"Rigorous" education: By whose standard?

When Republican senators quietly tucked a major new student-aid program into the 774-page budget bill last month, they not only approved a five-year, $3.75 billion initiative. They also set up what could be an important shift in U.S. education: The federal government for the first time will rate the academic rigor of the nation's 18,000 high schools.

The measure, backed by the Bush administration and expected to pass the House next month, would provide $750 to $1,300 grants to low-income college freshmen and sophomores who have completed "a rigorous secondary-school program of study" and larger amounts to juniors and seniors majoring in math, science and other critical fields.

Margaret Spellings, the secretary of education, would define rigorous, giving her a new foothold in matters of high-school curriculum.

Mindful of the delicate politics at play, senior Department of Education officials said they would consult governors and other groups in determining which high-school programs would allow students to qualify for grants.

"I do not see this, at all, as an expansion of the federal role," said Sally Stroup, an assistant secretary of education. Washington, she said, would not impose a curriculum, just judge programs of study outlined by states.

Furthermore, states and communities can decide on their own whether their students will compete for the grants. "We don't force people to do anything," Stroup said.

But Terry Hartle, a senior vice president at the American Council on Education, the nation's largest association of colleges and universities, said the new program "involves the federal government in curricular matters in a way that opens a new chapter in educational history."

"I'm very sympathetic to the goal of getting more students to take more math and science courses, but this particular plan has the potential to turn the Department of Education into a national school board," Hartle said.

Stroup and other department officials said they had not figured out how, if the program is approved, they would go about identifying which students, from which high schools, would qualify.

The department would have $790 million in new grant money to distribute to college-bound students by the fall, a tight timeline that Stroup said would force the department to postpone the rule-making process that usually accompanies new programs. (The program would operate for the first year without rules.) Susan Aspey, a department spokeswoman, estimated that more than 500,000 students would receive grants.

Several prominent educators said they expected the legislation to unleash a scramble by high schools to gain recognition of their curricula as rigorous.

The Constitution outlines no role for the federal government in education, and local control of schools is a cornerstone of the U.S. system. But the federal government's role has grown since Congress began financing college studies for World War II veterans.

Several laws increased federal aid to education, including the landmark National Defense Act of 1958, but specifically prohibited federal officials from assuming supervision or control over programs of instruction. And while President Bush's education law, No Child Left Behind, imposed mandatory testing, it allowed the states to choose their tests.

Like the No Child Left Behind law, the new grants largely are an effort to take a Texas idea nationwide.

The legislation is modeled on the Texas Scholars program, begun during Bush's governorship, which enlisted certain Texas high schools and encouraged students to take a "rigorous course of study," defined as including four years of English; 3-½ years of social studies; two years of foreign language; and a year each of algebra, geometry, advanced algebra, biology, chemistry and physics.

After Bush won the presidency, the administration financed a Center for State Scholars to spread a curriculum modeled on Texas Scholars nationwide.

Washington state's participation in the program ended when federal funding ran out in October, said Molly O'Connor of the nonprofit Partnership for Learning, which had run the program.

In the 2006 budget, Bush proposed supplemental Pell Grants for college freshmen and sophomores who had completed the "rigorous" curriculum outlined in the State Scholars initiative, in which some 300 school districts in 15 states are still participating. A House bill closely reflected that administration proposal.

But the legislation evolved. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., sponsored legislation establishing new grants to college juniors and seniors majoring in math, science or engineering.

In December, Republican lawmakers working with the administration melded the House and Senate bills, adding language requiring the secretary to recognize at least one rigorous high-school program in each state.

Democratic lawmakers said they barely were consulted.

"We were shut almost completely out of the process," said Rep. George Miller of California, the ranking minority member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.

The new grants, designed to supplement the broader, $13 billion Pell Grant program, range from $750 for low-income college freshmen and $1,300 for sophomores to $4,000 for juniors and seniors who are pursuing majors in the physical, life or computer sciences, mathematics, technology, engineering or certain foreign languages. Applicants must have a 3.0 grade-point average to be eligible as sophomores, juniors and seniors.

The administration's original proposal would have been simple to administer. But under the proposal approved by the Senate, Department of Education officials would need to scrutinize high-school courses of study and discuss curricular matters with local officials to a degree that federal officials never have.

"We haven't actually sat down yet and decided how we're going to go about it," Stroup said.

Pell Grants have been based on financial need, but eligibility for the new grants is more complicated, with requirements changing twice as students advance through college.

The requirement that students maintain a B average, for instance, will force the department to decide how to handle applicants attending institutions such as The Evergreen State College in Olympia, which does not give letter or numeric grades. With little time before crucial decisions must be made, some educators said they were expecting considerable confusion.

"This will be like trying to land a 747 on an airstrip built for a single-engine plane," said Barmak Nassirian, associate executive director of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers. "And we're all going to have to fly in by the seat of our pants."

Information on Washington state's State Scholars program was provided by Seattle Times staff.