Education Week - January 7, 2015 - 21

was a leading author of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, which
was enacted in 1990. The landmark
law required buildings and public
transportation to be wheelchair-accessible,
and called for accommodations
for people with disabilities in
the workplace.
"This is really going to change
American society in a very significant
way," Sen. Harkin said in 1989,
just months before the bill was
signed into law by President George
H.W. Bush.
And he was right. Since the enactment
of the law, and its subsequent
expansion in 2008, 54 million people
with disabilities in the United States
have greater access to employment
and educational opportunities.
His efforts on the issue have been
inspired in part by his late brother,
Frank Harkin, who was deaf. During
the passage of the ada, Sen. Harkin
gave an entire speech on the floor of
the Senate using only sign language.
As the chairman or ranking member,
since 1990, of the appropriations
subcommittee that oversees education
funding, Sen. Harkin sought to
provide full federal funding for the
Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act, which helps cover the cost of
students in special education. The law
authorizes Congress to contribute up
to 40 percent of the average per pupil
expenditure, but it's never been fully
funded. In fiscal 2014, for example,
federal funds covered 16 percent of
the estimated excess cost of educating
children with disabilities.
PAGE 22 >
Leaving the Stage: U.S. Rep. George Miller Reflects
In a four-decade career in Congress,
just-retired U.S. Rep. George Miller,
D-Calif., put an indelible stamp on
education policy. Most recently the ranking
Democrat on the House Education and the
Workforce Committee, he previously was
the chairman of the education committee
when Democrats were in control of the
U.S. House of Representatives. He has
long championed education equality
for low-income and minority students,
English-language learners, students with
disabilities, and other communities facing
disadvantages, and was a key architect of
the No Child Left Behind Act.
At a post-election event presented
by Education Week and the Gallup
organization, Mr. Miller reflected on
education policy and his career in Congress
in an interview with Assistant Editor and
Politics K-12 blogger Alyson Klein. Here is
an edited version of that Nov. 12 discussion.
what's not there, including any sort of
clear definition of "achievement gap."
In broader waiver-renewal guidance
released in November, the department
told states they needed
to ensure schools with big achievement
gaps can't get the highest rating
possible on their state accountability
system. That seemed to be a
direct response to a report put out
last fall by the Education Trust
which looked at how states were
identifying schools with significant
achievement gaps in their accountability
systems.
'Take This Seriously'
But there's nothing in the initial
waiver-renewal guidance, or in this
new list of frequently asked questions,
that would give states any
indication of what constitutes a big
achievement gap.
That's understandable, said
Ms. Hall. "If they tried to define
'achievement gap' in a particular
way it would not have worked for all
states," she said.
But the lack of a definition
doesn't mean states shouldn't take
the directive to heart, she added.
"It's incumbent on states to take
this seriously not just as one more
compliance exercise. It's also incumbent
on the department to
evaluate state plans rigorously, incumbent
on state advocates to pay
attention and push their states in
the right direction."
You have been a leading force on
education for decades. What was the best
moment? What are you most proud of?
I think it's hard, because I've had such
wonderful opportunities and success. But
I think for me, the involvement [in] and
the passage of, and the continuation of, the
landmark legislation known as Education
for All Handicapped Children [now the
Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act]. At that time [1975], in many parts of
the country, children with what we would
consider today very minor disabilities could
be barred from public schools, and were.
And today, when I walk into the disabilities
community, almost anywhere in the country,
I am confronted with people who are college
graduates, who have their own businesses,
who are lawyers, doctors, who are reporters.
They're in every part of our economy and our
society, and yet there was a time when they
couldn't get the basic key to participation,
which was an education. To me, that access
... is one of the most exciting things that
have happened to me. That became my
touchstone in everything I did in education.
If you had one do-over in the last 40
years, something you could go back and
change, what would it be?
I don't have many of those, because to me if
you fail, that's why they built in tomorrows.
In legislation, you have to be prepared to fail
many, many times. If you look at things I've
been involved in, whether it's the environment
or with children, some of it took 10 or 15 years.
In some ways, the atmosphere on Capitol
Hill has become more poisonous and
partisan at this point than in any other
part of your career. When did you see that
shift start to happen? Do you think it can
change, and what would it take?
Well, if everyone just lived up to the
comments they made the night of the election
and three or four days after the election, we'd
probably be home free in the next session of
Congress, but we know the reality of this place.
To me, the most visible point in terms of this
history was Newt Gingrich really deciding
Elected to Congress in 1974, U.S. Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., was an architect of No Child
Left Behind and other laws. He retired after the recently concluded 113th Congress.
that the Republicans [in 1975] in the minority
... were comfortable, and he didn't like that.
He said, "You'll never be in the majority." So he
started ... being confrontational on the floor,
... and today it's come full circle. Some people
would even suggest some of the reforms we
did in our class in 1974, ... that breaking down
the seniority system and breaking down some
of the rules in the Congress, have led to this.
It didn't happen overnight, and it didn't just
happen in the last two years. There's been a
drift in the Congress, and it's diminished the
legislative process. ... The idea that you would
spend a week, maybe, debating the nuances of
national education policy, no-now you get an
hour. I don't think that works in a big, diverse
democracy in America.
When Secretary of Education Arne Duncan
was picked, you were really excited
because you wanted a disrupter in the
role of education secretary.
I got one.
Sounds like you think he lived up to that.
How do you see his tenure?
Oh, I think he's clearly lived up to it. You
have to remember, when he came here we
already had three or four wheels in the mud,
certainly, around the reauthorization of No
Child Left Behind. We were going nowhere.
[Now-retired U.S. Rep. Howard P. "Buck"]
McKeon and I worked very hard to put a
discussion draft out, and we got shot down
by all points on the compass. I think that
the secretary had to make a decision on
behalf of the president: ... He could wait for
the Congress, and he would be waiting still
today, six years later. So they decided to act
with the [nclb] waivers and the Race to the
Top. I think it was the right decision from an
incoming administration.
You've said that No Child Left Behind is,
at its core, a civil rights law. Do you think
that a reauthorization can move with this
new set of players? And do you think they
can put together a bill that maintains its
civil rights core?
I don't think there's much debate on either
side of the aisle about that aspect of this. I
don't think you can go back to a time when
you think you can deny access to a quality
education. ... The real question is going to
be about implementation and the question
of [whether] you have a good accountability
system. If ... you really have a system that
works, then, in fact, you can have a second
discussion about what about involving ... the
state and local government.
There's been a lot of interest lately in an
idea of staggered testing, grade-span
testing, or at the very least substituting
local tests for state tests. Is that a policy
you would support, and what do you see as
the potential pitfalls?
I think you have to be very, very careful,
and I don't know these suggestions are really
answers. I go back to the fundamentals, and
the fundamentals are: Do you have a good
assessment system? And does that assessment
system inform the teacher, the school,
and others about how they're doing with
curriculum? ... If you start grade-span testing,
I question whether there's too much time [in
between tests]. And let's not pretend like we're
all doing a crackerjack job. There are students
in terrible learning situations that need to be
improved. The idea that we would step out
[of] the accountability system doesn't make
sense. I don't think that can be justified given
the situation that, again, poor and minority
and other students are in terrible situations in
many schools in this country.
What's next for you? How will you
continue to contribute to this debate and
discussion?
There is no way you can re-create your
life in Congress, which for me has been one
of the great rides possible for a person who
is engaged in issues. What I'd like to do is
pursue my passions in some other venue
where I could continue to have an impact on
outcomes and have the excitement of being
engaged. So my passions are children, the
environment, and working men and women.
So we will see what will happen.
View a video of the full Q&A. /www.edweek.org/
go/miller-interview
EDUCATION WEEK | January 7, 2015 | www.edweek.org | 21
J. Scott Applewhite/AP-File

http://www.edweek.org

Education Week - January 7, 2015

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Education Week - January 7, 2015