PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Education Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 20, 2005
Directs the Secretary of Education to revise certain regulations to increase, from one to three percent, the number of proficient and advanced level scores based on alternate assessments and alternate achievement standards for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities that may be counted in calculating adequate yearly progress (AYP) for schools, local educational agencies, and States, under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (ESEA-NCLBA).
Amends ESEA-NCLBA to lower from ten to seven percent the amount of the decrease, in the percentage in a school year from the preceding school year, of students in any of specified groups who did not meet or exceed the proficient level of academic achievement on the State assessments, which is required under certain conditions for a school to be considered to have made AYP.
Requires the Secretary to issue policy guidance directing that the assessment results of first-year and second-year limited English proficiency students who are recently resettled refugees and who take the reading-language arts assessment are not required to be included in AYP determinations, even if such students have been enrolled in the school or district for one or two full academic years.
People & committees
Rep. Bradley, Jeb [R-NH-1] · R–NH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Education Reform.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1722 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1722 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1722 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1722 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.