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 · Sep 13, 2010
Improving Student Testing Act of 2010 - Amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to allow states to use a formula grant for the development and administration of the student academic achievement assessments, used in determining whether local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools are making adequate yearly progress (AYP) toward student proficiency, to design and implement additional high-quality and innovative assessments.
Replaces the program providing competitive grants to states for enhanced assessment instruments with a program awarding competitive grants to states and LEAs to design and implement high-quality and innovative assessments that measure higher-order thinking skills, align with academic content and achievement standards, and create multiple measures that: (1) serve federal and state accountability purposes; (2) improve classroom instruction; and (3) provide timely and meaningful feedback to students, teachers, principals, and parents.
Includes as innovative assessments that may be funded under both programs: (1) performance assessments, measuring students' ability to apply knowledge and skills; (2) technology-based assessments, using technology to develop, administer, and score the assessment; (3) through-course assessments, testing students throughout the school year and resulting in a summative score for the year; (4) adaptive assessments, administering questions to students based on their previous answers; (5) formative assessments, integrated into classroom instruction; (6) interim assessments, given at regular and specified intervals throughout the school year; and (7) alternative assessments for students with disabilities and English language learners.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary of Commerce to cover the costs of the International Trade Administration's trade promotion activities by imposing fees on the businesses that benefit from such activities.
People & committees
Sen. Feingold, Russell D. [D-WI] · D–WI
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.3771 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.3771 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.3771 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.3771 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.