Sentences with phrase «federal footprint»
The phrase "federal footprint" refers to the impact or presence of the federal government in a particular area or sector. It represents the influence, activities, and resources allocated by the federal government within a specific region or industry. Full definition
We believe that the benefits of a lighter federal footprint outweigh the risks — that it will allow states to be more nimble and quick, rather than encourage them to run backwards again.
educationnext.org
Never mind that this brief account of Senator Alexander's career is incredibly misleading; Alexander joined other Republicans in calling for the elimination of the Department of Education in the mid-1990s, and has long pushed for a smaller federal footprint in education.
The current nomination contest is no exception, with all of the GOP candidates calling for a smaller federal footprint, if not the outright closure of the Department of Education.
«We're dramatically increasing the federal footprint that's there,» FEMA administrator Brock Long said outside the White House.
Former department Assistant Secretary Carmel Martin wrote, some might say incongruously, that ESSA wasn't a departure because Duncan «had actually shrank the federal footprint in education.»
The NCLB law has also been criticized for growing the federal footprint in K - 12 education, and for relying too heavily on standardized tests.
And, this week, there's the (bipartisan) Harkin - Enzi bill, authored by the chairman and ranking member (respectively) of the Senate education committee, which, well, it's hard to tell exactly what it does, but it surely reduces the federal footprint around accountability.
In that, it did something exquisitely rare, which is to shrink the federal footprint in the domestic sphere (the normal course of events is a steady increase of federal control).
The tension is that Romney has pledged both to reduce the federal footprint and to use federal levers to push states to offer more choice.
Reflecting a seismic shift in attitudes toward the federal footprint in education, states and districts are getting broad flexibility when it comes to how they measure school and student progress.
That's right: Contrary to popular belief, Secretary Arne DuncanArne Starkey DuncanObama Education secretary mocks Pruitt over staff raises Parkland survivors talk gun violence with Chicago high schoolers Trump administration is putting profits over students MORE actually shrank the federal footprint in education by empowering states to be drivers of education reform.
«President Trump is committed to reducing the federal footprint in education, and that is reflected in this budget,» Secretary of Education DeVos told members of a key House subcommittee.
On the Republican side, you have many who want to dramatically reduce the federal footprint in federal education policy, and then others who accept that there is going to be a federal role, and think it needs to enhance accountability and expand choice where possible.
Republicans, however — who have praised DeVos's willingness to shrink the federal footprint in education and take on teachers unions — showed no signs of withdrawing their support, meaning it appears DeVos almost certainly will be confirmed.
The resulting pushback against No Child Left Behind — especially from conservatives who want to shrink the federal footprint — has led many in the GOP - controlled Congress to try to shift power back to the states and curtail federal oversight of public schools.
On the right, conservatives want to shrink the federal footprint in education even further; on the left, the civil rights community and the Obama administration have argued that federal government must have the power to keep states from hiding achievement gaps or ignoring struggling schools.
While the administration's proposed cuts have been embraced by fiscal conservatives who argue that Education Department programs need to be trimmed or eliminated, some conservatives are also troubled by the administration's proposal to invest new money in school choice, saying that represents an unwelcome expansion of the federal footprint in education.
He and Alexander want to «reduce the federal footprint in K - 12 education» and strip Education Secretary Arne Duncan of his power to reward states that adopt the Obama administration's standards and punish those that don't.
Chairman Kline reiterated the four priorities that guided his ESEA bills» development in the last Congress: restoring local control, reducing the federal footprint in local education decisions, improving teacher effectiveness, and empowering parents.
It provides more flexibility and authority to states and local school districts, and it seeks to remove the federal footprint in education policy.
According to the Education and the Workforce Committee, «The Student Success Act (H.R. 5) will restore local control, support more effective teachers, reduce the federal footprint, and empower parents.»
According to Alyson Klein from Education Week, «The NCLB law criticized for growing the federal footprint in K - 12 education, and for relying too heavily on standardized tests.
More broadly, ESSA does something exquisitely rare — it actively shrinks the federal footprint, in perhaps the sharpest reversal of federal ambitions since the welfare - reform act of 1996.