1. Stop "Straight A’s" – which deserves to be called the "Parent Disempowerment Act." Straight A’s would let States and districts exempt themselves from virtually all the key requirements that spell out the elements of a quality education that parents can expect and the requirements that give parents a real role. Any bill with these provisions must get a "no" vote, regardless of whether it increases this year’s education funding.

1. None of the school-level provisions of Title I would apply, so the schools would still get $8 billion or more of Title I money but no longer have to spell out how they will provide enriched curriculum, effective instruction, highly qualified staff, and timely and effective individual help for students to master standards. Further states and districts could ignore the requirements to help schools do these things. And all the Title I requirements for parent involvement in program design and implementation would also no longer apply.
2. Straight A’s would tell schools they could take Comprehensive School Reform Demonstration money, but no longer actually need to have and implement a comprehensive school reform plan.
3. In short, Straight A’s cuts the legs out from under school reform and eliminates the elements of a quality education that parents should be able to count on for their kids from their school.
4. Straight A’s is written as if these core requirements are the barrier to quality education, when the real barrier is failure to implement them.
5. Even if there were federal requirements that were standing in the way of reform – there is already more than enough flexibility in existing law – through waivers, consolidation of plans and applications, consolidation of administrative funds, and Ed-Flex.
6. Supporters of Straight A’s say that parents don’t need these quality provisions because, after all, the school has promised under Title I to increase student achievement results over time. That’s is like telling parents that when take their children to a hospital, it’s o.k. to get rid of all standards of care for treatment or for dispensing drugs because the hospital has now promised to reduce its mortality rates.

2. Proposed new State and district requirements to help ensure that teachers are certified in, or have majors in, the fields they are teaching are worthwhile, but don’t call that "highly qualified" or "fully qualified." As in current law, Title I schools and districts still need to work with parents to figure out how to make sure that the certified teachers are "highly qualified" to help all their students master high standards. This process, now required by sections 1114 and 1115, will be short-circuited if they can say, well, the teachers are already "highly qualified" because all it means is that they’ve got certificates in their field.

1. Make it clear that when school wide programs consolidate their funds under other programs, they cannot ignore the substantive requirements of these programs – such as the Perkins Act requirements designed to ensure that vocational students are not channeled into second-class education and narrow job training. Right now, school wide Title I schools can take money under Perkins and other federal programs and then ignore all the school-level requirements, regardless of whether they are barriers to consolidated funding or not.
   
2. Require that targeted assistance programs have a plan for student achievement, just like school wide programs already do.
   
3. Provide frequent information for parents and teachers about how well their individual children are doing in relation to standards. Teachers and principals should be better trained in how to design classroom-based assessments that will provide this information, and to how in use the information. (This does not require, and will not be accomplished by, additional state-level tests – the existing Title I state assessment requirements, if properly implemented, are already sufficient for program accountability.)
   
4. Count students who do not take the state assessments, fail to be promoted, drop out, or fail to graduate when determining whether a school is making adequate yearly progress in achievement. Otherwise, the assessment results hide the real number of students who haven’t yet demonstrated proficiency.
   
5. Make sure that parents are heavily involved in designing the school performance report cards and other information that parents get.
   
6. Change negotiated rule-making for Title I regulations by making sure that consumers (parents and students) have equal representation in the negotiations, instead of being vastly outnumbered.

3. Make sure that Parent Information and Resource Centers are truly an independent source of support and information for parents, with majority parent boards or governing bodies. Also include Local Family Information Centers to provide independent, locally based support especially in high-poverty areas.