We’ve heard all about testing and teacher pay since the House education committee released its discussion drafts on NCLB.
Beware of another potential headache: paperwork. That’s what the American Association of School Administrators says.
In two separate documents (hereand here), AASA lists the new red tape the House proposal would add. Committees would need to form, studies would have to be published, and new reports would need to be filed. Under the Title I proposal, districts would be overwhelmed trying to comply with everything the draft would require in their improvement plans, AASA says. Under Title II, districts would have to collect data on teachers that they don’t have right now and might not have the capacity to get, the group says.
While paperwork is an important issue for AASA, reducing it probably wouldn’t change the group’s opposition to the draft. “There is no relief from the prescriptive nature of the current law,” Paul Houston, AASA’s executive director, told the House Education and Labor Committee on Sept. 10. The group lobbied against NCLB in 2001 and looks ready to do again—unless major changes are made.
A version of this news article first appeared in the NCLB: Act II blog.