^[1]

Obama administration officials said they are convinced they have the authority to make the changes without congressional approval.

The Obama administration is poised to spare school districts from potentially harsh penalties for low-performing schools if states agree to broad reforms favored by the federal government, including the linking of teacher evaluations to student test scores.

The plan, outlined by senior administration officials Sept. 22, would relieve school districts from the requirements of the decade-old No Child Left Behind Act, which requires nearly all students to be academically “proficient” by 2014. Schools that fall short are subject to being shut down, turned over to outside groups, or forced to replace their staffs.

“To help states, districts, and schools that are ready to move forward with education reform, our administration will provide flexibility from the law in exchange for a real commitment to undertake change,” President Obama said in a statement. “The purpose is not to give states and districts a reprieve from accountability, but rather to unleash energy to improve our schools at the local level.”

The president is expected to make additional remarks on his education initiatives at the White House on Sept. 23.

Under current law, most experts say that nearly every school that receives federal aid would, sooner or later, be deemed a failure, except where individual states dramatically lower academic standards. Congressional action to revise the law—and halt looming penalties for tens of thousands of schools—has stalled as other issues have consumed lawmakers.

Relief would come from a waiver dispensed by the U.S. Department of Education, which is overseen by Education Secretary Arne Duncan. For the administration, the waivers are an opportunity to advance favored reforms without waiting for overdue direction from Congress. This could include freeing some much-needed funding for districts to use at their discretion.

But two provisions for obtaining a waiver are likely to spark debate in particular. One is the push to use student data as part of a teacher’s evaluation. The other is the designation of each state’s lowest-performing 15 percent of schools for the aggressive, often controversial, sanction already in place under NCLB.

States expected to seek waivers under the administration’s plan include Illinois, Maryland, and Ohio, among others.

California’s top education official was unavailable for comment Sept. 22 but has repeatedly objected to pre-conditions for waivers. The Obama administration should not be setting federal education policy on its own, California Supt. of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson has said. He is joined in that view by some members of Congress, as well as by some officials from other states.

Torlakson also opposes using data from California’s standardized tests as part of a teacher’s evaluation. In a meeting last week with editors and reporters from the Los Angeles Times, he said the tests were not designed for that purpose.

California still could qualify for a waiver, however, if it is willing to work toward the administration’s goals, which could be encompassed in the next generation of state tests.

Torlakson’s views align closely with the California Teachers Association, the major financial backer behind his election. The leadership of United Teachers Los Angeles has strongly opposed using test data in evaluations, although some unions elsewhere have allowed test scores to play a role. In California, teacher evaluation methods must be negotiated with bargaining units.

L.A. schools Supt. John Deasy said the federal priorities echo his own.

“It’s a high bar Secretary Duncan has set, and I have no problem meeting the bar,” Deasy said. “I will be urging the state to apply for this.”

If the state receives a waiver, L.A. Unified could gain new freedom in how it spends more than $100 million in federal funds annually. Currently, much of that money must go to outside tutoring services at schools failing to meet No Child Left Behind targets. There is little oversight over tutoring vendors and that strategy has yielded few benefits, Deasy said.

Forgoing a waiver, said Deasy, “would be a shame and harmful to districts in desperate fiscal situations who are not afraid of an appropriately balanced accountability system.”

The fact that waivers are needed underscores the partisan gridlock that has gripped Washington since the midterm election last year, when tea party conservatives helped Republicans win control of the House of Representatives. Despite initial indications that Republicans and Democrats could work together on education policy, little progress has been made toward rewriting NCLB.

The tenor represents a major shift from a decade ago, when current House Speaker John Boehner—then a little-known GOP lawmaker from Ohio—helped to build his leadership credentials by working with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, a liberal Massachusetts Democrat, to move NCLB through Congress.

“Some people read the election in 2010 the wrong way. The public wants us to work together,” said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, a Maryland Democrat. “If we can’t agree on educational issues, which go to the essence of our society, we’re in trouble.”

States can apply for waivers as early as mid-November and get a response by early next year.

To receive a waiver, states also would have to adopt the Common Core standards, as well as new tests aligned to the standards. Forty-five states have pledged support for the Common Core standards and are developing tests that will be in use by 2014.

Republicans on Capitol Hill have been largely critical of the Obama administration’s proposal, which Department of Education officials have been hinting at for months. Rep. John Kline, chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said the announcement could undermine congressional efforts to pass a broader education measure.

“I simply cannot support a process that grants the secretary of education sweeping authority to hand pick winners and losers,” the Minnesota Republican said in a statement. “This sets a dangerous precedent, and every single American should be extremely wary.”

But Obama administration officials said they are convinced they have the authority to make the changes without congressional approval.

“We want to let states and districts know that relief arrives tomorrow,” a senior administration official said.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, issued a statement questioning the administration’s continued emphasis on using test-score data to evaluate teachers.

“In the absence of congressional reauthorization, we understand why the Obama administration is taking this action; we are keenly aware of the calls from parents, teachers, and administrators for change—sooner rather than later. [But] waivers are an imperfect answer to the stalemate in Congress and, at best, can provide only a temporary salve,” she said.

“We are pleased that the administration’s proposal includes more options for improving low-performing schools, recognizing that many of the remedies prescribed in NCLB were not flexible enough. … However, after all we’ve learned about how to construct and implement meaningful teacher evaluation and development systems since Race to the Top was announced two years ago, we’re disappointed that the lessons learned are not evident in this package. Evaluation needs to be more teaching-focused, not more testing-focused.”