PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

Educational Accountability and State Flexibility Act of 2013

Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4401-4402)

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 6, 2013

Educational Accountability and State Flexibility Act of 2013 - Revises and reauthorizes programs under title I (Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA).

Amends the school improvement program under part A of title I of the ESEA to eliminate the requirement that local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools make adequate yearly progress toward state academic content and achievement standards.

Requires states to adopt challenging academic content and achievement standards for mathematics, reading or language arts, and science that ensure that their high school graduates who are deemed proficient are fully prepared to succeed in higher education, job training, or work.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Requires states to implement a set of high-quality assessments of student progress toward those standards that: (1) involve multiple measures of student achievement; (2) measure the overall performance of students in each public school and the performance of their poor, minority, disabled, and limited English proficient student subgroups; and (3) are used as the primary means of determining the yearly performance of each of their schools.

Allows states to adopt alternative assessments for students with significant cognitive disabilities.

Requires each state to establish a multi-tiered accountability system that places each public school in a tier that reflects, at a minimum, the state's annual assessment of the extent to which each student at the school is: (1) proficient on state standards or is making satisfactory progress in attaining such proficiency, and (2) on track to graduate from high school on time. (Replaces the current system of assessing schools as needing improvement, corrective action, or restructuring due to their failure to make adequate yearly progress for a specified number of years.)

Requires, at a minimum, distinct tiers for schools that: (1) have met the state standards, (2) have not met those standards for up to two student subgroups but that are making satisfactory progress in doing so, (3) have not met those standards for a significant number of student subgroups and are not showing satisfactory progress in meeting the standards or improving the subgroups' graduation rates within the time frame required by the state plan, and (4) have not met the state standards for a significant number of subgroups and are showing little or no improvement.

Lists the minimum consequences for schools placed into each of these tiers, ranging from requiring states to recognize successful schools to requiring LEAs to implement alternative school governance models or school improvement strategies based on a specified system of support model.

Requires students in the lowest tiered schools who did not meet or exceed the proficient level on the most recent state assessment in mathematics or in reading or language arts to be provided with supplemental educational services. Allows the LEAs serving such schools to provide those students with the option to transfer to a higher-performing school served by the LEA, if that option is not prohibited by state law.

Denies the Secretary of Education any authority to approve or disapprove a state's multi-tiered accountability system.

Allows states that received a waiver of statutory or regulatory requirements under the ESEA before this Act's enactment to implement the school improvement program set forth in the waiver or implement a school improvement program that meets this Act's requirements.

Requires states and LEAs to consult with representatives of Indian tribes and Native organizations within their jurisdiction in implementing their school improvement programs.

Includes American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian children as children eligible for services under targeted assistance programs that direct school improvement funds toward the children in a school who are failing or most at risk of failing.

Requires each school and LEA receiving school improvement funds to establish mechanisms to overcome barriers to effective Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian parental involvement in their children's education.

Eliminates the requirement that teachers be highly qualified, requiring instead that they be deemed highly effective in accordance with state standards. Requires teachers and paraprofessionals to meet state standards for certification or licensure, knowledge of the subject matter being taught, and competency in assisting students to meet or make satisfactory progress toward meeting state academic achievement standards.

Repeals the definition of "highly qualified" teachers.

Repeals the programs under subparts 1 (Reading First), 2 (Early Reading First), and 3 (William F. Goodling Even Start Family Literacy Programs) of part B (Student Reading Skills Improvement Grants) of the ESEA.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK] · R–AK

Committees

  • Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4401-4402)

    2. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

    3. Introduced in Senate

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

    Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    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.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze S.1110 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine S.1110 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine S.1110 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine S.1110 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.

    View full prompt & sources