[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 73 (Monday, April 19, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20348-20351]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08068]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED-2021-OESE-0033]
Proposed Priorities--American History and Civics Education
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Proposed priorities.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) proposes two
priorities for the American History and Civics Education programs,
including the Presidential and Congressional Academies for American
History and Civics(Academies) and National Activities programs,
Assistance Listing Numbers 84.422A and 84.422B. We may use these
priorities for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2021 and later years.
We propose these priorities to support the development of culturally
responsive teaching and learning and the promotion of information
literacy skills in grants under these programs.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before May 19, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not
accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after
the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies,
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to
submit your comments electronically. Information on using
Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents,
submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site
under ``FAQ.''
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you
mail or deliver your comments about the proposed priorities, address
them to Mia Howerton, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue
SW, Room 3C152, Washington, DC 20202.
Privacy Note: The Department's policy is to make all comments
received from members of the public available for public viewing in
their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include
in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly
available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mia Howerton, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3C152, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 205-0147. Email: [email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll-free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
the proposed priorities. To ensure that your comments have maximum
effect in developing the notice of final priorities, we urge you to
clearly identify the specific section of the proposed priorities that
each comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and their overall
requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result from the
proposed priorities. Please let us know of any further ways we could
reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving
the effective and efficient administration of our programs.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about the proposed priorities by accessing Regulations.gov.
Due to the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the Department
buildings are currently not open to the public. However, upon reopening
you may also inspect the comments in person in Room 3C152, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW, Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00
p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal
holidays.
Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request, we will provide an appropriate
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who
needs assistance to
[[Page 20349]]
review the comments or other documents in the public rulemaking record
for the proposed priorities. If you want to schedule an appointment for
this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Programs: The American History and Civics Education
programs support efforts to improve: (1) The quality of American
history, civics, and government education by educating students about
the history and principles of the Constitution of the United States,
including the Bill of Rights; and (2) the quality of the teaching of
American history, civics, and government in elementary schools and
secondary schools, including the teaching of traditional American
history.
The Academies program supports the establishment of: (1)
Presidential Academies for the Teaching of American History and Civics
that offer workshops for both veteran and new teachers to strengthen
their knowledge of American history, civics, and government education
(Presidential Academies); and (2) Congressional Academies for Students
of American History and Civics that provide high school students
opportunities to enrich their understanding of these subjects
(Congressional Academies).
The purpose of the National Activities program is to promote new
and existing evidence-based strategies to encourage innovative American
history, civics and government, and geography instruction, learning
strategies, and professional development activities and programs for
teachers, principals, or other school leaders, particularly such
instruction, strategies, activities, and programs that benefit low-
income students and underserved populations.
Program Authority: Title II, part B, subpart 3 of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C. 6662
and 6663.
Proposed Priorities: The Department proposes two priorities to
support the development of culturally responsive teaching and learning
and the promotion of information literacy skills in grants under the
American History and Civics Education programs.
Proposed Priority 1--Projects That Incorporate Racially,
Ethnically, Culturally, and Linguistically Diverse Perspectives into
Teaching and Learning.
Background: The Department recognizes that COVID-19--with its
disproportionate impact on communities of color--and the ongoing
national reckoning with systemic racism have highlighted the urgency of
improving racial equity throughout our society, including in our
education system. As Executive Order 13985 states: ``Our country faces
converging economic, health, and climate crises that have exposed and
exacerbated inequities, while a historic movement for justice has
highlighted the unbearable human costs of systemic racism. Our Nation
deserves an ambitious whole-of-government equity agenda that matches
the scale of the opportunities and challenges that we face.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 86 FR 7009 (Jan. 25, 2021), www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01753/advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
American History and Civics Education programs can play an
important role in this critical effort by supporting teaching and
learning that reflects the breadth and depth of our Nation's diverse
history and the vital role of diversity in our Nation's democracy. For
example, there is growing acknowledgement of the importance of
including, in the teaching and learning of our country's history, both
the consequences of slavery, and the significant contributions of Black
Americans to our society. This acknowledgement is reflected, for
example, in the New York Times' landmark ``1619 Project'' and in the
resources of the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American
History.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/1619-america-slavery.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, schools across the country are working to incorporate
anti-racist practices into teaching and learning. As the scholar Ibram
X. Kendi has expressed, ``[a]n antiracist idea is any idea that
suggests the racial groups are equals in all their apparent
differences--that there is nothing right or wrong with any racial
group. Antiracist ideas argue that racist policies are the cause of
racial inequities.'' \3\ It is critical that the teaching of American
history and civics creates learning experiences that validate and
reflect the diversity, identities, histories, contributions, and
experiences of all students.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Kendi, Ibram X, How to Be an Antiracist (New York, One
World, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In turn, racially, ethnically, culturally, and linguistically
responsive teaching and learning practices contribute to what has been
called an ``identity-safe'' learning environment. According to the
authors Dorothy Steele and Becki Cohn-Vargas, ``Identity safe
classrooms are those in which teachers strive to assure students that
their social identities are an asset rather than a barrier to success
in the classroom. And, through strong positive relationships and
opportunities to learn, they feel they are welcomed, supported, and
valued as members of the learning community.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Steele, Dorothy M., and Becki Cohn-Vargas, Identify Safe
Classrooms (Thousand Oaks, Corwin, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed priority would support projects that incorporate
culturally and linguistically responsive learning environments.
Proposed Priority:
Under this priority, the applicants propose projects that
incorporate teaching and learning practices that reflect the diversity,
identities, histories, contributions, and experiences of all students
create inclusive, supportive, and identity-safe learning environments.
In its application, an applicant addressing this priority must
describe how its proposed project incorporates teaching and learning
practices that--
(a) Take into account systemic marginalization, biases, inequities,
and discriminatory policy and practice in American history;
(b) Incorporate racially, ethnically, culturally, and
linguistically diverse perspectives and perspectives on the experience
of individuals with disabilities;
(c) Encourage students to critically analyze the diverse
perspectives of historical and contemporary media and its impacts;
(d) Support the creation of learning environments that validate and
reflect the diversity, identities, and experiences of all students; and
(e) Contribute to inclusive, supportive, and identity-safe learning
environments.
Proposed Priority 2--Promoting Information Literacy Skills.
Background:
Effective civics education is vital to protecting the Nation's
democracy--especially at a time when its core institutions and values
are threatened by misinformation. As The Power of Active Citizenship
notes: ``Teaching civics should be more than just understanding the
structures and functions of government . . . [It] is crucial that
students learn how to gather and evaluate sources of information, and
then use evidence from that information to develop and support their
ideas and advocacy positions. No polity can make wise decisions if its
citizens do not know how to separate
[[Page 20350]]
fact from opinion, and how to gather and weigh relevant evidence.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://www.aft.org/ae/summer2018/graham_weingarten.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ensuring that students have strong information literacy skills is
especially important in an age of digital media consumption. According
to a 2019 survey from Common Sense Media and Survey Monkey: ``Teens get
their news more frequently from social media sites (e.g., Facebook and
Twitter) or from YouTube than directly from news organizations. More
than half of teens (54%) get news from social media, and 50% get news
from YouTube at least a few times a week. Fewer than half, 41%, get
news reported by news organizations in print or online at least a few
times a week, and only 37% get news on TV at least a few times a
week.'' Among teens who got their news from YouTube, two-thirds
reported learning about the news from celebrities and influencers,
rather than news organizations.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://www.commonsensemedia.org/about-us/news/press-releases/new-survey-reveals-teens-get-their-news-from-social-media-and-youtube.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a 2017 report, the Brookings Institution concluded that,
``Funding efforts to enhance news literacy should be a high priority
for governments. This is especially the case with people who are going
online for the first time. For those individuals, it is hard to
distinguish false from real news, and they need to learn how to
evaluate news sources, not accept at face value everything they see on
social media or digital news sites. Helping people become better
consumers of online information is crucial as the world moves towards
digital immersion.'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Brookings Institution, 12/18/2017, https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-to-combat-fake-news-and-disinformation/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Civics education can be an opportunity to help students develop the
skills necessary to meaningfully participate in our democracy and
distinguish fact from misinformation. Well-designed programs can fuel
student engagement in our democracy and provide students with the
knowledge and skills to critically evaluate the materials they
encounter by developing their information literacy.
Proposed Priority:
In its application, the applicants propose projects that describe
how they will foster critical thinking and promote student engagement
in civics education through professional development or other
activities designed to support students in--
(a) Evaluating sources and evidence using standards of proof;
(b) Understanding their own biases when reviewing information, as
well as uncovering and recognizing bias in primary and secondary
sources;
(c) Synthesizing information into cogent communications; and
(d) Understanding how inaccurate information may be used to
manipulate individuals, and developing strategies to recognize accurate
and inaccurate information.
Types of Priorities:
When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Final Priorities:
We will announce the final priorities in a document published in
the Federal Register. We will determine the final priorities after
considering responses to the proposed priorities and other information
available to the Department. This document does not preclude us from
proposing additional priorities, requirements, definitions, or
selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking
requirements.
Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year
in which we choose to use the priorities, we invite applications
through a notice inviting applications in the Federal Register.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, it must be determined whether this
regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to the
requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely to
result in a rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or
Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the
Executive order.
This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866.
We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under
Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review
established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law,
Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only on a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
[[Page 20351]]
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing the proposed priorities only on a reasoned
determination that their benefits would justify their costs. In
choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those
approaches that would maximize net benefits. Based on an analysis of
anticipated costs and benefits, we believe that the proposed priorities
are consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the exercise of
their governmental functions.
In accordance with the Executive orders, the Department has
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
Potential Costs and Benefits
The Department believes that this proposed regulatory action would
not impose significant costs on eligible entities, whose participation
in our programs is voluntary, and costs can generally be covered with
grant funds. As a result, the proposed priorities would not impose any
particular burden except when an entity voluntarily elects to apply for
a grant. The proposed priorities would help ensure that the American
History and Civics Education programs support the development of
culturally responsive teaching and learning practices and promote
students' acquisition of critical information literacy skills. We
believe these benefits would outweigh any associated costs.
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum ``Plain
Language in Government Writing'' require each agency to write
regulations that are easy to understand.
The Secretary invites comments on how to make the proposed
priorities easier to understand, including answers to questions such as
the following:
Are the requirements in the proposed regulations clearly
stated?
Do the proposed regulations contain technical terms or
other wording that interferes with their clarity?
Does the format of the proposed regulations (grouping and
order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce
their clarity?
Would the proposed regulations be easier to understand if
we divided them into more (but shorter) sections?
Could the description of the proposed regulations in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble be more helpful in
making the proposed regulations easier to understand? If so, how?
What else could we do to make the proposed regulations
easier to understand?
To send any comments that concern how the Department could make the
proposed priorities easier to understand, see the instructions in the
ADDRESSES section.
Intergovernmental Review: These programs are subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for these programs.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that this proposed regulatory action would
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The U.S. Small Business Administration Size Standards define
proprietary institutions as small businesses if they are independently
owned and operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and
have total annual revenue below $7,000,000. Nonprofit institutions are
defined as small entities if they are independently owned and operated
and not dominant in their field of operation. Public institutions are
defined as small organizations if they are operated by a government
overseeing a population below 50,000.
The small entities that this proposed regulatory action would
affect are institutions of higher education and nonprofit
organizations. Of the impacts we estimate accruing to grantees or
eligible entities, all are voluntary and related mostly to an increase
in the number of applications prepared and submitted annually for
competitive grant competitions. Therefore, we do not believe that the
proposed priorities would significantly impact small entities beyond
the potential for increasing the likelihood of their applying for, and
receiving, competitive grants from the Department.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The proposed priorities contain information collection requirements
that are approved by OMB under OMB control number 1894-0006; the
proposed priorities do not affect the currently approved data
collection.
Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
can obtain this document in an accessible format. The Department will
provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich
Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file,
braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible
format.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can view this
document, as well as all other documents of the Department published in
the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To use
PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the
site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Ruth Ryder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Programs, Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2021-08068 Filed 4-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P