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 · Aug 2, 2007
Improving Mathematics and Science Teacher Quality Act - Amends part B of title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) to authorize the inclusion of informal science education centers and business consortia as partners in the grant program to improve the quality of elementary and secondary school mathematics and science teachers. Requires the inclusion of teacher training departments of institutions of higher education in such partnerships, but removes state educational agencies as partnership participants.
Authorizes the Secretary of Education to award such grants to states for redistribution as competitive subgrants to eligible partnerships. (Currently, the Secretary awards grants directly to such partnerships if appropriations do not exceed a specified amount.)
Requires that grant priority be given to eligible partnerships that carry out activities modeled after programs which are to be identified and disseminated by the Secretary, in consultation and coordination with the Director of the National Science Foundation, for replication on a more expansive basis.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Removes the provision of financial incentives to recruit and retain teachers from authorized grant uses.
Reauthorizes appropriations for the programs under parts A and B of title II of the ESEA through FY2013.
People & committees
Rep. Ehlers, Vernon J. [R-MI-3] · R–MI
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.3313 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.3313 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.3313 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.3313 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.