Madam Chairwoman and Members of the City Council Education Committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today on the public school choice and supplemental educational services requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and New York's implementation of these provisions. Choice and supplemental services under Title I are two of the most important elements of No Child Left Behind, and the Bush Administration has made their successful implementation a very high priority. These provisions are especially important to parents of students in your city. About 356,000 students in New York City were eligible for public school choice last year, and 240,000 were eligible for supplemental services.

The key mission of No Child Left Behind is to close the achievement gap in America's public schools. No Child Left Behind thus has the potential to make the American dream available for every single neighborhood across America. It does this in two ways: through high standards and accountability from the top, and through choice and flexibility from the bottom. First, the law raises the stakes in terms of school accountability. It requires (beginning in school year 2005-06) annual testing in mathematics and reading or language arts in grades three through eight and once in high school, so that teachers have up-to-date data that can help to diagnose problems and identify solutions before any student falls through the cracks. (Currently, testing is required once per grade span.) It requires all schools to make "adequate yearly progress" (AYP). Its principal innovation is to hold schools accountable for the success of all groups of students so high average test scores will not mask serious achievement gaps. We are seeing success across America, from New York to Oregon. In New York, state education officials released a list of over 1,000 schools that made substantial gains on statewide English and math tests, including many in poor neighborhoods. In Oregon, almost two-thirds of the more than 1,100 schools met all of the state targets for achievement and high-poverty schools outperformed other schools.

In the past few years, we've seen the first effects of this new accountability system. Thousands of schools are being identified as "in need of improvement." The greatest shock comes in communities that generally have good school systems, but have a previously unknown achievement gap. Our hope is that by revealing these inconsistencies, districts will learn to better target their resources on students who need help the most.

Second, No Child Left Behind seeks to empower parents with information and options for change if their child's academic needs are not being met. Education reforms enacted earlier this year give unprecedented new options to parents and children trapped in low-performing schools. Both choice and supplemental services provide parents additional opportunities to be involved in their child's education. The idea that parents should have options should not be controversial. After all, there are higher education options in every size and shape imaginable. K-12 education should be no different. While schools will aim to meet state standards, one size certainly does not fit all, and one educational model certainly does not serve every child. We need choices within our education system.

The choice provisions of NCLB say that if a school is in need of improvement – which means that it has not met its AYP target for at least two consecutive years in reading or math – then parents should be free to send their child to a better-performing public school. The school choice provision of NCLB benefits students in the short run by allowing them to choose to attend another school while their home school undergoes improvement. It also benefits students and communities in the long run by forcing school districts to take a hard look at the schools in their system, determine if students' needs are being met by the current set of schools, and implement reforms that will improve the quality of the educational services that schools offer.

If the school hasn't met its targets for three years, low-income parents should have the opportunity to access supplemental educational services – in essence free tutoring for their children, with priority going to low-performing students. The thinking behind the supplemental educational services provision is that, during the time a school is identified as in need of improvement and is turning itself around by adopting new curricula or other reforms, the students in that school should not be left behind. The tutoring they can receive after school, if delivered effectively, gives students a way of keeping up, making academic gains, and helping their school to reach state goals. You would certainly want extra help for students who are not achieving at grade level. Middle and upper class parents, in ever-greater numbers, go out and purchase that kind of extra help. No Child Left Behind tries to level the playing field for families who cannot afford it.

My hope is that, with all the emphasis placed on results by the No Child Left Behind Act, the law will energize local administrators and others. Across the nation, 112,000 low-income children have received free tutoring. That was just in the first year of the law. Schools in need of improvement have been identified, with additional resources matched to their needs. And close to 50,000 parents took advantage of school choice when they transferred their children from poorly performing schools to better educational environments.

I am testifying in this hearing today because the Bush Administration believes the law provides an unprecedented opportunity for meaningful reform and school improvement in American schools, including those in New York City. Councilwoman Moskowitz has pointed out some challenges New York City is facing as the school system implements choice and supplemental services. The U.S. Department of Education has been working closely with the New York State Department of Education as it oversees the city's implementation of these requirements. As a general point of clarification, under the law, the U.S. Department of Education has a direct relationship with State educational agencies, not with individual school districts. Each State has a responsibility to monitor local educational agencies to ensure they are complying with the law. The U.S. Department of Education, in turn, monitors State educational agencies to make sure that they are carrying out their responsibilities to see that the law is being properly implemented.

New York City parents should have full and fair access to public school choice and supplemental educational services, as the law provides. In order to create a strategic approach to informing parents of their options in the future, the New York State Department of Education, along with a Parent Information Resource Center supported by the U.S. Department of Education, will be conducting an informational session in New York City this November. This event will provide critical training and support for educators, parent organizations and community-based organizations, so that parents receive a consistent set of messages about their options under No Child Left Behind. The State has also indicated to us that it is taking steps to expedite its reporting of schools identified as in need of improvement, corrective action, or restructuring and has plans to move up its State assessments so that the State can post official results earlier in the year. These actions will help ensure that parents in New York City receive information on their choice and supplemental educational service options well before the school year begins, that is, at the time when parents are most likely to be interested in choosing a new school or a supplemental service provider.

As we (the State and U.S. Department of Education) work closely together to ensure New York City implements school choice and supplemental services for this school year, we are also working to encourage creative options the district can use to expand its capacity to meet students' choice needs for future years. For example, the Chancellor has shown great leadership in launching high-quality charter schools in the city, and pushing State policymakers to lift the cap on new charter schools. That's the kind of capacity-building that we would like to see all across the nation.

The U.S. Department of Education is working to highlight promising practices on public school choice and supplemental services from around the nation, so that districts can build on each other's successes. This past spring, our Office of Innovation and Improvement released two publications on these "Innovations in Education" which drew lessons from school districts on reaching out to parents, creating a positive environment for choice and supplemental services, meeting logistical challenges, and more. These publications are available through the Department's web site.

I want to mention one other effort we are making to help districts improve public school choice. We recently made a grant award to the Center for Education Innovation – Public Education Association (CEI-PEA) to provide quality public school choice to five inner-city public school districts in five different cities (New York City; Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, PA; and Cleveland and Columbus, OH). To reach this goal, CEI-PEA will establish and develop Centers for Quality Public School Choice that will reflect local needs, evolve through local initiatives, and be sustained by becoming institutionalized within each of the school districts.

These are all common-sense measures to adapt the education system to the 21st century. We are focusing on the needs of the children in the system—not the system itself. And, we have put our money where our mouth is: President Bush has set federal support for education at $57 billion for fiscal year 2005, a 36 percent increase since he took office. He promised to provide the resources to make this law work. And he has delivered.

While the U.S. Department of Education has provided support to States and districts through grants, publications and technical assistance, it is up to all of you to make these provisions work. Pressure from school choice advocates is needed to push these issues from the "ground-up" so these "top-down" solutions can take hold. I appreciate the hard work of this City Council Education Committee. Thank you for inviting me to speak to you today.

####