PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 28, 2007
State and Local Education Flexibility Act of 2007 - Amends part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) to revise requirements for determining whether states, local educational agencies (LEAs), and schools are making adequate yearly progress (AYP) toward state academic performance standards.
Provides for state and local flexibility, under specified conditions, to: (1) exclude from AYP and academic assessments the performance of certain limited English proficient students; (2) include in favorable AYP graduation rates certain students who require extra time to graduate due to exceptional circumstances or disability; (3) modify academic content and achievement standards in the individual education plans of students with disabilities; (4) develop assessments locally and use multiple assessments; and (5) have alternative qualification requirements for special education teachers and rural teachers.
Subjects social studies teachers to ESEA competence requirements. Treats teacher competence in general science or social sciences as competence in those subjects' subdisciplines.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Comptroller General to study the adequacy of ESEA school improvement funds.
Allows states, which meet certain requirements, to measure AYP using individual growth models measuring individual student progress from grade to grade.
Requires that each school be given a grade based on the percentage of AYP factors it has attained. Gives grade A schools greater flexibility in the use of school improvement funds and states and LEAs greater flexibility in choosing the ESEA intervention they consider appropriate for lower-graded schools that fail to make AYP for two years.
Requires schools to provide parents with student progress report cards showing the school's AYP grade. Requires states to include their performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress on schoolwide and statewide progress report cards.
People & committees
Rep. Terry, Lee [R-NE-2] · R–NE
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 Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
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.2946 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.2946 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.2946 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.2946 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.