I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1741 

To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to decrease 

the frequency of standardized tests administered to students in grades 

3 through 12, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 23, 2023 

Mr. BOWMAN (for himself, Ms. WILSON of Florida, Ms. OCASIO-CORTEZ, Ms. 

BROWN, Mr. ESPAILLAT, Mrs. RAMIREZ, Mr. CASAR, Mr. PAYNE, Ms. 

VELA ́ZQUEZ, Ms. JAYAPAL, Mrs. CHERFILUS-MCCORMICK, Ms. TLAIB, 

Ms. JACKSON LEE, Ms. NORTON, Ms. PRESSLEY, Ms. CROCKETT, Ms. 

LEE of Pennsylvania, Ms. WILLIAMS of Georgia, and Mr. FROST) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 

of 1965 to decrease the frequency of standardized tests 

administered to students in grades 3 through 12, and 

for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘More Teaching Less 

5 Testing Act of 2023’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 1741 IH

1 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

2 Congress finds the following: 

3 (1) An overwhelming body of research evidence 

4 demonstrates that— 

5 (A) standardized testing scores are highly 

6 correlated with the socioeconomic status of a 

7 student; and 

8 (B) test-based accountability has not im9 proved equity in public schools. 

10 (2) According to the National Education Asso11 ciation, there is a nationwide shortage of 300,000 

12 teachers and school staff. 

13 (3) According to the 2022 report of the Amer14 ican Federation of Teachers Teacher and School 

15 Staff Shortage Task Force titled ‘‘Here Today, 

16 Gone Tomorrow?’’, reducing the frequency of stand17 ardized testing and empowering teachers to use au18 thentic assessments that measure what students 

19 know and can do is a critical component to address20 ing the nationwide teacher shortage. 

21 (4) Research published by the National Acad22 emies Press shows that summative assessments are 

23 appropriate for curriculum and in-school account24 ability but are not appropriate when used as a domi25 nant factor in making high-stakes decisions and can 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 1741 IH

1 undermine the quality of education and equality of 

2 opportunity. 

3 (5) The peer-reviewed Research in Middle Level 

4 Education Journal published a study in 2017 show5 ing that State standardized test results are strongly 

6 influenced by non-school factors and that standard7 ized test results cannot capture the complexities of 

8 the influence of middle level administrators may 

9 have on the lives of students. Nevertheless, the use 

10 of State standardized test results drove school ad11 ministrator evaluations in more than 40 States. 

12 (6) More than 1,185 accredited, four-year col13 leges and universities removed ACT and SAT test 

14 score requirements for prospective applicants for the 

15 Fall 2022 semester. 

16 (7) According to a sum of mean science, read17 ing, and mathematics scores from the OECD Pro18 gramme for International Student Assessment (in 

19 this Act referred to as ‘‘PISA’’) results for 2018, 

20 the United States ranked 22nd out of participating 

21 countries. In mathematics, the United States ranked 

22 36th out of the 79 participating countries and re23 gions, which was below the international average. 

24 Throughout the high-stakes accountability era, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
4 

•HR 1741 IH

1 standardized test scores in the United States have 

2 remained flat. 

3 (8) Even before the COVID–19 pandemic 

4 began, progress had stalled on the main measure of 

5 academic well-being in the United States, the Na6 tional Assessment of Educational Progress (in this 

7 Act referred to as ‘‘NAEP’’). According to the 2019 

8 NAEP, the average performance of American 

9 fourth-and eighth-graders in math and reading has 

10 declined since the 2017 NAEP. 

11 (9) According to the National Center for Edu12 cation Statistics, students demonstrating the lowest 

13 performance in reading have made no progress since 

14 the first NAEP was conducted almost 30 years ago. 

15 (10) According to the 2015 survey from the 

16 Council of the Great City Schools titled ‘‘Student 

17 Testing in America’s Great City Schools: An Inven18 tory and Preliminary Analysis’’, there is no correla19 tion between the amount of mandated testing time 

20 and the reading and mathematics scores in grades 

21 four and eight on the NAEP. 

22 (11) In the same survey from the Council of the 

23 Great City Schools, 39 percent of school districts re24 ported having to wait between two and four months 

25 before final State test results were available at the 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
5 

•HR 1741 IH

1 school level, minimizing the utility of these tests for 

2 instructional purposes. 

3 (12) In 2015, a typical American student took 

4 112 mandated standardized tests across the length 

5 of their elementary and secondary education years, 

6 including both federally mandated summative assess7 ments and non-federally mandated summative as8 sessments. Countries that outperform the United 

9 States on the PISA only test their students three 

10 times throughout the kindergarten through twelfth11 grade years. 

12 (13) Research has shown that current testing 

13 volumes narrow curriculum to the tested topics, par14 ticularly when exams are high stakes. Other impor15 tant subjects, such as art, music, finance, foreign 

16 languages, social studies, civics, and physical edu17 cation are downplayed or ignored. 

18 (14) Studies show that standardized testing 

19 leads to the narrowing of instruction and classroom 

20 curriculum even within assessed subjects. 

21 (15) The negative impact of standardized test22 ing extends to students, their families, and the eco23 nomic well-being of their communities. The mass 

24 availability of school ratings based on standardized 

25 test scores has accelerated divergence in housing valVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:02 Apr 18, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1741.IH H1741

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
6 

•HR 1741 IH

1 ues, income distributions, and education levels as 

2 well as the racial and ethnic composition across com3 munities. 

4 (16) African Americans, especially boys, are 

5 disproportionately placed or misplaced in special 

6 education, frequently based on standardized test re7 sults. 

8 (17) A reduction in the administration of and 

9 preparation for mandated summative assessments 

10 would afford more time and resources for other 

11 learning opportunities that— 

12 (A) incorporate a diverse array of high13 quality assessment methods, including formative 

14 assessments embedded within instruction, per15 formance-based assessment, and methods to as16 sess understanding and skill development 

17 through project-based learning; and 

18 (B) promote deeper learning, positive cog19 nitive development, and the skills needed for the 

20 21st century workforce. 

21 SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO APPROPRIATE 

22 USES OF SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENTS. 

23 It is the sense of Congress that— 

24 (1) to support a love of learning that fosters 

25 joy, curiosity, creativity, rigor, collaborative problem 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
7 

•HR 1741 IH

1 solving, and the development of 21st century skills, 

2 public elementary and secondary schools need more 

3 capacity and resources for meaningful educational 

4 experiences; 

5 (2) the requirement for States to administer 

6 annual standardized tests to receive Federal funds 

7 under title I of the Elementary and Secondary Edu8 cation Act of 1965 limits classroom instruction, pro9 motes memorization over critical thinking, and 

10 prioritizes multiple choice tests over balanced assess11 ment systems using multiple measures that promote 

12 high-quality teaching and learning; 

13 (3) a robust body of research demonstrates that 

14 the overuse of standardized testing takes a negative 

15 toll on students, teachers, and the classroom envi16 ronment; 

17 (4) States should be supported in developing 

18 and implementing innovative, evidence-based, and 

19 standards-based assessment systems that support 

20 high-quality teaching and learning and the ability to 

21 meaningfully measure performance rather than 

22 using commercial assessment products that are lim23 ited to demonstrating proficiency to a standardized 

24 test; and 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
8 

•HR 1741 IH

1 (5) State assessment and accountability sys2 tems should— 

3 (A) focus on, not hinder, critical thinking; 

4 (B) reflect principles of reciprocity, such 

5 that identified needs and areas for growth re6 sult in the allocation of both resources and ca7 pacity building opportunities to support im8 provement; and 

9 (C) promote equitable opportunities for 

10 high-quality teaching and deep learning on a 

11 range of academic, socioemotional, and 21st 

12 century skills. 

13 SEC. 4. DECREASING STANDARDIZED TESTING FREQUENCY 

14 FOR STUDENTS IN GRADES 3 THROUGH 12. 

15 (a) EXPANSION OF STATE EDUCATIONAL ASSESS16 MENT OPTIONS.—Section 8101 of the Elementary and 

17 Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801) is 

18 amended by adding at the end the following: 

19 ‘‘(53) COMBINATION TESTING.—The term ‘com20 bination testing’ means an educational assessment 

21 system in which a State administers grade-span test22 ing using— 

23 ‘‘(A) representative sampling; or 

24 ‘‘(B) matrix sampling. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
9 

•HR 1741 IH

1 ‘‘(54) GRADE-SPAN TESTING.—The term 

2 ‘grade-span testing’ means an educational assess3 ment system in which a State administers each of 

4 the assessments described in section 1111(b)(2)(A) 

5 once during— 

6 ‘‘(A) grades 3 through 5; 

7 ‘‘(B) grades 6 through 9; and 

8 ‘‘(C) grades 10 through 12. 

9 ‘‘(55) MATRIX SAMPLING.—The term ‘matrix 

10 sampling’ means an educational assessment adminis11 tration method in which a State— 

12 ‘‘(A) divides the total number of questions 

13 on an educational assessment into groups that 

14 are comprised of an equal number of questions; 

15 ‘‘(B) divides the students enrolled at an el16 ementary or secondary school who will receive 

17 such educational assessment into groups that 

18 are comprised of— 

19 ‘‘(i) an equal number of students; and 

20 ‘‘(ii) with respect to each subgroup of 

21 students (described in section 

22 1111(b)(2)(B)(xi)), a number of students 

23 belonging to such subgroup that is equal to 

24 the proportion of— 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
10 

•HR 1741 IH

1 ‘‘(I) the total number of students 

2 enrolled at such school belonging to 

3 such subgroup; to 

4 ‘‘(II) the total number of stu5 dents enrolled at such school; and 

6 ‘‘(C) administers such groups of questions 

7 to such groups of students in a manner deter8 mined by the Secretary to be appropriate. 

9 ‘‘(56) REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLING.— 

10 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘representa11 tive sampling’ means an educational assessment 

12 administration method in which a State— 

13 ‘‘(i) administers, in accordance with 

14 subparagraph (B), math, reading or lan15 guage arts, and science assessments to a 

16 representative sample of students from a 

17 sample of public elementary and secondary 

18 schools in the State; and 

19 ‘‘(ii) is able to draw from such sam20 pling valid and reliable inferences about 

21 the performance of students— 

22 ‘‘(I) in the State and in local 

23 educational agencies served by the 

24 State; and 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
11 

•HR 1741 IH

1 ‘‘(II) in the elementary and sec2 ondary schools selected for such sam3 pling. 

4 ‘‘(B) SAMPLE REQUIREMENTS.—A State 

5 shall ensure that— 

6 ‘‘(i) each assessment described in sub7 paragraph (A)(i) is administered to a dif8 ferent representative sample of students; 

9 and 

10 ‘‘(ii) the composition of each such rep11 resentative sample of students enables re12 sults to be disaggregated in accordance 

13 with section 1111(b)(2)(B)(xi).’’. 

14 (b) STATE DISCRETION CONCERNING THE FRE15 QUENCY OF STANDARDIZED TESTING.—Section 

16 1111(b)(2)(B) of the Elementary and Secondary Edu17 cation Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(B)) is amend18 ed— 

19 (1) in clause (i)(II)— 

20 (A) by inserting ‘‘, in accordance with 

21 clause (v),’’ after ‘‘administered’’; and 

22 (B) by striking ‘‘all’’; 

23 (2) in clause (v)— 

24 (A) by amending subclause (I) to read as 

25 follows: 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
12 

•HR 1741 IH

1 ‘‘(I) in the case of mathematics, read2 ing or language arts, and science, be ad3 ministered using— 

4 ‘‘(aa) combination testing; 

5 ‘‘(bb) grade-span testing; or 

6 ‘‘(cc) representative sampling— 

7 ‘‘(AA) not more than once 

8 in each of grades 3 through 8; 

9 and 

10 ‘‘(BB) at least once in 

11 grades 9 through 12; and’’; 

12 (B) by striking subclause (II); and 

13 (C) by redesignating subclause (III) as 

14 subclause (II); and 

15 (3) in clause (vii)(I), by inserting ‘‘, as applica16 ble’’ after ‘‘students’’. 

17 (c) STATEWIDE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM.—Section 

18 1111(c)(4) of the Elementary and Secondary Education 

19 Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(c)(4)) is amended— 

20 (1) in subparagraph (A)(i)(I)(aa), by striking 

21 ‘‘annual’’; and 

22 (2) in subclauses (I) and (II) of subparagraph 

23 (B)(i), by striking ‘‘annual’’ in each place it appears. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
13 

•HR 1741 IH

1 SEC. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD REGARDING THE AD2 MINISTRATION OF ASSESSMENTS FOR EACH 

3 GRADE. 

4 Section 1111(b)(2)(L) of the Elementary and Sec5 ondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(L)) 

6 is amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘at the sole discretion of such 

8 State’’ and inserting ‘‘following a 90-day public com9 ment period inviting input from a broad community 

10 of local stakeholders, including educators, principals, 

11 other school leaders, parents, and primary care12 givers’’; and 

13 (2) by inserting ‘‘, and preparation for,’’ after 

14 ‘‘administration of’’. 

15 SEC. 6. ESTABLISHING A TASKFORCE TO EVALUATE TEST16 ING PRACTICES AND TO PROMOTE QUALITY 

17 TEACHING. 

18 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established a 

19 taskforce within the National Center for Education Re20 search to be known as the ‘‘Taskforce to Evaluate Testing 

21 Practices and Promote Quality Teaching’’ (in this section 

22 referred to as the ‘‘Taskforce’’). 

23 (b) DUTIES.— The duties of the Taskforce shall be 

24 to— 

25 (1) identify— 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
14 

•HR 1741 IH

1 (A) the effect standardized test practices 

2 have on student wellness, learning, and postsec3 ondary education success; 

4 (B) opportunities to promote in elementary 

5 and secondary schools performance-based as6 sessment systems that are developmentally ap7 propriate, promote experiential and project8 based learning, and build technological literacy 

9 skills; 

10 (C) potential metrics of educational quality 

11 and equity that do not rely on standardized as12 sessments, including opportunity-to-learn data; 

13 and 

14 (D) barriers that prevent elementary and 

15 secondary schools from establishing innovative 

16 assessment systems; and 

17 (2) make recommendations to address such bar18 riers. 

19 (c) MEMBERSHIP.— 

20 (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after 

21 the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commis22 sioner for Education Research shall appoint to the 

23 Taskforce not fewer than 5, and not more than 10, 

24 members. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
15 

•HR 1741 IH

1 (2) INCLUSION OF EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT

2 EXPERTS.—At least 1 member shall be an individual 

3 with expertise in education assessment systems, in4 cluding performance-based assessments. 

5 (3) TERMS.—Each member shall be appointed 

6 for a term of 2 years. 

7 (4) BASIC PAY.—Members shall each be paid at 

8 a rate equal to the rate of basic pay for level IV of 

9 the Executive Schedule. 

10 (5) VACANCIES.—A vacancy in the Taskforce 

11 shall be filled by an appointment of a new member 

12 by the Director (as described in subsection (d)) in 

13 consultation with— 

14 (A) public elementary school teachers; 

15 (B) public secondary school teachers; 

16 (C) public school leaders; and 

17 (D) individuals representing organizations 

18 with expertise in education policy. 

19 (d) DIRECTOR OF TASKFORCE.—The Taskforce shall 

20 have a Director who shall be appointed by the Commis21 sioner, in consultation with— 

22 (1) public elementary school teachers; 

23 (2) public secondary school teachers; 

24 (3) public school leaders; 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
16 

•HR 1741 IH

1 (4) school-based mental health services pro2 viders; and 

3 (5) individuals representing organizations with 

4 expertise in education policy. 

5 (e) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than 2 years 

6 after the date on which the Commissioner completes all 

7 appointments to the Taskforce required under subsection 

8 (c)(1), the Taskforce shall submit to the appropriate con9 gressional committees a report that includes— 

10 (1) a review, disaggregated by each State, of 

11 assessments administered to students in kinder12 garten through grade 12 that includes— 

13 (A) a description of each summative as14 sessment the State used, including assessments 

15 developed pursuant to the innovative assess16 ment demonstration authority under section 

17 1204 of the Elementary and Secondary Edu18 cation Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6364); 

19 (B) an estimation of the cost of admin20 istering each such assessment; 

21 (C) an estimation, for each grade, of the 

22 test administration time allocated each aca23 demic year for such assessments; 

24 (D) an estimation, for each grade, of the 

25 classroom instructional time lost each academic 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
17 

•HR 1741 IH

1 year while preparing students for each such as2 sessment; and 

3 (E) a description of how each State is 

4 using data from such assessments, including 

5 whether such data is used for punitive pur6 poses; 

7 (2) an accounting of Federal, State, and local 

8 funds paid to for-profit entities for the purpose of 

9 designing, developing, administering, and scoring 

10 summative assessments; 

11 (3) a study of the interaction between statewide 

12 summative assessment and accountability systems, 

13 as implemented as of the date of the beginning of 

14 the report required under this subsection, and the 

15 quality of teaching and learning, including— 

16 (A) the extent to which statewide 

17 summative assessments are aligned to 21st cen18 tury skill development; 

19 (B) the extent to which such assessment 

20 and accountability systems lead to a narrowing 

21 of curriculum; and 

22 (C) the impact of such assessment and ac23 countability systems on the quality of instruc24 tion and opportunities for deeper learning 

25 across a variety of subjects and skills; 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
18 

•HR 1741 IH

1 (4) a description of barriers that prevent 

2 schools from establishing and implementing innova3 tive assessment systems that promote performance4 based assessment; 

5 (5) recommendations to overcome such barriers; 

6 and 

7 (6) recommendations for innovative assessment 

8 systems that— 

9 (A) are created in partnership with teach10 ers and other educators; 

11 (B) empower teachers; 

12 (C) reduce elementary and secondary 

13 school reliance upon summative assessment 

14 tools from for-profit third-party vendors; and 

15 (D) create a framework for designing a 

16 balanced assessment system that supports equi17 table opportunities for learning and centers stu18 dents’ needs. 

19 (f) EXPIRATION OF TASKFORCE.—The Taskforce 

20 shall expire on the date that is 30 days after the date 

21 of the submission of the report required under subsection 

22 (d). 

23 (g) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
19 

•HR 1741 IH

1 (1) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMIT2 TEES.—The term ‘‘appropriate congressional com3 mittees’’ means— 

4 (A) the Committees on Appropriations of 

5 the Senate and House of Representatives; 

6 (B) the Committee on Health, Education, 

7 Labor, and Pensions of the Senate; and 

8 (C) the Committee on Education and the 

9 Workforce of the House of Representatives. 

10 (2) ESEA TERMS.— 

11 (A) The terms ‘‘elementary school’’, 

12 ‘‘school leader’’, ‘‘secondary school’’, and 

13 ‘‘State’’ have the meanings given such terms in 

14 section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary 

15 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801). 

16 (B) The term ‘‘innovative assessment sys17 tem’’ has the meaning given such term in sec18 tion 1204(a) of the Elementary and Secondary 

19 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6364(a)). 

20 (C) The term ‘‘school-based mental health 

21 services provider’’ has the meaning given such 

22 term in section 4102 of the Elementary and 

23 Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

24 7112). 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
20 

•HR 1741 IH

1 SEC. 7. EXPANSION OF INNOVATIVE ASSESSMENT DEM2 ONSTRATION AUTHORITY. 

3 (a) EXPANSION OF AUTHORITY.—Section 1204 of 

4 the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 is 

5 amended— 

6 (1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ‘‘an an7 nual’’ and inserting ‘‘a’’; 

8 (2) in subsection (b)— 

9 (A) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘5 

10 years’’ and inserting ‘‘7 years’’; and 

11 (B) in paragraph (3)— 

12 (i) in the matter preceding subpara13 graph (A), by striking ‘‘3 years’’ and in14 serting ‘‘5 years’’; and 

15 (ii) in subparagraph (A), by striking 

16 ‘‘a total number of not more than 7 par17 ticipating State educational agencies’’ and 

18 inserting ‘‘a total number of not fewer 

19 than 20 participating State educational 

20 agencies’’; 

21 (3) in subsection (e)(2)(A)— 

22 (A) in clause (x)— 

23 (i) by striking ‘‘an annual,’’ and in24 serting ‘‘a’’; 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
21 

•HR 1741 IH

1 (ii) by inserting ‘‘assessed in a given 

2 subject in a given year’’ after ‘‘each indi3 vidual student’’; and 

4 (iii) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; 

5 (B) in clause (xi)(II), by striking the pe6 riod at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

7 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

8 ‘‘(xii) be of equal or greater rigor to 

9 the State assessments under section 

10 1111(b)(2).’’; 

11 (4) in subsection (f)(1)(B)(i), by striking ‘‘com12 parable to the State assessments’’ and inserting ‘‘de13 termined by the Secretary to be of equal or greater 

14 rigor to the State assessments’’; 

15 (5) in subsection (i)(3), by striking ‘‘com16 parable to measures of academic achievement’’ and 

17 inserting ‘‘determined by the Secretary to be of 

18 equal or greater rigor to measures of academic 

19 achievement’’; and 

20 (6) in subsection (m)(1)(A)(ii), by striking 

21 ‘‘comparable with statewide assessments’’ and in22 serting ‘‘determined by the Secretary to be of equal 

23 or greater rigor to statewide assessments’’. 

24 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There 

25 are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of EduVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:02 Apr 18, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1741.IH H1741

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
22 

•HR 1741 IH

1 cation $100,000,000 for the fiscal year in which the date 

2 of the enactment of this Act occurs, and for each of the 

3 4 succeeding fiscal years, to carry out section 1204 of the 

4 Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 

5 U.S.C. 6364). 

6 SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR LOCAL 

7 EDUCATIONAL AGENCY GRANTS. 

8 Section 1002(a) of the Elementary and Secondary 

9 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6302(a)) is amended 

10 to read as follows: 

11 ‘‘(a) LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY GRANTS.—There 

12 are authorized to be appropriated $66,000,000,000 for the 

13 fiscal year in which the date of the enactment of the More 

14 Teaching Less Testing Act of 2023 occurs, and for each 

15 of the 9 succeeding fiscal years, to carry out the activities 

16 described in part A.’’. 

17 SEC. 9. PROHIBITION ON USE OF ESEA FUNDS FOR CER18 TAIN PURPOSES. 

19 A State receiving funds under the Elementary and 

20 Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et 

21 seq.) may not— 

22 (1) consider the summative assessments re23 quired under section 1111(b)(2) of such Act as a 

24 sole or dominant factor when— 

25 (A) implementing grade-retention policies; 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
23 

•HR 1741 IH

1 (B) awarding a student a high school di2 ploma; or 

3 (C) evaluating the performance of teachers 

4 or administrators; 

5 (2) establish a rating system for elementary 

6 schools or local educational agencies that serve such 

7 elementary schools based exclusively on the 

8 summative assessment scores of students who attend 

9 such elementary schools; or 

10 (3) establish a rating system for secondary 

11 schools or local educational agencies that serve such 

12 secondary schools based exclusively on— 

13 (A) the summative assessment scores of 

14 students that attend such secondary schools; or 

15 (B) the graduation rates of students that 

16 attend such secondary schools. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB