Proposed Priorities, Requirements, and Definition-Augustus F. Hawkins Centers of Excellence Program, 6470-6475 [2024-01972]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6470-6475]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-01972]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Chapter VI

[ED-2024-OPE-0002]


Proposed Priorities, Requirements, and Definition--Augustus F. 
Hawkins Centers of Excellence Program

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.

ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirements, and definition.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) proposes priorities, 
requirements, and definition for use in the Augustus F. Hawkins Centers 
of Excellence (Hawkins) Program, Assistance Listing Number 84.428A. The 
Department may use one or more of these priorities, requirements, and 
definition for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2024 and later years. 
We intend for these priorities, requirements, and definition to help 
increase the number of, and retain, well-prepared teachers from diverse 
backgrounds, resulting in a more diverse teacher workforce prepared to 
teach in our Nation's underserved elementary and secondary schools and 
close student opportunity and achievement gaps.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before March 4, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at www.regulations.gov. However, if you require an accommodation 
or cannot otherwise submit your comments via www.regulations.gov, 
please contact one of the program contact persons listed under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The Department will not accept comments 
submitted by fax or by email, or comments submitted after the comment 
period closes. To ensure the Department does 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 
``FAQ.''
    Note: The Department's policy is generally to make 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: Dr. Vicki Robinson, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20202. 
Telephone: (202) 453-7907. Email: [email protected]. You may also 
contact Ashley Hillary, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland 
Avenue SW, 5th floor, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 453-7880. 
Email: [email protected].
    If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and 
wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7-1-1.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding 
the proposed priorities, requirements, and definition. To ensure that 
your comments have maximum effect in developing the final priorities, 
requirements, and definition, we urge you to identify clearly the 
specific section of the proposed priorities, requirements, and 
definition that each comment addresses.
    We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094 and their 
overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result 
from these proposed priorities, requirements, and definition. 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 public 
comments about the proposed priorities, requirements, and definition by 
accessing Regulations.gov. To inspect comments in person, please 
contact one of the persons listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT.
    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

[[Page 6471]]

documents in the public rulemaking record for these proposed 
priorities, requirements, and definition. 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 Hawkins Program, authorized under part B of 
title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA), is 
designed to support comprehensive, high-quality State-accredited 
teacher preparation programs by creating centers of excellence at 
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs); Tribal Colleges 
or Universities (TCUs); or Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs), such 
as Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs). The Hawkins Program will help 
increase the number of, and retain, well-prepared teachers from diverse 
backgrounds, resulting in a more diverse teacher workforce prepared to 
teach in our Nation's highest-need elementary and secondary schools and 
close student opportunity and achievement gaps. This program focuses on 
the various aspects of the teacher preparation pipeline, including the 
recruitment, preparation, support, placement, and retention and 
retraining of teachers for and in high-need schools to support 
underserved students. Through this program, the Secretary seeks to fund 
applicants that propose to incorporate evidence-based practices into 
their teacher preparation program.
    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1033-1033a.

Proposed Priorities

    Background: There is significant inequity in students' access to 
well-prepared, experienced, and effective teachers,\1\ particularly for 
students from low-income backgrounds, students of color, children or 
students with disabilities, and English learners (ELs).\2\ Providing 
all students with consistent access to a well-prepared, effective, and 
diverse educator workforce who provide high-quality instruction and 
support to all children and youth is essential to closing opportunity 
and achievement gaps. Teachers who entered the profession through the 
least comprehensive teacher preparation pathway are two to three times 
more likely to leave their school or the profession compared to those 
who entered through a comprehensive pathway.\3\ Research demonstrates 
that high rates of turnover harm student achievement,\4\ and that the 
quality of a school's leadership is among the most important predictors 
of teacher turnover, with more effective principals being more likely 
to retain their best teachers.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Isenberg, E., Max, J., Gleason, P., Johnson, M., Deutsch, 
J., and Hansen, M. (2016). Do Low-Income Students Have Equal Access 
to Effective Teachers? Evidence from 26 Districts (NCEE 2017-4007). 
Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and 
Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. 
Department of Education.
    \2\ www.ed.gov/raisethebar/Eliminating-Educator-Shortages-through-Increasing-Educator-Diversity.
    \3\ Ingersoll, R., & May, H. (2011). Recruitment, retention and 
the minority teacher shortage. CPRE Research Report #RR-69. 
Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, 
University of Pennsylvania.
    \4\ Carver-Thomas, D., and Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher 
Turnover: Why It Matters and What We Can Do About It, Learning 
Policy Institute, https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-turnover-report.
    \5\ Grissom, J. (2018). Strong principals retain effective 
teachers--and don't retain ineffective ones, The Brookings 
Institution, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/strong-principals-retain-effective-teachers-and-dont-retain-ineffective-ones/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Hawkins Program is critical in enabling the Department to meet 
its goal of supporting a diverse teacher workforce to improve student 
opportunities, achievement and outcomes, and address the educator 
shortage, by providing expanded access to comprehensive, high-quality, 
and affordable educator preparation programs. To increase and retain 
the number of well-prepared teachers from diverse backgrounds, and 
improve their preparation, recruitment, retention and placement, the 
Department proposes the following three priorities. We may use one or 
more of these priorities in any year in which this program is in 
effect.
    Proposed Priority 1: Increase Evidence-Based, Comprehensive Pre-
service Clinical Experiences Through Teacher Preparation Programs.
    Background: The Department proposes this priority to assist centers 
of excellence at eligible institutions of higher education (IHEs) in 
expanding their pre-service clinical experiences through comprehensive 
teacher preparation programs. The priority would advance comprehensive, 
high-quality teacher preparation by creating partnerships with local 
high-need districts and schools, in order to form meaningful clinical 
practice partnerships and help address teacher shortages. These 
clinical practice partnerships can both provide a preparation 
opportunity and serve as a pathway to hiring well-prepared teacher 
candidates from backgrounds that are underrepresented in the 
profession, including teacher candidates of color. High-quality, 
evidence-based clinical experience can also lead to increased teacher 
retention as research demonstrates that teachers prepared in classrooms 
similar to those they teach in after graduation are more likely to 
remain in the classroom.\6\ Furthermore, extensive, high-quality, 
evidence-based, clinical experience is one of three ``aspects of 
preparation that have the highest potential for effects on outcomes for 
students.'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Francies, C., Glover, S., and Jamieson, C. (2021). Enhancing 
Teacher Preparation Through Clinical Experience. Education 
Commission of the States. https://www.ecs.org/wp-content/uploads/Enhancing-Teacher-Preparation-Through-Clinical-Experience.pdf.
    \7\ National Research Council. (2010). Preparing teachers: 
Building evidence for sound policy. Report by the Committee on the 
study of teacher preparation programs in the United States. 
Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are several ways educator preparation programs can partner 
with school districts and schools to provide these kinds of clinical 
experiences. For example, a number of school districts are partnering 
with teacher preparation programs to provide clinical experiences that 
are mutually beneficial for teacher candidates and teachers of record, 
and their students. Teacher candidates, in addition to completing the 
required elements of evidence-based clinical experience, may also serve 
in schools in roles that support students and teachers as their 
academic schedules allow and as they complete their other requirements 
for teacher certification. Teacher residencies and Grow Your Own 
programs, which may be supported through registered teacher 
apprenticeship programs, can support teacher candidates serving in 
these roles and cover the costs associated with extensive clinical 
experience. Other examples of educator preparation programs supporting 
high need schools in this way can be found here: www.ed.gov/coronavirus/factsheets/teacher-shortage.
    Proposed Priority 1:
    To meet this priority, an eligible applicant must propose projects 
that are evidence-based (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) comprehensive 
teacher preparation programs that provide extensive clinical 
experience. Applicants with existing programs must describe their 
record in graduating highly skilled, well-prepared, and diverse 
teachers and describe how the proposed project will refine or enhance 
existing programs. Applicants proposing new programs must describe how 
their new program is evidence-based and designed to achieve the 
intended outcomes of the Hawkins Program. Applicants must also address 
how they will--
    (a) Examine the sources of inequity and inadequacy in resources and

[[Page 6472]]

opportunity and implement pedagogical practices in teacher preparation 
programs that are inclusive with regard to race, ethnicity, culture, 
language, gender, and disability status and that prepare teachers to 
create inclusive, supportive, equitable, unbiased, and identity-safe 
learning environments for their students;
    (b) Prepare teacher candidates to integrate rigorous academic 
content, including through the effective use of technology, and 
instructional techniques and strategies consistent with universal 
design for learning principles;
    (c) Prepare teacher candidates to design and deliver instruction in 
ways that are engaging and provide their students with opportunities to 
think critically and solve complex problems, apply learning in 
authentic and real-world settings, communicate and collaborate 
effectively, and develop growth mindsets. Teacher candidate pedagogy 
should include how to incorporate project-based, work-based, or other 
experiential learning opportunities in curriculum development;
    (d) Prepare teacher candidates to build meaningful and trusting 
relationships with students and their families to support in-home, 
community-based, and in-school learning; and
    (e) Provide sustained and high-quality pre-service clinical 
experiences, including teaching assistant initiatives, that facilitate 
the pathway to the teaching credential for those with paraprofessional 
experience or high-quality school leader induction and support in the 
first three years of school leadership for principals and other school 
leaders. In providing such experiences, applicants must consider 
opportunities to provide pre-service clinical experience earlier in the 
teacher preparation program, as is practicable, and in ways that 
benefit students and teachers. These clinical experiences must be 
designed to--
    (1) Integrate pedagogy and classroom practice and promote effective 
teaching skills in academic content areas;
    (2) Be tightly aligned with course work with clear, relevant, and 
strong links between theory and practice;
    (3) Group teacher candidates in cohorts to facilitate reflection of 
practice and professional collaboration;
    (4) Closely supervise interaction between teacher candidates and 
faculty, experienced teachers, principals, and other administrators in 
high-need schools or hard-to-staff schools; and
    (5) Provide high-quality-teacher mentoring.
    Proposed Priority 2: Projects that are Designed to Increase and 
Retain the Number of Well-Prepared Teachers from Diverse Backgrounds.
    Background: The Department proposes this priority to increase 
teacher diversity by supporting teacher candidates from backgrounds 
that are underrepresented in the profession. While the majority of U.S 
public school students are children of color,\8\ only 20 percent of 
teachers are people of color and 40 percent of the Nation's public 
schools do not have a single teacher of color on record.\9\ Research 
shows that teachers of color benefit all students and can have a 
significant positive impact on students of color.\10\ When students of 
color are instructed by teachers of color, higher levels of student 
achievement,\11\ student encouragement, students forming aspirations 
(e.g., through role modeling), teacher recommendations (for example, to 
gifted and talented programs), and rigorous course-taking \12\ have all 
been observed. Research also demonstrates that teachers of color can be 
positive role models for all students in breaking down negative 
stereotypes and preparing students to live and work in a multiracial 
society.\13\ A more diverse teacher workforce also increases the 
likelihood that students of color will have access to culturally and 
linguistically relevant teaching and learning and positive 
relationships.\14\ Thus, supporting teachers of color can be a critical 
strategy for advancing educational equity for students of color and 
addressing one of the root causes of institutional barriers to equity 
in the academic environment.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cge/racial-ethnic-enrollment.
    \9\ Education Trust (2022). Educators of Color Make the Case for 
Teacher Diversity. https://edtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Educators-of-Color-Make-the-Case-for-Teacher-Diversity-November-2022.pdf.
    \10\ Dee, T. (2004). Teachers, race and student achievement in a 
randomized experiment. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 
86(1), 195-210; and Gershenson, S., Hart, C.M.D., Lindsay, C.A., & 
Papageorge, N.W. (2017). The long-run impacts of same race teachers. 
Bonn, Germany: IZA Institute of Labor Economics. Discussion Paper 
Series.
    \11\ Egalite, A., Kisida, B., & Winters, M.A. Representation in 
the classroom: The effect of own-race teachers on student 
achievement, Economics of Education Review, 45 (April 2015), 44-52.
    \12\ Grissom, J., Kabourek, S., & Kramer, J. Exposure to same-
race or same-ethnicity teachers and advanced math course-taking in 
high school: Evidence from a diverse urban district, Teachers 
College Record, 122 (2020), 1-42.
    \13\ www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/highered/racial-diversity/state-racial-diversity-workforce.pdf.
    \14\ Blazar, D. (2021). Teachers of Color, Culturally Responsive 
Teaching, and Student Outcomes: Experimental Evidence from the 
Random Assignment of Teachers to Classes. (EdWorkingPaper: 21-501). 
Retrieved from Annenberg Institute at Brown University: https://doi.org/10.26300/jym0-wz02.
    \15\ www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/highered/racial-diversity/state-racial-diversity-workforce.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Priority 2:
    To meet this priority, applicants must propose projects that are 
designed to increase the number of well-prepared teachers and the 
diversity of the teacher workforce with a focus on increasing and 
retaining a diverse teacher workforce, and improving the preparation, 
recruitment, retention, and placement of such teachers.
    Applicants addressing this priority must describe--
    (a) How their project will integrate multiple services or 
initiatives across academic and student affairs, such as academic 
advising, counseling, stipends, child-care, structured/guided pathways 
from teacher candidates' first year in the preparation program through 
successful employment placement, career services, or student financial 
aid, such as scholarships, with the goal of increasing program 
completion and credential attainment;
    (b) Their plan for identifying and supporting teacher candidates 
from backgrounds that are underrepresented in the profession, including 
teacher candidates of color. This plan must span the beginning of the 
preparation program through graduation, and include a plan to improve 
program entry rates, as applicable, graduation rates, passage rates for 
certification and licensure exams, and rates of successful employment 
placement between teacher candidate subgroups and an institution's 
overall teacher candidate population; and
    (c) Their proposed initiatives to promote the retention of teachers 
from backgrounds that are underrepresented in the profession, including 
teachers of color, prepared through the program, which may include 
induction programs, such as teacher or school leader induction 
programs, or mentorship programs that provide school and district 
leaders with the support they need to persist in their professions.
    Proposed Priority 3--Increasing the Number of Bilingual and/or 
Multilingual Teachers with Full Certification.
    Background: The Department proposes this priority to increase 
teacher diversity by expanding the number of bilingual and multilingual 
teachers with full teacher certification. In addition to the need for 
more teachers of color, a parallel challenge in the Nation's public 
schools lies in the shortage of multilingual teachers prepared to teach 
a growing population

[[Page 6473]]

of English Learners (ELs). ELs are the fastest growing student 
demographic, with more than ten percent of students identified as ELs 
currently.\16\ Additionally, about one-quarter of all students speak a 
language other than English at home, whereas only 1 in 8 teachers 
do.\17\ Despite that, more than half of the States nationwide are 
experiencing bilingual and multilingual teacher shortages and a quarter 
of the States do not require certification or endorsements for teachers 
who teach ELs.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d20/tables/dt20_204.20.asp.
    \17\ https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/81-children-who-speak-a-language-other-than-english-at-home?loc=1&loct=1#detailed/1/any/false/1729,37,871,870,573,869,36,868,867,133/any/396,397.
    \18\ Torre Gibney, D., Kelly, H., Rutherford-Quach, S., Ballen 
Riccards, J. & Parker, C. (2021). Addressing the bilingual teacher 
shortage. CCNetwork.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The bilingual and multilingual teacher shortage has the potential 
to have a negative impact on all students, but especially ELs. These 
shortages may be among the reasons why ELs have some of the lowest 
achievement levels and graduation rates.\19\ During the pandemic, ELs 
were also likely to lose instructional time, thus experiencing setbacks 
in their language acquisition goals.\20\ Research demonstrates that ELs 
who are taught in bilingual settings, such as dual-language immersion 
programs, by well-prepared bilingual teachers have stronger academic 
outcomes and better English-language acquisition trajectories than ELs 
who are taught in English only, which underscores the need to close the 
multilingual teacher shortage gap.\21\ Additionally, ELs who learn in 
bilingual settings in which they can maintain their native languages 
while learning English have stronger social and emotional development, 
cross-cultural skills, and problem-solving skills.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ https://www2.ed.gov/datastory/el-outcomes/
index.html#:~:text=Graduation%20Rates,-
In%202015%E2%80%9316&text=For%20ELs%20the%20rate%20was,%2DELs%20(85%2
0percent).
    \20\ www.gao.gov/products/gao-21%E2%80%9343.
    \21\ Steele, J., Slater, R., Zamarro, G., Miller, T., Li, J., 
Burkhauser, S., Bacon, M. (2017). Effects of Dual-Language Immersion 
Programs on Student Achievement: Evidence From Lottery Data, 
American Educational Research Journal, 54, no. 1S,: 282S-306S, 
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0002831216634463.
    \22\ Williams, C., Soto-Boykin, X., Zabala, J., Meek, S. (2023). 
Why We Need To Cultivate America's Multilingual, Multicultural 
Assets. The Century Foundation. https://tcf.org/content/report/why-we-need-to-cultivate-americas-multilingual-multicultural-assets/#easy-footnote-bottom-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Bilingual and multilingual learning environments can also mitigate 
linguistic barriers that limit family engagement, as bilingual and 
multilingual teachers are more likely to communicate with 
linguistically diverse families and ensure they have equitable access 
to learn about their students' education.\23\ Bilingual and 
multilingual teachers' assets are critical to creating inclusive school 
and family partnerships where linguistically diverse families can 
meaningfully participate in their child's education.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Hopkins, M., & Schutz, K.M. (2019). Bilingual teacher 
leadership: Supporting linguistically responsive practices and 
parent engagement in schools. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 
9(2), 96-109.
    \24\ Newcomer, S.N., & Puzio, K. (2016). ``Cultivando 
confianza'': A bilingual community of practice negotiates 
restrictive language policies. International Journal of Bilingual 
Education and Bilingualism, 19(4), 347-369.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Priority 3:
    To meet this priority, applicants must propose projects that are 
designed to prepare effective and experienced bilingual and/or 
multilingual teachers for high-need schools by increasing the number of 
teachers across elementary and secondary schools who are fully 
certified to provide academic language instruction in a language other 
than English, including for English Learners (ELs). These projects must 
prepare teacher candidates to lead students toward linguistic fluency 
and academic achievement in more than one language. Applicants must 
describe how--
    (a) Their project will integrate multiple services or initiatives 
across academic and student affairs, such as academic advising, 
counseling, stipends, child-care, structured/guided pathways from 
teacher candidates' first year in the preparation program through 
successful employment placement, career services, and student financial 
aid, such as scholarships, and provide the necessary knowledge and 
skills so that teacher candidates can serve students from many 
different language backgrounds; and
    (b) Their plan for recruiting, supporting, and retaining bilingual 
and/or multilingual teacher candidates, including those who may have a 
teaching credential but have not been teaching in bilingual and/or 
multilingual education settings; aspiring teachers; and teaching 
assistants who are interested in becoming bilingual and/or multilingual 
teachers.

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 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

    The Department 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.
    Proposed Requirement 1--Draft Written Agreement with Clinical 
Practice Partner(s).
    An applicant must provide a Draft Written Agreement (DWA) that 
identifies the partnership between: (1) at least one eligible IHE with 
a state accredited teacher preparation program, and (2) a high-need 
local educational agency (LEA) or consortium of high-need LEAs, or with 
a high-need school or consortium of high-need schools. The agreement 
with partners is intended to ensure that the parties joining the 
project are committed to fulfilling the purpose of the clinical 
practice by either creating new partnerships or expanding existing 
partnerships, and that teacher candidates will not become the teacher 
of record prior to completing the certification program, including pre-
service clinical experience, and, for any candidates who entered the 
program without a bachelor's degree, obtaining a bachelor's. Grantees 
will finalize the DWA into a Final Written Agreement (FWA) within 120 
days of grant award notification.
    Proposed Requirement 2--Supplement-Not-Supplant.
    Grant funds must be used so that they supplement and, to the extent 
practical, increase the funds that would otherwise be available for the 
activities to be carried out under this grant.
    Proposed Requirement 3--Indirect Cost Rate Information.
    A grantee's indirect cost reimbursement is limited to 8 percent of 
a modified total direct cost base. For

[[Page 6474]]

more information regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated 
indirect cost rate, please see www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.

Proposed Definition

    The Department proposes the following definition for this program. 
We may apply this definition in any year in which this program is in 
effect.
    Pre-service means the period of training for a person who does not 
have a prior teaching certification or license and who is enrolled in a 
State-approved teacher education program at an institution of higher 
education, prior to becoming the teacher of record.

Final Priorities, Requirements, and Definition

    We will announce the final priorities, requirements, and definition 
in a document in the Federal Register. We will determine the final 
priorities, requirements, and definition after considering public 
comments on the proposed priorities, requirements, and definition 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 document does not solicit applications. In any year in 
which we choose to use one or more of these priorities, requirements, 
and definition, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal 
Register.

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) determines whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, 
therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and 
subject to review by OMB. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as 
amended by Executive Order 14094, 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 $200 million or more 
(adjusted every three years by the Administrator of Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for changes in gross domestic 
product); or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector 
of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, 
public health or safety, or State, local, territorial, or Tribal 
governments or communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise legal or policy issues for which centralized review would 
meaningfully further the President's priorities, or the principles set 
forth in this Executive order, as specifically authorized in a timely 
manner by the Administrator of OIRA in each case.
    This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory 
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094.
    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, as amended by Executive Order 
14094. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires 
that an agency--
    (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon 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, and 
definition 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 the analysis that follows, the Department believes 
that this regulatory action is consistent with the principles in 
Executive Order 13563.
    The potential costs associated with these priorities, requirements, 
and definition would be minimal, while the potential benefits are 
significant. The Department believes that this proposed regulatory 
action would not impose significant costs on eligible entities. 
Participation in this program is voluntary, and the costs imposed on 
applicants by this regulatory action would be limited to paperwork 
burden related to preparing an application. The potential benefits of 
implementing the program would outweigh the costs incurred by 
applicants, and the costs of carrying out activities associated with 
the application would be paid for with program funds. For these 
reasons, we have determined that the costs of implementation would not 
be burdensome for eligible applicants, including small entities.
    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.
    In accordance with these 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.

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 these proposed priorities, requirements, and definition 
easier to understand, including answers to questions such as the 
following:
     Are the requirements in the proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definition clearly stated?
     Do the proposed priorities, requirements, and definition 
contain technical terms or other wording that interferes with their 
clarity?

[[Page 6475]]

     Does the format of the proposed priorities, requirements, 
and definition (grouping and order of sections, use of headings, 
paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce their clarity?
     Would the proposed priorities, requirements, and 
definition be easier to understand if we divided them into more (but 
shorter) sections?
     Could the description of the proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definition in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 
of this preamble be more helpful in making the proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definition easier to understand? If so, how?
     What else could we do to make the proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definition easier to understand?
    To send any comments that concern how the Department could make 
these proposed priorities, requirements, and definition easier to 
understand, see the instructions in the ADDRESSES section.
    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.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    The Secretary certifies that these proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definition would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    The small entities that this proposed regulatory action would 
affect are IHEs that meet the eligibility requirements described in 
section 241(1) of the HEA. The Secretary believes that the costs 
imposed on applicants by the proposed priorities, requirements, and 
definition would be limited to paperwork burden related to preparing an 
application and that the benefits would outweigh any costs incurred by 
applicants.
    Participation in this program is voluntary. For this reason, the 
proposed priorities, requirements, and definition would impose no 
burden on small entities unless they applied for funding under the 
program. We expect that in determining whether to apply for Hawkins 
Program funds, an eligible applicant would evaluate the requirements of 
preparing an application and any associated costs, and weigh them 
against the benefits likely to be achieved by receiving a Hawkins 
Program grant. Eligible applicants most likely would apply only if they 
determine that the likely benefits exceed the costs of preparing an 
application. The likely benefits include the potential receipt of a 
grant as well as other benefits that may accrue to an entity through 
its development of an application, such as the use of that application 
to seek funding from other sources to address the teacher shortage 
present in the Nation's high need-need public schools.
    This proposed regulatory action would not have a significant 
economic impact on a small entity once it receives a grant because it 
would be able to meet the costs of compliance using the funds provided 
under this program. We invite comments from eligible small entities as 
to whether they believe this proposed regulatory action would have a 
significant economic impact on them and, if so, request evidence to 
support that belief.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    These proposed priorities, requirements, and definition do not 
contain any information collection requirements.
    Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities 
can obtain this document in an accessible format. The Department will 
provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich 
Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, 
braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible 
format.
    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 this 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.

Nasser Paydar,
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2024-01972 Filed 1-31-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P