[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 71 (Monday, April 13, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20455-20460]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07753]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED-2020-OESE-0025]
Proposed Priorities, Requirements, Definition, and Selection
Criteria--Education Innovation and Research-- Teacher-Directed
Professional Learning Experiences
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirements, definition, and selection
criteria.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for the Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education proposes priorities, requirements, definition, and
selection criteria under the Education Innovation and Research (EIR)
program, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) numbers 84.411A/
B/C. The Assistant Secretary may use these priorities, requirements,
definition, and selection criteria for competitions in fiscal year (FY)
2020 and later years. The Department proposes these priorities,
requirements, definition, and selection criteria to support
competitions under the EIR program for the purpose of developing,
implementing, and evaluating teacher-directed professional learning
projects designed to enhance instructional practice and improve
achievement and attainment for high-need students. The Department
believes that teacher-directed professional development provided
through such projects may be more effective in improving instructional
practice and student outcomes than the one-size-fits-all professional
development activities often funded by school systems in response to
districtwide improvement goals.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before May 13, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not
accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after
the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies,
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to
submit your comments electronically. Information on using
Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents,
submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site
under ``How to use Regulations.gov'' in the Help section.
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you
mail or deliver your comments about the proposed priorities,
requirements, definition, and selection criteria, address them to
Ashley Brizzo, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 3E325, Washington, DC 20202.
Privacy Note: The Department's policy is to make all comments
received from members of the public available for public viewing in
their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include
in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly
available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ashley Brizzo. U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E325, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 453-7122. Email: [email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
this notification. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in
developing the notice of final priorities, requirements, definition,
and selection
[[Page 20456]]
criteria, we urge you to clearly identify the specific proposed
priority, requirement, definition, and selection criteria that each
comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13371 and their
overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result
from these proposed priorities, requirements, definition, and selection
criteria. Please let us know of any further ways we could reduce
potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving the
effective and efficient administration of the program.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about the proposed priorities, requirements, definition, and
selection criteria by accessing Regulations.gov. You may also inspect
the comments in person at 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E325,
Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Eastern
time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal holidays.
Please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Directed Questions: The Department seeks input on three specific
areas of the proposed priorities, requirements, definition, and
selection criteria. Regarding Proposed Priority 2, the Department seeks
input from the public regarding whether partnership with a State
educational agency (SEA) is necessary for successful systems-level
change, such as to allow teacher-directed professional learning to be
substituted for other mandatory professional development activities
(e.g., professional development hours required as part of certification
renewal); or to provide for a greater selection of professional
learning providers and experiences. Likewise, the Department seeks
input from the public regarding whether partnership with a local
educational agency (LEA) is necessary for successful systems-change.
Regarding Application Requirement (d)(1), the Department seeks input
from the public regarding what, if any, challenges would applicants
have in meeting the proposed requirement that teacher-directed
professional learning must replace no less than a majority of the
existing mandatory professional development for participating teachers;
the Department also seeks input on anticipated technical assistant
needs to be able to comply with this requirement.
Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request we will provide an appropriate
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the
public rulemaking record for the proposed priorities, requirements,
definition, and selection criteria. If you want to schedule an
appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The EIR program, established under section 4611
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended (ESEA),
provides funding to create, develop, implement, replicate, or take to
scale entrepreneurial, evidence-based, field-initiated innovations to
improve student achievement and attainment for high-need students; and
rigorously evaluate such innovations. The EIR program is designed to
generate and validate solutions to persistent education challenges and
to support the expansion of those solutions to serve substantially
larger numbers of students.
Program Authority: Section 4611 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7261.
Proposed Priorities
This notification contains three proposed priorities.
Proposed Priority 1--Teacher Directed Professional Learning
Background: Although school-related factors such as curriculum,
family engagement, and funding contribute to student academic
performance, research suggests that the single most important school-
based factor impacting students' achievement is their teacher
(Hanushek, 2016; Stronge & Tucker, 2000). Creating every opportunity
for teachers to engage deeply with high-quality professional
development that is aligned to students' academic and other learning
needs holds promise, therefore, in boosting student achievement.
Alignment of professional development to teacher needs is also
critical. Research on adult learning (andragogy) posits that adults
engage more deeply with learning opportunities when those opportunities
are aligned to their interests (Trotter, 2006). Among teachers, those
interests can vary between phases of their careers. For example, novice
teachers may seek to improve classroom management skills, content
knowledge, and pedagogy. In contrast, more experienced teachers may
want to develop the advanced skills necessary to take on new leadership
roles or increase intensive intervention skills. Andragogy suggests
that adult learning can be differentiated by the learner's need--that
is, personalized--and indeed should be to maximize engagement in
learning (Trotter, 2006).
Leveraging the power of personalization, and the deep engagement
with learning it promotes, is critical if teacher professional
development is to have an impact on educator practice. The Learning
Policy Institute (2017) identifies a set of seven pillars for effective
professional development. Among them are: (1) Active learning, (2)
collaboration, (3) coaching and support, (4) feedback and reflection,
and (5) training of a sustained duration (Learning Policy Institute,
2017). A common thread among each of these practices is that they
require teachers to invest meaningful effort and attention. No matter
how well designed by the provider, the promise of these pillars to
improve teacher practice is only realized when teachers engage fully
with their content. Adult learning theory suggests personalization is
one way to make it more likely that teachers will (Trotter, 2006).
Giving teachers the financial and other resources needed to
personalize their professional development, consistent with their needs
and the needs of their students, has the potential to maximize benefits
to both themselves and their students. Research indicates that having
teachers create professional learning plans and giving them the freedom
to select the activities that will support them in achieving the goals
outlined in those plans could have positive effects on student
achievement and attainment (Rabbitt, et al., 2015). Thus, it may be the
case that a stipend program may magnify the efficacy of other
personalization efforts by giving teachers access to options that
otherwise may have been inaccessible due to other professional
development requirements or that were cost prohibitive.
For these reasons, this proposed priority would support innovative
projects that develop and test approaches providing teachers with
professional learning stipends. With the autonomy to identify
instructionally relevant professional learning, teachers can improve
their craft to better support student achievement and attainment for
high-need students.
Proposed Priority: Under this priority, an applicant must propose a
project in which classroom teachers receive stipends to select
professional learning alternatives that are instructionally relevant
and meet their individual needs related to instructional practices for
high-need students. Additionally, teachers receiving stipends must be
allowed the flexibility to replace no less than a majority of existing
mandatory
[[Page 20457]]
professional development with such teacher-directed learning, which
must also be allowed to fully count toward any mandatory teacher
professional development goals (e.g., professional development hours
required as part of certification renewal, designated professional days
mandated by districts).
Proposed Priority 2--State Educational Agency Partnership
Background: Since teacher certification and training requirements
are usually under the purview of an SEA, an SEA is critical to
reshaping teacher professional learning opportunities to better serve
teachers and the students they teach. Moreover, an SEA may have an
opportunity to leverage greater selection of professional learning
providers and experiences. One example might include an SEA offering a
broad and comprehensive menu of pre-selected options for teachers to
choose from that reflect additional options beyond what was available
prior to the stipend program. Another example might include an SEA,
after implementation of the stipend program, incorporates a micro-
credential program (that a teacher paid for with the stipend) is
offered statewide to any teacher who wants it by the SEA informing
teachers about a new route to fulfilling licensure requirements. Thus,
an SEA may have an important role to play in supporting Proposed
Priority 1. One way of supporting projects submitted under Proposed
Priority 1 is through a partnership that includes an SEA.
Proposed Priority: Under this proposed priority, an application
must demonstrate it has established a partnership between an eligible
entity and an SEA (with either member of the partnership serving as the
applicant) to support the proposed project.
Proposed Priority 3--Local Educational Agency Partnership
Background: Given that teachers are employees of an LEA, an LEA is
critical in coordinating teacher professional learning opportunities
and managing the stipends teachers would receive. One example might
include an LEA coordinating a new intra-district job shadowing program
in which teachers could elect to use the stipend to pay for substitute
coverage while shadowing. Another example might include an LEA, after
implementation of the stipend program, enters into a contract agreement
with an entity that provided online coaching (paid for with the stipend
and determined as successful) to allow the coaching option to be
available to additional teachers throughout the district. Thus, an LEA
may have an important role to play in supporting Proposed Priority 1.
One way of supporting projects submitted under Proposed Priority 1 is
through a partnership that includes an LEA.
Proposed Priority: Under this priority, an application must
demonstrate it has established a partnership between an eligible entity
and an LEA (with either member of the partnership serving as the
applicant) to support the proposed project.
Types of Priorities: When inviting applications for a competition
using one or more priorities, we designate the type of each priority as
absolute, competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in
the Federal Register. The effect of each type of priority is as
follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Proposed Requirements
Background
The proposed application requirements specify the necessary
components to structure a program for teacher-directed professional
learning in ways that prioritize teacher autonomy, high-need students,
and high-quality professional learning.
Proposed Requirements
The Assistant Secretary proposes the following requirements for
this program. We may apply one or more of these requirements in any
year in which this program is in effect.
An applicant must--
(a) Describe the pool of teachers eligible to request a stipend,
including whether the applicant intends to prioritize eligibility based
on content areas, strategic staffing initiatives, or other factors (and
including a rationale for how such a determination addresses the needs
of high-need students, as defined by the applicant);
(b) Describe the anticipated level of teacher participation,
including--
(1) Current information on teacher satisfaction with existing
professional learning; and
(2) Details on the planned outreach strategy to communicate the
stipend opportunity to eligible teachers;
(c) Describe the proposed stipend structure, including--
(1) Estimated dollar amount per stipend, including associated
expenses related to the professional learning (e.g., materials,
transportation, etc.);
(2) A rationale for how the estimated dollar amount per stipend is
sufficient to ensure access to professional learning activities that
are, at minimum, comparable in quality, frequency, and duration to the
professional development other non-participating teachers will receive
in a given year;
(3) Mechanisms to protect against fraud, waste, and abuse (e.g.,
monitoring systems, reviews for conflicts of interest); and
(4) Plans for how the applicant will select participants if there
is more interest than available stipends (e.g., prioritizing by student
need, prioritizing by teacher need, teachers teaching in a specific
content area, human capital priorities, rubric-based review of
requests, lottery);
(d) Describe details about the stipend system, including--
(1) How the applicant will update its policies to offer stipends to
teachers such that no less than a majority of existing mandatory
professional development is replaced by teacher-directed professional
learning, including--
(i) The professional development days or activities from which
participating teachers will be released in order to enable teacher-
directed learning opportunities and to ensure that teacher-directed
learning replaces no less than a majority of existing mandatory
professional development; or
(ii) Other methods in which participating teachers will be given
the flexibility to participate in teacher-directed learning (e.g., by
providing release from and substitute teacher coverage during regular
instructional days) and how such methods will also ensure participating
teachers are released from no less than a majority of existing
professional development requirements;
(2) How the applicant will ensure that teacher-directed learning
will fully substitute for mandatory professional development in meeting
mandatory professional development goals or
[[Page 20458]]
activities (e.g., professional development hours required as part of
certification renewal, district- or contract-required professional
development hours);
(3) How the applicant will provide information to teachers about
professional learning options not previously available to teachers
(e.g., list of innovative options, qualified providers, other
resources);
(4) In addition to any list of professional learning options or
providers identified by the applicant, mechanisms for teachers to
independently select different high-quality, instructionally relevant
professional learning activities connected to the achievement and
attainment of high-need students (based on teacher-identified needs
such as self-assessment surveys, student assessment data, and
professional growth plans); and
(e) Describe strategies for supporting teachers' implementation of
changes in instructional practice as a result of their professional
learning;
(f) Describe the process for managing the stipend system,
including--
(1) For professional learning options that are among a list of
options identified by the applicant: The processes for teachers to
submit their requests to participate in those options in place of a
previously required training and the processes for direct vendor
payment using the stipend; and
(2) For different professional learning options selected by a
teacher that may not be on the applicant's list of options: How the
applicant will determine that the activity meets the definition of
``professional learning'' and is reasonable, and what processes the
applicant will implement to ensure payment or timely reimbursement to
teachers;
(g) Describe the proposed strategy to expand the use of
professional learning stipends (pending the results of the evaluation),
including the following:
(1) Plans for continuously improving the stipend system in order
to, over time, offer more teachers the opportunity to engage in
teacher-directed professional learning and, for participating teachers,
ensure a higher percentage of all mandatory professional learning is
teacher-directed.
(2) Mechanisms for incorporating effective practices discovered
through teacher-directed professional learning into the professional
development curriculum for all teachers; and
(h) Provide an assurance that--
(1) At a minimum, the SEA or LEA involved in the project (as an
applicant, partner, or implementation site) will maintain its current
fiscal and administrative levels of effort in teacher professional
development and allow the professional learning activities funded
through the stipends to supplement the level of effort that is
typically supported by the applicant;
(2) Project funds will only be used for instructionally relevant
professional learning activities and not solely for obtaining advanced
degrees, taking or preparing for licensure exams, or for pursuing
personal enrichment activities; and
(3) Projects will allow for a variety professional learning options
for teachers and not limit use of the stipend to a restrictive set of
choices (for example, professional learning provided only by the
applicant or partners, specific pedagogical or philosophical
viewpoints, or organizations with specific methodological stances). The
applicant and any application partners will not be the primary
financial beneficiaries of the professional learning stipends, and
there is no conflict between the applicant, any application partner,
and the purpose of providing teachers the autonomy to select their own
professional learning opportunities.
Proposed Definition
Background
Given the widely varied interpretation of professional learning, we
propose a specific definition for this program to promote a shared
understanding of the scope of professional learning that could be
supported by this program. Specifically, professional ``learning'' in
which teachers play an active role in their continued growth is
intended to replace the status quo professional ``development'' that is
provided to teachers.
Proposed Definition
The Assistant Secretary proposes the following definition for this
program. We may apply this definition in any year in which this program
is in effect.
Professional learning means instructionally relevant activities to
improve and increase classroom teachers'--
(1) Content knowledge;
(2) Understanding of instructional strategies and intervention
techniques for high-need students, including how best to analyze and
use data to inform such strategies and techniques; and
(3) Classroom management skills to better support high-need
students.
Professional learning must be job-embedded or classroom-focused and
related to the achievement and attainment of high-need students.
Professional learning may include innovative activities such as peer
shadowing opportunities, virtual mentoring, online modules,
professional learning communities, communities of practice, action
research, micro-credentials, and coaching support.
Proposed Selection Criteria
Background
The proposed selection criteria are intended to provide the
Department with the opportunity to allow peer reviewers to score
applications in ways that reinforce the primary purpose of Proposed
Priority 1.
Proposed Selection Criteria
The Assistant Secretary proposes the following selection criteria
for evaluating an application under this priority. We may apply one or
more of these selection criteria in any year in which this priority is
in effect.
(a) The sufficiency of the stipend amount to enable professional
learning funded through the stipend to replace a majority of the
existing mandatory professional development for participating teachers.
(b) The adequacy of plans to ensure that stipends are appropriately
used for professional learning that is instructionally relevant, high-
quality, and aligned to the identified needs of high-need students.
(c) The extent to which the proposed project will offer teachers
flexibility and autonomy in meeting the majority of professional
development requirements, including the extent of the choice teachers
have in their professional learning.
(d) The likelihood that the procedures and resources for teachers
results in a simple process to select or request professional learning
based on their professional learning needs and those identified needs
of high-need students.
(e) The adequacy of the mechanisms for teachers to sustain positive
changes in instructional practice.
(f) The likelihood that the professional learning supported through
the stipends will result in improved student outcomes.
(g) The reasonableness of the payment structure that enables
teachers to have an opportunity to apply for and use the stipend with
minimal burden.
(h) The adequacy of procedures for leveraging the stipend program
to inform continuous improvement and systematic changes to professional
learning.
[[Page 20459]]
References
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M., and Gardner, M., with assistance
from Espinoza, D. (2017). Effective teacher professional
development. Learning Policy Institute.
Hanushek, E.A. (2016). What matters for student achievement.
Education Next, 16(2), 18-26.
Rabbitt, B., Finegan, J., & Kellogg, N. (2019). Research-Based,
online learning for teachers: What the research literature tells us
about the design of platforms and virtual experiences for working
adult learners. The Learning Accelerator.
Stronge, J.H., & Tucker, P.D. (2000). Teacher evaluation and student
achievement. National Education Association.
Trotter, Y. (2006). Adult learning theories: Impacting professional
development programs. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 72(2), 8-13.
Final Priorities, Requirements, Definition, and Selection Criteria
We will announce the final priorities, requirements, definition,
and selection criteria in a notice in the Federal Register. We will
determine the final priorities requirements, definition, and selection
criteria after considering responses to the proposed priorities,
requirements, definition, and selection criteria and other information
available to the Department. This document does not preclude us from
proposing additional priorities, requirements, definitions, or
selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking
requirements.
Note: This notification does not solicit applications. In any year
in which we choose to use one or more of these priorities,
requirements, definition, and selection criteria we invite applications
through a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, it must be determined whether this
regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to the
requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely to
result in a rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or
Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the
Executive order.
This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f)(4) of Executive
Order 12866.
Under Executive Order 13771, for each new regulation that the
Department proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates
that is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866,
and that imposes total costs greater than zero, it must identify two
deregulatory actions. For FY 2020, any new incremental costs associated
with a new regulation must be fully offset by the elimination of
existing costs through deregulatory actions. However, Executive Order
13771 does not apply to ``transfer rules'' that cause only income
transfers between taxpayers and program beneficiaries, such as those
regarding discretionary grant programs. Because the proposed
priorities, requirements, definition, and selection criteria would be
used in connection with one or more discretionary grant programs,
Executive Order 13771 does not apply.
We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under
Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review
established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law,
Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only on a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing these proposed priorities, requirements, definition,
and selection criteria only on a reasoned determination that their
benefits would justify their costs. In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize
net benefits. Based on an analysis of anticipated costs and benefits,
we believe that this proposed regulatory action is consistent with the
principles in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this regulatory action would not
unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
Potential Costs and Benefits
In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
Proposed Priority 1 would give the Department the opportunity to
elevate the teaching profession by increasing the available funds for
professional learning while requiring that applicants maintain current
levels of investment. Additionally, by acknowledging teachers' ability
to identify their professional learning needs and empowering them to
select professional learning opportunities to meet those needs, we
believe that this proposed priority could result in a number of changes
including reducing personal costs that teachers incur when they must
pay for professional learning that they want through their own means if
their school, district, or State will not. We also believe that
teachers are more likely to have a committed investment in professional
learning that they select,
[[Page 20460]]
thereby enhancing the benefits of professional learning, including, but
not limited to, increased knowledge and skills. Such changes have the
potential to change instructional practices in ways that will improve
student outcomes.
Proposed Priorities 2 and 3 may have the result of shifting at
least some of the Department's grants among eligible entities by giving
the Department the opportunity to prioritize partnerships that might be
well suited to achieve the purposes of Proposed Priority 1. By
prioritizing projects that are supported by an SEA or LEA--entities
that establish professional development requirements--the Department is
increasing the likelihood that such teacher-driven approaches can be
implemented more widely, should they be determined as more effective.
Because this proposed priority would neither expand nor restrict the
universe of eligible entities for any Department grant program, and
since application submission and participation in our discretionary
grant programs is voluntary, there are not costs associated with this
proposed priority.
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum ``Plain
Language in Government Writing'' require each agency to write
regulations that are easy to understand.
The Secretary invites comments on how to make the proposed
priorities, requirements, definition, and selection criteria easier to
understand, including answers to questions such as the following:
Are the requirements in the proposed regulations clearly
stated?
Do the proposed regulations contain technical terms or
other wording that interferes with their clarity?
Does the format of the proposed regulations (grouping and
order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce
their clarity?
Would the proposed regulations be easier to understand if
we divided them into more (but shorter) sections?
Could the description of the proposed regulations in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble be more helpful in
making the proposed regulations easier to understand? If so, how?
What else could we do to make the proposed regulations
easier to understand?
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that this proposed regulatory action would
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The U.S. Small Business Administration Size Standards define
proprietary institutions as small businesses if they are independently
owned and operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and
have total annual revenue below $7,000,000. Nonprofit institutions are
defined as small entities if they are independently owned and operated
and not dominant in their field of operation. Public institutions are
defined as small organizations if they are operated by a government
overseeing a population below 50,000.
The small entities that this proposed regulatory action would
affect are public or private nonprofit agencies and organizations,
including institutions of higher education, that may apply. We believe
that the costs imposed on an applicant by the proposed priorities,
requirements, definition, and selection criteria would be limited to
paperwork burden related to preparing an application and that the
benefits of these proposed priorities, requirements, definition, and
selection criteria would outweigh any costs incurred by the applicant.
Therefore, these proposed priorities, requirements, definition, and
selection criteria would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act: The proposed priorities, requirements,
definition, and selection criteria do not contain any information
collection requirements.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Assessment of Educational Impact
In accordance with section 411 of GEPA, 20 U.S.C. 1221e-4, the
Secretary particularly requests comments on whether the proposed
regulations would require transmission of information that any other
agency or authority of the United States gathers or makes available.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., Braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can view this
document, as well as all other documents of the Department published in
the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To use
PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the
site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2020-07753 Filed 4-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P