Title III
Learn more about the federal money for English-language acquisition, including how much money there is and how it's administered
Title III Funding for English Learners, Explained
As the nation’s English-learner population continues to grow , researchers look to the Title III for how to best support these students.
Education
What the Feds Said About 'Supplement Not Supplant' for Title III
I hope you've had a chance to read my reports on this blog of what officials from the U.S. Department of Education have been saying about the "supplement-not-supplant" provision of Title III, the section of the No Child Left Behind Act that authorizes funds for English-language-acquisition programs. The provision says that money from Title III can't be used in place of money from local, state, or federal sources that would otherwise be spent on ELLs. Andrew Brownstein of Thompson Publishing Group has recently posted a report on the same topic, "Title III Supplanting Provisions Draw Questions." (Hat tip to This Week in Education.) He picks up on one of the issues that I've reported on previously, that a number of states have been using Title III funds to pay for English-language-proficiency tests, and federal officials say that's not allowed. For previously unreported details from a discussion that took place at a session of the LEP Partnership meeting on Oct. 15, such as how Title III funds can be used to pay for an ELL resource teacher, read the points with bullets at the end of Mr. Brownstein's piece.
Federal
The Marriage of Title I and Title III
Given that the joining of Title I and Title III under one administrative office of the U.S. Department of Education has already taken place, Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. has put aside its objections and put out a joint statement with the National Association of State Title I Directors with recommendations for how the union should work. It's a statement about how the two programs should be coordinated from the federal level down to the classroom.
Education
What CAN Title III Funds Be Spent On?
At the LEP Partnership meeting last week, several U.S. Department of Education officials spelled out for state education officials what federal Title III funds cannot be spent on. But I came away wondering what the funds CAN be spent on. Title III is the part of the No Child Left Behind Act that authorizes funds for English-language-acquisition programs.
English Learners
Some Education Groups Oppose Move of Title III Grant Program
The agenda for the LEP Partnership meeting scheduled for this Wednesday and Thursday lists Zollie Stevenson as the director of student achievement and school accountability programs for both Title I and Title III programs of the No Child Left Behind Act. Title I authorizes funds for disadvantaged students and also includes some provisions for English-language learners, and Title III is the main conduit of funding for English-language-acquisition programs.
Education
Feds Pay for Study on Distribution of Title III Money
The U.S. Department of Education announced this week that it will provide $754,415 to the National Academy of Sciences to examine how federal funds under Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act can best be distributed to states. Title III is the section of the law that authorizes funds for English-language-acquisition programs.
Education
Feds Stress "Supplement Not Supplant" with Title III
The federal government has sent to chief state school officers a letter reiterating that federal funds targeted for English-language learners may not be used to replace local, state, or other federal money that otherwise would be spent on such students. The Oct. 2 letter says that U.S. Department of Education officials encountered some "state and local practices" while monitoring programs for English-language learners that suggested a need for clarification.
English Learners
Ed Department Puts Title I and Title III Under Same Administration
State education officials received an e-mail message from the U.S. Department of Education last week announcing that the administration of Title III—the main conduit for the funding of ELL programs under the No Child Left Behind Act—will soon be carried out by the same office that administers Title I. Title III has been handled by the office of English-language acquisition, while Title I, which provides funds for disadvantaged students and also contains some provisions applying specifically to English-language learners, is administered by the office of elementary and secondary education.
Education
State Officials Speak Up on "Interpretation" for Title III
The voices of state education officials are strongly present in the comments that have been submitted to the U.S. Department of Education regarding its proposed "interpretation" of Title III of the No Child Left Behind Act, which was published in the Federal Register on May 2. And many of them don't like one of the proposed requirements in particular: that states be required to use the same criteria to decide if students have attained proficiency in English as they do to determine when students should leave special programs. Education officials and educators in California raised a bigger outcry than those in any other state regarding that requirement.
Education
Senate Draft of Title III of NCLB
My colleague David Hoff has passed along to me a draft of Title III, the section of the No Child Left Behind Act for English-acquisition programs, that a Senate committee is proposing for reauthorization of the act. Unlike the "discussion draft" released by the House Education and Labor Committee in August, the proposals of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee are not yet online. The partial draft of a revised NCLB from the Senate has only been circulated among lobbyists for comments (for more on that see David Hoff's blog, NCLB: Act II).
Education
Where's the Ed Department's Evaluation of NCLB's Title III?
Back in March, an official from the office of English language acquisition for the U.S. Department of Education told me the department was just about ready to send a two-year evaluation of programs for English-language learners to the U.S. Congress.
