Proposed Priorities, Requirements, Definition, and Selection Criteria-Education Innovation and Research- Teacher-Directed Professional Learning Experiences, 20455-20460 [2020-07753]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[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