Higher education is becoming more expensive across the country. With rising tuition in many states and tightening of the credit market, families are finding it more difficult to fund their children’s higher education. What is your state doing to ease these problems? Share your thoughts for an upcoming State News article.
This isn’t your father’s Oldsmobile.
If that’s the case, then it can’t be your father’s mechanic. So the training has to be different, according to Donna Nola-Ganey, assistant superintendent of the Louisiana Department of Education. And it’s not just auto mechanics that requires new learning methods. She spoke during the education committee meeting Sunday at the Southern Legislative Conference.
That means high schools must change, she said.
Louisiana is redesigning its high schools, a process that began in 2005 before hurricanes Katrina and Rita stalled efforts.
One state, by itself, cannot hold off the federal government.
That’s the message Missouri Rep. Jim Guest and South Carolina Sen. Larry Martin left with those in attendance at the plenary session on REAL ID at the Southern Legislative Conference Sunday.
Both are from states that have rejected outright the federal mandate to implement the new identification system. Four other states—New Hampshire, Washington, Montana and Oklahoma—have also rejected the national ID card.
Guest started the Legislators Against REAL ID in 2007 to get more states on board. He and others believe the unfunded mandate is too costly, not only financially but also because of the impact on citizen freedoms.
If you're attending the CSG Spring National Committee & Task Force Meetings in Fajardo, Puerto Rico, we want to hear from you. Share what you learned in the sessions with readers of Capitol Comments. We'll post your impressions and insights from the meeting.
Staff from The Council of State Governments have researched 10 issues facing state governments and prepared a new report, Trends in America, to be released at the spring meeting in June.
State News magazine will feature the trends in the June issue. We need your input. Why are these issues important to state government? Click on the Trend to make your comments.
The Commission on No Child Left Behind today released its recommendations for reauthorization of the five-year-old law that aimed to improve public schools and close achievement gaps.
Congress is scheuled to review the law this year. The commission has worked on its report for the past year.
Among the recommendations:
Something different is in the air.
That's California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's assessment of his state's efforts to reform health care.
"In the past, health care reform was always dead on arrival," Schwarzenegger said in his State of the State address, one day after unveiling his ambitious plan calling for universal health care coverage through a mandate similar to the one in Massachusetts and help from the state.
California isn't the only state focusing on expanded health care coverage. Several states -- Connecticut, Kansas, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Washington -- are considering proposals to cover all children or all residents. Illinois launched a program covering all children in 2006, and Pennsylvania plans to launch a similar program this year.
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 has been praised and criticized - aiding those states that need help in improving education and hindering others that had already made great leaps in advancing education reform.
While the law has been a reality for several years, states have heretofore only made symbolic cries of federal bullying rather than actively pursuing change or noncompliance. That is until now.
With a newly composed Congress, some state policymakers are hopeful that change may be on the horizon. A swath of state legislative resolutions encouraging that No Child Left Behind not be reauthorized in its current form are increasing in 2007 (e.g. Florida HB315). But Vermont has taken the boldest step yet by introducing both House and Senate measures directing the state board of education not to comply with the testing and consequence provisions of NCLB.
Specifically, Vermont SB-16 and Vermont HB-60:
Recent Comments