complete, since Congress will essentially leave town in the middle of July for party conventions, followed by a longer-than-usual August recess.  So while the cherry blossoms are still decorating the Tidal Basin today, the Congressional calendar has very few days left on it.

Della B. Cronin is a principal at Washington Partners, LLC.