I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3692 

To authorize a competitive grant program to implement and evaluate digital 

learning in rural locales. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 10, 2013 

Mr. LOEBSACK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To authorize a competitive grant program to implement and 

evaluate digital learning in rural locales. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Schools of the Future 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 The Congress finds the following: 

8 (1) Digital learning technology holds the prom9 ise of transforming rural education by removing bar10 riers of distance and increasing school capacity. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3692 IH

1 (2) While many large urban local educational 

2 agencies are at the forefront of implementing new 

3 digital learning innovations, it is often harder for 

4 smaller and more rural local educational agencies to 

5 access these tools. Smaller local educational agencies 

6 with less capacity may also find it more difficult to 

7 provide the training needed to effectively implement 

8 new digital learning technologies. 

9 (3) Despite the potential of digital learning in 

10 rural areas, these advancements risk bypassing rural 

11 areas without support for their implementation. 

12 Rather than having schools and local educational 

13 agencies apply digital learning innovations designed 

14 for urban environments to rural areas, it is impor15 tant that digital learning technologies be developed 

16 and implemented in ways that reflect the unique 

17 needs of rural areas. 

18 (4) Digital learning is rapidly expanding, and 

19 new tools for improving teaching and learning are 

20 being developed every day. A growing demand for 

21 digital learning tools and products has made rig22 orous evaluation of their effectiveness increasingly 

23 important, as this information would allow school 

24 and local educational agency leaders to make in25 formed choices about how best to use these tools to 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3692 IH

1 improve student achievement and educational out2 comes. 

3 (5) High-quality digital learning increases stu4 dent access to courses that may not have been avail5 able to students in rural communities, increasing 

6 their college and career readiness. 

7 SEC. 3. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED. 

8 (a) GRANTS TO ELIGIBLE PARTNERSHIPS.—From 

9 the amounts appropriated to carry out this Act, the Sec10 retary of Education is authorized to award grants, on a 

11 competitive basis, to eligible partnerships to carry out the 

12 activities described in section 6. 

13 (b) DURATION OF GRANT.—A grant under subsection 

14 (a) shall be awarded for not less than a 3-year and not 

15 longer than a 5-year period. 

16 (c) FISCAL AGENT.—If an eligible partnership re17 ceives a grant under this Act, a school partner in the part18 nership shall serve as the fiscal agent for the partnership. 

19 SEC. 4. APPLICATION. 

20 An eligible partnership desiring a grant under this 

21 Act shall submit an application to the Secretary at such 

22 time, in such manner, and containing such information as 

23 the Secretary may require, which shall include the fol24 lowing: 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

•HR 3692 IH

1 (1) A description of the eligible partnership, in2 cluding the name of each of the partners and their 

3 respective roles and responsibilities. 

4 (2) A description of the technology-based learn5 ing practice, tool, strategy, or course that the eligi6 ble partnership proposes to develop or implement 

7 using the grant funds. 

8 (3) An assurance that all teachers of record 

9 hold the relevant license and are otherwise qualified 

10 to implement any technology-based practice, tool, 

11 strategy, or course using the grant funds. 

12 (4) An assurance that all students in a class or 

13 school implementing a practice, tool, strategy or 

14 course using the grant funds will have access to any 

15 equipment necessary to participate on a full and eq16 uitable basis. 

17 (5) An assurance that the proposed uses of 

18 smartphones, laptops, tablets, or other devices sus19 ceptible to inappropriate use have the informed con20 sent of parents or guardians and are not incon21 sistent with any policies of the local educational 

22 agency on the use of such devices. 

23 (6) Information relevant to the selection criteria 

24 under section 5(c). 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
5 

•HR 3692 IH

1 (7) A description of the evaluation to be under2 taken by the eligible partnership, including— 

3 (A) how the school partner and the evalua4 tion partner will work together to implement 

5 the practice, tool, strategy, or course in such a 

6 way that permits the use of a rigorous, inde7 pendent evaluation design that meets the stand8 ards of the What Works Clearinghouse of the 

9 Institute of Education Sciences; and 

10 (B) a description of the evaluation design 

11 that meets such standards, which will be used 

12 to measure any significant effects on the out13 comes described in paragraphs (1) through (3) 

14 of section 7(a). 

15 (8) An estimate of the number of students to 

16 be reached through the grant and evidence of its ca17 pacity to reach the proposed number of students 

18 during the course of the grant. 

19 (9) An assurance that the school partner in the 

20 eligible partnership will ensure that each school to 

21 be served by the grant under this Act is designated 

22 with a school locale code of Fringe Rural, Distant 

23 Rural, or Remote Rural, as determined by the Sec24 retary. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
6 

•HR 3692 IH

1 (10) Any other information the Secretary may 

2 require. 

3 SEC. 5. APPLICATION REVIEW AND AWARD BASIS. 

4 (a) PEER REVIEW.—The Secretary shall use a peer 

5 review process to review applications for grants under this 

6 Act. The Secretary shall appoint individuals to the peer 

7 review process who have relevant expertise in digital learn8 ing, research and evaluation, standards quality and align9 ment, and rural education. 

10 (b) AWARD BASIS.—In awarding grants under this 

11 Act, the Secretary shall ensure, to the extent practicable, 

12 diversity in the type of activities funded under the grants. 

13 (c) SELECTION CRITERIA.—In evaluating an eligible 

14 partnership’s application for a grant under this Act, the 

15 Secretary shall consider— 

16 (1) the need for the proposed technology-based 

17 learning practice, tool, strategy, or course; 

18 (2) the quality of the design of the proposed 

19 practice, tool, strategy, or course; 

20 (3) the strength of the existing research evi21 dence with respect to such practice, tool, strategy, or 

22 course; 

23 (4) the experience of the eligible partnership; 

24 and 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
7 

•HR 3692 IH

1 (5) the quality of the evaluation proposed by 

2 the eligible partnership. 

3 SEC. 6. USE OF FUNDS. 

4 (a) REQUIRED USE OF FUNDS.— 

5 (1) IN GENERAL.—An eligible partnership re6 ceiving a grant under this Act shall use such funds 

7 to implement and evaluate the results of technology8 based learning practices, strategies, tools, or courses, 

9 including the practices, strategies, tools, or courses 

10 identified under paragraphs (2) through (6). 

11 (2) TOOLS AND COURSES DESIGNED TO PER12 SONALIZE THE LEARNING EXPERIENCE.—Tech13 nology-based tools and courses identified under this 

14 paragraph include the following types of tools and 

15 courses designed to personalize the learning experi16 ence: 

17 (A) Technology-based personalized instruc18 tional systems. 

19 (B) Adaptive software, games, or tools, 

20 that can be used to personalize learning. 

21 (C) Computer-based tutoring courses to 

22 help struggling students. 

23 (D) Games, digital tools, and smartphone 

24 or tablet applications to improve students’ en25 gagement, focus, and time on task. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
8 

•HR 3692 IH

1 (E) Other tools and courses designed to 

2 personalize the learning experience. 

3 (3) PRACTICES AND STRATEGIES DESIGNED TO

4 AID AND INFORM INSTRUCTION.—Technology-based 

5 practices and strategies identified under this para6 graph include the following types of practices and 

7 strategies designed to aid and inform instruction: 

8 (A) Adaptive software, games, or tools that 

9 can be used for the purpose of formative assess10 ment. 

11 (B) Web resources that provide teachers 

12 and their students access to instructional and 

13 curricular materials that are— 

14 (i) aligned with high-quality stand15 ards; and 

16 (ii) designed to prepare students for 

17 college and a career, such as a repository 

18 of primary historical sources for use in his19 tory and civics courses or examples of de20 velopmentally appropriate science experi21 ments. 

22 (C) Online professional development oppor23 tunities, teacher mentoring opportunities, and 

24 professional learning communities. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
9 

•HR 3692 IH

1 (D) Tools or web resources designed to ad2 dress specific instructional problems. 

3 (E) Other practices and strategies de4 signed to personalize the learning experience. 

5 (4) TOOLS, COURSES, AND STRATEGIES DE6 SIGNED TO IMPROVE THE ACHIEVEMENT OF STU7 DENTS WITH SPECIFIC EDUCATIONAL NEEDS.— 

8 Technology-based tools, courses, and strategies iden9 tified under this paragraph include the following 

10 types of tools, courses, and strategies designed to 

11 meet the needs of students with specific educational 

12 needs: 

13 (A) Digital tools specifically designed to 

14 meet the needs of students with a particular 

15 disability. 

16 (B) Online courses that give students who 

17 are not on track to graduate or have already 

18 dropped out of school the opportunity for accel19 erated credit recovery. 

20 (C) Language instruction courses, games, 

21 or software designed to meet the needs of 

22 English language learners. 

23 (D) Other tools, courses, and strategies de24 signed to personalize the learning experience. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
10 

•HR 3692 IH

1 (5) TOOLS, COURSES, AND STRATEGIES DE2 SIGNED TO HELP STUDENTS DEVELOP 21ST CEN3 TURY SKILLS.—Technology-based tools, courses, and 

4 strategies identified under this paragraph include 

5 peer-to-peer virtual learning opportunities to be used 

6 for the purposes of project-based learning, deeper 

7 learning, and collaborative learning, and other tools, 

8 courses, and strategies designed to help students de9 velop 21st century skills, such as the ability to think 

10 critically and solve problems, be effective commu11 nicators, collaborate with others, and learn to create 

12 and innovate. 

13 (6) TECHNOLOGY-BASED OR ONLINE COURSES

14 THAT ALLOW STUDENTS TO TAKE COURSES THAT

15 THEY WOULD NOT OTHERWISE HAVE ACCESS TO.— 

16 Technology-based or online courses identified under 

17 this paragraph include courses or collections of 

18 courses that provide students access to courses that 

19 they would not otherwise have access to, such as the 

20 following: 

21 (A) An online repository of elective 

22 courses. 

23 (B) Online or software-based courses in 

24 foreign languages, especially in languages iden25 tified as critical or in schools where a teacher 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
11 

•HR 3692 IH

1 is not available to teach the language or course 

2 level a student requires. 

3 (C) Online advanced or college-level 

4 courses that can be taken for credit. 

5 (b) AUTHORIZED USE OF FUNDS.—An eligible part6 nership receiving a grant under this Act may use grant 

7 funds to— 

8 (1) develop the technology for technology-based 

9 learning strategies, practices, courses, or tools to be 

10 carried out under the grant; 

11 (2) purchase hardware or software needed to 

12 carry out such strategies, practices, courses, or tools 

13 under the grant, except that such purchases may not 

14 exceed 50 percent of total grant funds; 

15 (3) address the particular needs of student sub16 groups, including students with disabilities and 

17 English-language learners; 

18 (4) provide technology-based professional devel19 opment or professional development on how to maxi20 mize the utility of technology; and 

21 (5) address issues of cost and capacity in rural 

22 areas and shortage subjects. 

23 SEC. 7. DATA COLLECTION AND EVALUATION. 

24 (a) IN GENERAL.—Each eligible partnership receiv25 ing a grant under this Act shall require its evaluation 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
12 

•HR 3692 IH

1 partner to complete an independent, comprehensive, well2 designed, and well-implemented evaluation that meets the 

3 standards of the What Works Clearinghouse after the 

4 third year of implementation of the grant to measure the 

5 effect of the practice, tool, strategy, or course on— 

6 (1) student achievement, as measured by high 

7 quality assessments that provide objective, valid, re8 liable measures of student academic growth and in9 formation on whether a student is on-track to grad10 uate ready for college and career; 

11 (2) costs and savings to the school partner; and 

12 (3) at least one of the following: 

13 (A) Student achievement gaps. 

14 (B) Graduation and dropout rates. 

15 (C) College enrollment. 

16 (D) College persistence. 

17 (E) College completion. 

18 (F) Placement in a living-wage job. 

19 (G) Enhanced teacher or principal effec20 tiveness as measured by valid, reliable, and 

21 multiple measures of student achievement and 

22 other appropriate measures. 

23 (b) EVALUATION.—The Secretary shall— 

24 (1) acting through the Director of the Institute 

25 of Education Sciences— 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
13 

•HR 3692 IH

1 (A) evaluate the implementation and im2 pact of the activities supported under the grant 

3 program authorized under this section; and 

4 (B) identify best practices; and 

5 (2) disseminate, in consultation with the re6 gional educational laboratories established under 

7 part D of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 

8 2002 and comprehensive centers established under 

9 the Educational Technical Assistance Act of 2002, 

10 research on best practices in school leadership. 

11 (c) IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION.—An evaluation 

12 partner may use funds under this Act to carry out an im13 plementation evaluation designed to provide information 

14 that may be useful for schools, local educational agencies, 

15 States, consortia of schools, and charter school networks 

16 seeking to implement similar practices, tools, strategies, 

17 or courses in the future. 

18 (d) PUBLICATION OF RESULTS.—Upon completion of 

19 an evaluation described in subsection (a), (b), or (c) the 

20 evaluation partner shall— 

21 (1) submit a report of the results of the evalua22 tion to the Secretary; and 

23 (2) make publicly available such results. 

24 SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS. 

25 In this Act: 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
14 

•HR 3692 IH

1 (1) ELIGIBLE PARTNERSHIP.—The term ‘‘eligi2 ble partnership’’ means a partnership that includes 

3 a school partner and not less than 1— 

4 (A) digital learning partner, except that in 

5 a case in which a school partner or evaluation 

6 partner demonstrates expertise in digital learn7 ing to the Secretary; and 

8 (B) evaluation partner. 

9 (2) SCHOOL PARTNER.—The term ‘‘school part10 ner’’ means a— 

11 (A) local educational agency; 

12 (B) a charter school network that does not 

13 include virtual schools; 

14 (C) a consortium of public elementary 

15 schools or secondary schools; 

16 (D) a regional educational service agency 

17 or similar regional educational service provider; 

18 or 

19 (E) a consortium of the entities described 

20 in subparagraphs (A) through (D). 

21 (3) DIGITAL LEARNING PARTNER.—The term 

22 ‘‘digital learning partner’’ means an organization 

23 with expertise in the technology required to develop 

24 or implement the digital learning practices, tools, 

25 strategies, or courses proposed by the school partner 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
15 

•HR 3692 IH

1 with which the digital learning partner will partner 

2 or has partnered under this Act, such as— 

3 (A) an institution of higher education; 

4 (B) a nonprofit organization; or 

5 (C) an organization with school develop6 ment or turnaround experience. 

7 (4) EVALUATION PARTNER.—The term ‘‘evalua8 tion partner’’ means a partner that has the expertise 

9 and ability to carry out the evaluation of a grant re10 ceived under this Act, such as— 

11 (A) an institution of higher education; 

12 (B) a nonprofit organization with expertise 

13 in evaluation; or 

14 (C) an evaluation firm. 

15 (5) INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.—The 

16 term ‘‘institution of higher education’’ has the 

17 meaning given the term in section 102 of the Higher 

18 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002). 

19 (6) LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY.—The term 

20 ‘‘local educational agency’’ has the meaning given 

21 the term in section 9101 of the Elementary and Sec22 ondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801). 

23 (7) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

24 the Secretary of Education. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS