Coding Technology Improvements Act

Bill: 115-hr-5053
Sponsor: full_name: Rep. Kuster, Ann M. [D-NH-2]
Introduced: 2018-02-15
Policy area: Education
Subjects: Advanced technology and technological innovations

Computers and information technology

Education of the disadvantaged

Education programs funding

Higher education
Latest action: action_date: 2018-04-05
text: Referred to the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development.

Summaries:
action_date: 2018-02-15
action_desc: Introduced in House
text: <p><b>Coding Technology Improvements Act</b></p> <p>This bill amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to expand the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) program to include grants that support innovative technology partnerships.&nbsp;</p>

tv_txt: I 115th CONGRESS 2d Session H. R. 5053 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES February 15, 2018 Ms. Kuster of New Hampshire introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce A BILL To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to support innovative technology partnerships.

1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Coding Technology Improvements Act . 2. Support of innovative technology partnerships Section 744(c) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 ( 20 U.S.C. 1138c(c) ) is amended by adding at the end the following: (7) Support of innovative technology partnerships, through grants to encourage increased innovation in higher education programs that are offered through partnerships between institutions of higher education and nontraditional providers not traditionally eligible to participate in title IV programs, and that are approved by a quality assurance entity (which meets the requirements for such an entity described in the notice published in the Federal Register by the Department of Education on October 15, 2015 (80 Fed. Reg. 62047 et seq.)), including programs on coding, high-technology software, or computer science. Such grants may be used to assist in assessing whether such partnerships— (A) increase access to innovative and effective educational programs, particularly for students from low-income backgrounds; (B) assess quality assurance processes appropriate for the nontraditional providers and programs described in this paragraph; and (C) identify ways to protect students and taxpayers from risk, including lack of employment or increase of personal debt. .