PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 17, 2011
Assuring Successful Students through Effective Teaching Act of 2011 - Amends the school improvement program under part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to define "highly qualified teachers" as those that have: (1) completed a state-approved traditional or alternative teacher preparation program, where available; or (2) passed a rigorous state-approved teacher performance assessment and obtained full state certification.
Defines "effective teachers" as highly qualified teachers that demonstrate certain qualities and have done so for at least three years, as measured by a comprehensive teacher evaluation and support system developed by the relevant local educational agency (LEA).
Requires LEAs to ensure that poor, minority, disabled, and limited English proficient students are taught by highly qualified and effective teachers at similar rates and ratios as other students.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires states to provide additional supports to LEAs that fall short of that goal to assist them in making continuous progress towards it. Includes among those supports: (1) stronger teacher recruitment efforts, (2) efforts to improve teacher retention, and (3) ongoing teacher training.
Requires LEAs to ensure that: (1) all their teachers are highly qualified no later than three years after this Act's enactment, (2) that none of their public schools has a disproportionate percentage of teachers neither highly qualified nor effective, and (3) teachers who are not highly qualified are closely mentored and overseen by an effective mentor teacher who is certified and effective in the mentored teacher's subject area.
People & committees
Sen. Sanders, Bernard [I-VT] · I–VT
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 Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Introduced in Senate
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: Aug 14, 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.1716 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.1716 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.1716 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.1716 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.