PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 11, 1997
Teacher Excellence in America Challenge Act of 1997 - Amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA) to replace current State and local Programs for Teacher Excellence with a Teacher Excellence in America Challenge program under which the Secretary of Education may award competitive grants to professional development partnerships for 80 percent of the cost of providing teacher preparation, induction, classroom experience, and professional development opportunities to prospective, beginning, and veteran teachers while improving the education of students in the classroom. Provides for such professional development partnerships among institutions of higher education, elementary schools or secondary schools, local educational agencies (LEAs), State educational agencies, teacher organizations, and nonprofit organizations. Requires that priority be given to partnerships serving elementary schools, secondary schools, or LEAs that serve high percentages of children from families below the poverty line. Lists activities for which partnerships shall use such grants, excluding construction, renovation, or repair of any school or facility. Sets forth requirements for grant applications and partnership assurances. Directs the Secretary to reserve a certain amount of funds under this Act for national evaluation and information dissemination activities. Authorizes appropriations. Repeals the following HEA programs: (1) National Teacher Academies; (2) Paul Douglas Teacher Scholarships; (3) the Teacher Corps; (4) the Class Size Demonstration Grant program; (5) Middle School Teaching Demonstration Programs; (6) New Teaching Careers programs (for minority teacher recruitment); and (7) Programs for Special Populations, including the National Mini Corps Program, Foreign Language Instruction, Small State Teaching Initiative, Faculty Development Grants, and Early Childhood Education Training.
People & committees
Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI] · D–RI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9213-9214)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. 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 S.1169 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 S.1169 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 S.1169 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 S.1169 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.