I 
112TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. R. 5732 
To authorize a competitive grant program to implement and evaluate digital 
learning in rural locales. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MAY 10, 2012 
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. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Schools of the Future 
Act’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
Congress finds the following: 
(1) Digital learning technology holds the prom-
ise of transforming rural education by removing bar-
riers of distance and increasing school capacity. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:29 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(2) While many large urban local educational 
agencies are at the forefront of implementing new 
digital learning innovations, it is often harder for 
smaller and more rural local educational agencies to 
access these tools. Smaller local educational agencies 
with less capacity may also find it more difficult to 
provide the training needed to effectively implement 
new digital learning technologies. 
(3) Despite the potential of digital learning in 
rural areas, these advancements risk passing rural 
areas by without support for their implementation. 
Rather than having schools and local educational 
agencies apply digital learning innovations designed 
for urban environments to rural areas, it is impor-
tant that digital learning technologies be developed 
and implemented in ways that reflect the unique 
needs of rural areas. 
(4) Digital learning is rapidly expanding, and 
new tools for improving teaching and learning are 
being developed every day. A growing demand for 
digital learning tools and products has made rig-
orous evaluation of their effectiveness increasingly 
important, as this information would allow school 
and local educational agency leaders to make in-
formed choices about how best to use these tools to 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:29 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
improve student achievement and educational out-
comes. 
SEC. 3. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED. 
(a) GRANTS TO ELIGIBLE PARTNERSHIPS.—From 
the amounts appropriated to carry out this Act, the Sec-
retary of Education is authorized to award grants, on a 
competitive basis, to eligible partnerships to carry out the 
activities described in section 6. 
(b) DURATION OF GRANT.—A grant under subsection 
(a) shall be awarded for not less than a 3-year and not 
longer than a 5-year period. 
(c) FISCAL AGENT.—If an eligible partnership re-
ceives a grant under this Act, a school partner in the part-
nership shall serve as the fiscal agent for the partnership. 
SEC. 4. APPLICATION. 
An eligible partnership desiring a grant under this 
Act shall submit an application to the Secretary at such 
time, in such manner, and containing such information as 
the Secretary may require, which shall include the fol-
lowing: 
(1) A description of the eligible partnership, in-
cluding the name of each of the partners and their 
respective roles and responsibilities. 
(2) A description of the technology-based learn-
ing practice, tool, strategy, or course that the eligi-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:29 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
ble partnership proposes to develop or implement 
using the grant funds. 
(3) Information relevant to the selection criteria 
under section 5(c). 
(4) A description of the evaluation to be under-
taken by the eligible partnership, including— 
(A) how the school partner and the evalua-
tion partner will work together to implement 
the practice, tool, strategy, or course in such a 
way that permits the use of a rigorous evalua-
tion design that meets the standards of the 
What Works Clearinghouse of the Institute of 
Education Sciences; and 
(B) a description of the evaluation design 
that meets such standards, which will be used 
to measure any significant effects on the out-
comes described in paragraphs (1) through (3) 
of section 7(a). 
(5) An estimate of the number of students to 
be reached through the grant and evidence of its ca-
pacity to reach the proposed number of students 
during the course of the grant. 
(6) An assurance that the school partner in the 
eligible partnership will ensure that each school to 
be served by the grant under this Act is designated 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:29 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
with a school locale code of Fringe Rural, Distant 
Rural, or Remote Rural, as determined by the Sec-
retary. 
(7) Any other information the Secretary may 
require. 
SEC. 5. APPLICATION REVIEW AND AWARD BASIS. 
(a) PEER REVIEW.—The Secretary shall use a peer 
review process to review applications for grants under this 
Act. The Secretary shall appoint individuals to the peer 
review process who have relevant expertise in digital learn-
ing, research and evaluation, and rural education. 
(b) AWARD BASIS.—In awarding grants under this 
Act, the Secretary shall ensure, to the extent practicable 
diversity in the type of activities funded under the grants. 
(c) SELECTION CRITERIA.—In evaluating an eligible 
partnership’s application for a grant under this Act, the 
Secretary shall consider— 
(1) the need for the proposed technology-based 
learning practice, tool, strategy, or course; 
(2) the quality of the design of the proposed 
practice, tool, strategy, or course; 
(3) the strength of the existing research evi-
dence with respect to such practice, tool, strategy, or 
course; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:29 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(C) Online professional development oppor-
tunities, teacher mentoring opportunities, and 
professional learning communities. 
(D) Tools or web resources designed to ad-
dresses specific instructional problems. 
(E) Other practices and strategies de-
signed to personalize the learning experience. 
(4) TOOLS, COURSES, AND
STRATEGIES
DE-
SIGNED TO IMPROVE THE ACHIEVEMENT OF STU-
DENTS
WITH
SPECIFIC
EDUCATIONAL
NEEDS.— 
Technology-based tools, courses, and strategies iden-
tified under this paragraph include the following 
types of tools, courses, and strategies designed to 
meet the needs of students with specific educational 
needs: 
(A) Digital tools specifically designed to 
meet the needs of students with a particular 
disability. 
(B) Online courses that give students who 
are not on track to graduate or have already 
dropped out of school the opportunity for accel-
erated credit recovery. 
(C) Language instruction courses, games, 
or software designed to meet the needs of 
English language learners. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:29 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(D) Other tools, courses, and strategies de-
signed to personalize the learning experience. 
(5) TOOLS, COURSES, AND
STRATEGIES
DE-
SIGNED TO HELP STUDENTS DEVELOP 21ST CEN-
TURY SKILLS.—Technology-based tools, courses, and 
strategies identified under this paragraph include 
peer-to-peer virtual learning opportunities to be used 
for the purposes of project-based learning, deeper 
learning, and collaborative learning, and other tools, 
courses, and strategies designed to help students de-
velop 21st century skills, such as the ability to think 
critically and solve problems, be effective commu-
nicators, collaborate with others, and learn to create 
and innovate. 
(6) TECHNOLOGY-BASED OR ONLINE COURSES 
THAT ALLOW STUDENTS TO TAKE COURSES THAT 
THEY WOULD NOT OTHERWISE HAVE ACCESS TO.— 
Technology-based or online courses identified under 
this paragraph include courses or collections of 
courses that provide students access to courses that 
they would not otherwise have access to, such as the 
following: 
(A) An online repository of elective 
courses. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
06:09 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(B) Online or software-based courses in 
foreign languages, especially in languages iden-
tified as critical or in schools where a teacher 
is not available to teach the language or course 
level a student requires. 
(C) 
Online 
advanced 
or 
college-level 
courses that can be taken for credit. 
(b) AUTHORIZED USE OF FUNDS.—An eligible part-
nership receiving a grant under this Act may use grant 
funds to— 
(1) develop the technology for technology-based 
learning strategies, practices, courses, or tools to be 
carried out under the grant; 
(2) purchase hardware or software needed to 
carry out such strategies, practices, courses, or tools 
under the grant, except that such purchases may not 
exceed 50 percent of total grant funds; 
(3) address the particular needs of student sub-
groups, including students with disabilities and 
English-language learners; 
(4) provide technology-based professional devel-
opment or professional development on how to maxi-
mize the utility of technology; and 
(5) address issues of cost and capacity in rural 
areas and shortage subjects. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:29 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
SEC. 7. DATA COLLECTION AND EVALUATION. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Each eligible partnership receiv-
ing a grant under this Act shall require its evaluation 
partner to complete a comprehensive, well-designed, and 
well-implemented evaluation that meets the standards of 
the What Works Clearinghouse after the third year of im-
plementation of the grant to measure the effect of the 
practice, tool, strategy, or course on— 
(1) student achievement, as measured by high 
quality assessments that provide objective, valid, re-
liable measures of student academic growth and in-
formation on whether a student is on-track to grad-
uate ready for college and career; 
(2) where applicable, student achievement gaps, 
graduation and dropout rates, college enrollment, 
college persistence, college completion, and teacher 
or principal effectiveness as measured by student 
achievement and other applicable measures; and 
(3) costs and savings to the school partner. 
(b) IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION.—An evaluation 
partner may use funds under this Act to carry out an im-
plementation evaluation designed to provide information 
that may be useful for schools, local educational agencies, 
States, consortia of schools, and charter school networks 
seeking to implement similar practices, tools, strategies, 
or courses in the future. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:29 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(c) PUBLICATION OF RESULTS.—Upon completion of 
an evaluation described in subsection (a) or (b), the eval-
uation partner shall— 
(1) submit a report of the results of the evalua-
tion to the Secretary; and 
(2) make publicly available such results. 
SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS. 
In this Act: 
(1) ELIGIBLE PARTNERSHIP.—The term ‘‘eligi-
ble partnership’’ means a partnership that includes 
a school partner and not less than 1— 
(A) digital learning partner, except that in 
a case in which a school partner or evaluation 
partner demonstrates expertise in digital learn-
ing to the Secretary; and 
(B) evaluation partner. 
(2) SCHOOL PARTNER.—The term ‘‘school part-
ner’’ means a— 
(A) local educational agency; 
(B) a charter school network; 
(C) a consortium of elementary schools or 
secondary schools; 
(D) a regional educational service agency 
or similar regional educational service provider; 
or 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:29 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
(E) a consortium of the entities described 
in subparagraphs (A) through (D). 
(3) DIGITAL LEARNING PARTNER.—The term 
‘‘digital learning partner’’ means an organization 
with expertise in the technology required to develop 
or implement the digital learning practices, tools, 
strategies, or courses proposed by the school partner 
with which the digital learning partner will partner 
or has partnered under this Act, such as— 
(A) an institution of higher education; 
(B) a nonprofit organization; or 
(C) an organization with school develop-
ment or turnaround experience. 
(4) EVALUATION PARTNER.—The term ‘‘evalua-
tion partner’’ means a partner that has the expertise 
and ability to carry out the evaluation of a grant re-
ceived under this Act, such as— 
(A) an institution of higher education; 
(B) a nonprofit organization with expertise 
in evaluation; or 
(C) an evaluation firm. 
(5) INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.—The 
term ‘‘institution of higher education’’ has the 
meaning given the term in section 102 of the Higher 
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002). 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
05:29 May 13, 2012
Jkt 019200
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H5732.IH
H5732
tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS