|
|
|
|
|
NASFAA
1101 Connecticut Avenue, NW,
Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20036-4303
Phone: 202-785-0453
Fax: 202-785-1487
Web@NASFAA.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal Register: June 23, 2008
Volume 73, Number 121
[Notices]
[Page 35471-35507]
[PDF version of document]
[[Page 35471]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of Education
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
34 CFR Parts 668, 673, 674, et al.
The Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education
(TEACH) Grant Program and Other Federal Student Aid Programs; Final
Rule
[[Page 35472]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION/
34 CFR Parts 668, 673, 674, 675, 676, 682, 685, 686, and 690
RIN 1840-AC93
[Docket ID ED-2008-OPE-0001]
The Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education
(TEACH) Grant Program and Other Federal Student Aid Programs
AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Final regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Secretary amends title 34 of the Code of Federal
Regulations to establish regulations for the Teacher Education
Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant program. The
TEACH Grant program is a non-need-based grant program that provides up
to $4,000 per year to students who are enrolled in an eligible program
and who agree to teach in a high-need field, at a low-income elementary
or secondary school for at least four years within eight years of
completing the program for which the TEACH Grant was awarded. If the
grant recipient fails to complete the required teaching service, the
TEACH Grant is treated as a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Stafford Loan
(Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan). The Secretary also amends the
regulations related to the Student Assistance General Provisions; the
General Provisions for the Federal Perkins Loan Program, Federal Work-
Study Program, and Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant
Program; the Federal Perkins Loan Program; the Federal Work-Study
Program; the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant
Program; the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) Program; the William
D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program; and the Federal Pell Grant Program
to implement the TEACH Grant program. These regulations are needed to
implement provisions of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA), as
amended by the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 (CCRAA).
DATES: Effective Date: These regulations are effective July 1, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Belton, U.S. Department of
Education, 1990 K Street, NW., room 8031, Washington, DC 20006-8502.
Telephone: (202) 502-7821 or via the Internet at:
Michelle.Belton@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the
Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an
alternative format (e.g. , Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the contact person listed in this section.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 21, 2008, the Secretary published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for the Teacher Education
Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program and
Other Federal Student Aid Programs in the Federal Register (73 FR
15336).
In the preamble to the NPRM, the Secretary discussed on pages 15337
through 15352 the major regulations proposed in that document to
implement the TEACH Grant program authorized under Title IV of the HEA,
including the following:
Amending Sec. 668.164(g) to add the TEACH Grant program
to the list of programs for which a student becomes ineligible when the
student is no longer enrolled at the institution for the award year and
to describe how TEACH Grant recipients may qualify for a late
disbursement.
Amending Sec. 668.183 to specify that a TEACH Grant that
has been converted to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan would not be
included in calculating an institution's cohort default rate.
Amending Sec. 673.5 to include the amount of any TEACH
Grant in the types of funds that may be used to replace a student's
expected family contribution (EFC).
Adding new Sec. 686.2 to define the terms ``Academic year
or its equivalent for elementary and secondary schools (Elementary or
secondary academic year),'' ``Annual award,'' ``Scheduled award,''
``Elementary school,'' ``High-need field,'' ``Highly-qualified,''
``Numeric equivalent,'' ``Post-baccalaureate program,'' ``Retiree,''
``School serving low-income students (low-income school),'' ``Secondary
school,'' ``Service Agreement,'' ``TEACH Grant-eligible institution,''
``TEACH Grant-eligible program,'' ``Teacher,'' and ``Teacher
preparation program.''
Adding new Sec. 686.3 to establish the duration of
student eligibility for a TEACH Grant based on the maximum amount of
grant funds available to students under section 420M(d)(1) and (2) of
the HEA.
Adding new Sec. 686.4 to give institutions the option to
participate in the TEACH Grant program, to clarify that participation
in the program is voluntary, and to describe the obligations of
institutions if they cease to participate in the program.
Adding new Sec. 686.5 to specify how an institution would
treat correspondence courses for purposes of the TEACH Grant program.
Adding new Sec. 686.6 to prohibit students from receiving
TEACH Grant payments concurrently from more than one institution.
Adding new Sec. 686.10 to describe the procedures that a
student must follow when applying for a TEACH Grant, and, in
particular, to require that a student submit a Free Application for
Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), complete and sign a service agreement and
promise to repay, and provide any additional information requested by
the Secretary.
Adding new Sec. 686.11 to establish student eligibility
requirements for the TEACH Grant program.
Adding new Sec. 686.12 to describe the agreement students
must sign prior to receiving each TEACH Grant award, and to explain the
service obligation that students must carry out for the TEACH Grant
award not to convert to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan.
Adding new Sec. 686.20 to require a student to submit a
valid Student Aid Report (SAR) or for the student's institution to
receive an Institutional Student Information Record (ISIR) with an
official EFC so that the institution can determine the appropriate
amount of a student's TEACH Grant.
Adding new Sec. 686.21 to provide that while a Scheduled
Award for the TEACH Grant program is $4,000, students may receive
lesser annual award amounts depending on their enrollment status and to
clarify that a student's TEACH Grant award, combined with other
estimated financial assistance, cannot exceed the cost of the student's
attendance as determined by the institution.
Adding new Sec. Sec. 686.22 and 685.25 to: (1) Describe
how an institution calculates a TEACH Grant payment for a payment
period for an eligible student depending on the academic calendar of
the eligible program, the student's enrollment status, and the amount
of the student's annual award; (2) establish the minimum payment for a
payment period; (3) require institutions to define the term ``academic
year'' for purposes of calculating payments for payment periods; and
(4) allow institutions to use overlapping Scheduled Awards in a payment
period.
Adding new Sec. 686.23 to address how an institution
calculates a TEACH Grant payment for an eligible student's payment
period when the student is enrolled in a payment period that overlaps
two award years.
Adding new Sec. 686.24 to establish how an institution
calculates a payment for an eligible student who transfers
[[Page 35473]]
from another postsecondary institution within the same award year.
Adding new Sec. 686.31 to delineate what an institution
must do to determine whether a student is eligible to receive a TEACH
Grant.
Adding new Sec. 686.32 to describe the initial,
subsequent, and exit counseling that institutions must provide to each
TEACH Grant recipient.
Adding new Sec. 686.33 to allow institutions to pay a
student a TEACH Grant at such times and in such installments that best
meet the student's needs.
Adding new Sec. 686.37 to describe the information
pertaining to a student's TEACH Grant eligibility that an institution
must submit to the Department and to establish submission deadlines for
this information.
Adding new Sec. 686.40 to define how and when a TEACH
Grant recipient must contact the Department to document fulfillment of
his or her service obligation or, if the service obligation has not
been met, the intent to fulfill the service obligation.
Adding new Sec. 686.41 to define the conditions under
which a TEACH Grant recipient will be able to request a suspension of
his or her service obligation for a specified amount of time.
Adding new Sec. 686.42 to require the discharge of a
grant recipient's service obligation if the recipient dies or becomes
totally and permanently disabled, and to clarify that the four-year
service obligation still would apply to a recipient who is in a
conditional discharge period.
Adding new Sec. 686.43 to describe the various conditions
under which a TEACH Grant would be converted into a Federal Direct
Unsubsidized Loan, with interest accruing from the date of each grant
disbursement and which a TEACH Grant recipient would be required to
pay.
Technical Corrections
We are making minor technical changes, including the following, to
correct errors that we identified during our review of the proposed
regulations.
Program Participation Agreement (Sec. 668.14(f))
We have revised Sec. 668.14(f) to correct inaccurate cross-
references. Specifically, Sec. 668.14(f) has been amended to cross-
reference paragraphs (g) and (h) of the section, rather than (h) and
(i) of the section. We also have revised Sec. 668.14(f)(3) to cross-
reference paragraph (f), rather than paragraph (g), of the section.
Teacher Loan Forgiveness Program (Sec. Sec. 682.215 and 685.217)
We have revised Sec. Sec. 682.215(c)(7)(ii) and 685.217(c)(7)(ii)
to correct inaccurate citations for the Family and Medical Leave Act of
1993 (FMLA). The correct citation for the FMLA is 29 U.S.C. 2601, et
seq., not 19 U.S.C. 2654.
Analysis of Comments and Changes
The regulations in this document were developed through negotiated
rulemaking. Section 492 of the HEA requires that, before publishing any
proposed regulations to implement programs under Title IV of the HEA,
the Secretary must obtain public involvement in the development of the
proposed regulations. After obtaining advice and recommendations, the
Secretary must conduct a negotiated rulemaking process to develop the
proposed regulations. All proposed regulations must conform to
agreements resulting from the negotiated rulemaking process unless the
Secretary reopens that process or explains any departure from the
agreements to the negotiated rulemaking participants.
These regulations were published in proposed form on March 21,
2008, in conformance with the consensus of the negotiated rulemaking
committee. Under the committee's protocols, consensus meant that no
member of the committee dissented from the agreed-upon language. The
Secretary invited comments on the proposed regulations by April 21, and
in response to the Secretary's invitation, 132 parties submitted
comments on the proposed regulations. An analysis of the comments and
the changes in the regulations since publication of the NPRM follows.
We group major issues according to subject, with appropriate
sections of the regulations referenced in parentheses. We discuss other
substantive issues under the sections of the regulations to which they
pertain. Generally, we do not address minor, non-substantive changes.
General
Comment: The Department received several general comments about the
TEACH Grant program. Four commenters suggested that the program is
inappropriately named and argued that the Department should change the
name of the program to reflect the fact that it is, in their opinion, a
loan forgiveness program rather than a grant program. Two commenters
argued that the funds dedicated for the TEACH Grant program would
better serve students if they were reallocated to the current Teacher
Loan Forgiveness Program or to the Perkins Loan Program.
The Department also received comments in support of the TEACH Grant
program that did not address specific sections of the proposed
regulations.
Discussion: The name, purpose, and structure of the program are
established by the HEA and cannot be changed by the Department. The
Department is not authorized to reallocate funds Congress designates
for the TEACH Grant program to another program.
The Department is working to disseminate detailed information about
the unique nature of the TEACH Grant program, including how TEACH
Grants may, under certain circumstances, convert into Federal
Unsubsidized Direct Loans, to institutions as well as to parents and
students.
Changes: None.
Eligible Programs (Sec. 668.8)
Comment: One commenter requested clarification about the
relationship between the definition of eligible program in Sec. 668.8
and the definition of TEACH Grant-eligible program in 34 CFR 686.2(d).
The commenter questioned whether it is appropriate to add, in Sec.
668.8(h)(3), a cross-reference to the definition of TEACH Grant-
eligible program in 34 CFR 686.2(d). In addition, the commenter asked
if programs that contribute to a student's ability to teach in a high-
need field should be included in the definition of eligible program
under Sec. 668.8(h)(3)(i).
Discussion: We agree that the connection between the definition of
eligible program in Sec. 668.8 and the definition of TEACH Grant-
eligible program found in 34 CFR 686.2(d) needs clarification. For
purposes of the TEACH Grant program, an educational program is an
eligible program under Sec. 668.8 only if it qualifies as a TEACH
Grant-eligible program in accordance with 34 CFR 686.2(d). Rather than
amend Sec. 668.8 to restate the definitional requirements of a TEACH
Grant-eligible program, we amended Sec. 668.8 simply to cross-
reference the definition in 34 CFR 686.2(d).
A program that contributes to a student's ability to teach in a
high-need field would be a TEACH Grant-eligible program if it is
designed to prepare an individual to teach as a highly qualified
teacher in a high-need field and leads to a baccalaureate or master's
degree, or is a post-baccalaureate program of study.
Changes: We amended Sec. 668.8(h) to clarify that an educational
program qualifies as an eligible program for purposes of the TEACH
Grant program only if it is a TEACH Grant-eligible
[[Page 35474]]
program in accordance with 34 CFR 686.2(d).
Treatment of Title IV grant and loan funds when a student withdraws
(Sec. 668.22)
Comment: One commenter questioned the placement of TEACH Grants in
the listing of unearned grant funds returned in the event a student
withdraws from an institution during a payment period. The commenter
believed that TEACH Grants should be placed at the beginning of the
order for returning grant funds and asked that that placement be
reconsidered.
Discussion: As reflected in the NPRM, the Department believes that
TEACH Grants should not be at the beginning of the order for returning
grant funds. Under the regulations, TEACH Grants will be returned after
Federal Pell Grants, Academic Competitiveness Grants, National SMART
Grants, and FSEOG program assistance. This return order is prescribed
by section 484B(b)(3)(B)(iii) of the HEA.
Changes: None.
Calculating and Applying Cohort Default Rates (Sec. 668.183)
Comment: Several commenters supported Sec. 668.183, which provides
that a TEACH Grant that has been converted to a Federal Direct
Unsubsidized Loan is not included in the calculation of an
institution's cohort default rate.
Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' support.
Changes: None.
Overaward (Sec. 673.5)
Comment: One commenter supported the proposal that TEACH Grants be
allowed to replace the EFC, believing that this approach fulfills the
spirit of the legislation and will be helpful in making awards to
students.
Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's support.
Changes: None.
Maximum Loan Amounts (Sec. Sec. 682.204 and 685.203)
Comment: One commenter wrote to support the proposal to exclude a
TEACH Grant that has been converted to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized
Loan from a borrower's aggregate or annual loan limits in the Federal
Family Education Loan (FFEL) and Federal Direct Loan Programs.
Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's support.
Changes: None.
Definitions (Sec. 686.2(d))
Agreement To Serve
Comment: None.
Discussion: The Department is changing the name of the agreement
described in section 420N(b) of the HEA from ``service agreement'' to
``agreement to serve'' to be more consistent with the statute.
Change: We have amended Sec. 686.2(d) to change the name of the
agreement under which a TEACH Grant recipient commits to meet the
service obligation described in Sec. 686.12 from ``service agreement''
to ``agreement to serve.''
High-Need Field
Comment: A large number of commenters suggested that library media
specialist should be included in the list of high-need fields. They
argued that all 50 States require that a school library media
specialist have a State teaching certificate, that library media
specialists are considered teachers and are responsible for developing
curriculum and instructing students, and that there are significant
shortages of library media specialists across the country. Several
commenters contended that early childhood education should be
considered a high-need field because of the shortage of baccalaureate-
degree-holding early childhood education teachers and the requirement
that Head Start teachers have a bachelor's degree in early childhood
education by 2013.
Discussion: Under certain circumstances, library media specialist
and early childhood education qualify as high-need fields and a grant
recipient could fulfill the service obligation associated with receipt
of a TEACH Grant by teaching in these fields. As specified in Sec.
686.12(b), for each TEACH Grant-eligible program for which the student
received TEACH Grant funds, the grant recipient must fulfill a service
obligation by serving as a full-time teacher for a total of not less
than four elementary or secondary academic years within eight calendar
years after completing the program or otherwise ceasing to be enrolled
in the program for which the recipient received the TEACH Grant in a
low-income school, as a highly qualified teacher, and in a high-need
field in the majority of classes taught during each elementary and
secondary academic year.
The definition of high-need field in Sec. 686.2(d) reflects
section 420N(b) of the HEA which specifically designates several fields
as high-need and provides for the inclusion of other fields that are
documented as high-need by the Federal Government, a State government
or a local educational agency (LEA), and approved by the Secretary. The
regulations explain that the additional high-need fields are those
listed in the Department's annual Teacher Shortage Area Nationwide
Listing (Nationwide List), which is available on the Department of
Education's Web site at http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/
tsa.pdf. The Nationwide List is based on information submitted to the
Department by the States, and inclusion of a field on the Nationwide
List indicates approval by the Department of Education. Some States
have identified early childhood education and library media specialist
as shortage areas in the Nationwide List.
For purposes of the TEACH Grant program, a teacher is someone who
provides direct classroom teaching or classroom-type teaching in a non-
classroom setting in an elementary or secondary school. An elementary
or secondary school is a nonprofit institutional day or residential
school, including a public elementary or secondary charter school, that
provides elementary or secondary education, as determined under State
law. The individual must be teaching the majority of classes in the
high-need field. In the case of service in early childhood education,
to meet the criterion of being a highly qualified teacher the
individual would need to be certified by the State in early childhood
education. To meet the criterion of teaching in an elementary school,
the service would need to take place in an elementary school and the
State would need to consider early childhood education a component of
the State's elementary school education system and have designated
early childhood education as a high-need field.
To meet the criterion of ``highly qualified,'' a library media
specialist would need to be certified by the State as a library media
specialist. To meet the criterion of ``teacher,'' the library media
specialist would need to be performing direct classroom teaching or
classroom-type teaching in a non-classroom setting for a majority of
time in an elementary or secondary school. In addition, the State would
have to designate library media specialist as a high-need field. In all
cases, the service would need to be performed in a low-income school.
Changes: None.
Comment: A couple of commenters inquired whether elementary
education could be included as a high-need field. One commenter
requested that we provide specific information about how elementary
school teachers could demonstrate that they are teaching in a high-need
field.
[[Page 35475]]
Discussion: As described in the discussion of library media
specialist and early childhood education, elementary education could be
a high-need field if it is designated as a high-need field by the State
in which the recipient teaches.
There are other limited circumstances under which a grant recipient
can satisfy the service obligation by serving as an elementary school
teacher including: (1) Teaching the majority of his or her courses in a
high-need field, such as math, science, or a foreign language; (2)
teaching in a foreign language immersion program; (3) serving as a
reading specialist, a special education teacher, or a bilingual
education teacher, or teaching English language acquisition; or (4)
teaching in a low-income school in a State that has designated
elementary education as a high-need field.
Changes: None.
Comment: A couple of commenters asked for clarification of the
terms ``bilingual education'' and ``English language acquisition.'' One
commenter questioned whether bilingual education includes immersion
classrooms.
Discussion: The National Clearinghouse for English Language
Acquisition (NCELA) (http://www.ncela.gwu.edu), an online resource
supported by the Department of Education's Office of English Language
Acquisition, provides general definitions of these terms. Language
acquisition is the process of acquiring a first or second language.
Bilingual education is an educational program in which two languages
are used to provide content matter instruction. In foreign language
immersion programs the foreign language is the vehicle for content
instruction and is not the subject of instruction. Therefore, bilingual
education does not include foreign language immersion programs.
Changes: We have added definitions of the terms ``bilingual
education'' and ``English language acquisition'' to Sec. 686.2(d).
These definitions are taken from the NCELA.
Comment: One commenter asked the Department to specify what major
would lead to teaching English acquisition and English as a Second
Language and who would make this determination.
Discussion: The Department does not have the authority or expertise
to specify which academic degrees would prepare an individual to teach
in these, or any other, fields since that is an academic decision that
rests with the institution.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter sought clarification of whether a foreign
language is a high-need field and suggested that a K-12 foreign
language immersion program should be considered part of the high-need
foreign language field listed in the statute and regulations.
Discussion: All foreign languages are high-need fields for purposes
of the TEACH Grant program. We agree with the commenter that teaching
in a foreign language immersion program would meet the requirement for
teaching in a high-need field.
Changes: None.
Highly-Qualified
Comment: A couple of commenters requested that the Department
provide the specific requirements that must be met to satisfy the
criterion for being a highly-qualified teacher rather than merely
referencing the relevant statutes.
Discussion: The requirements for being designated ``highly
qualified'' are very complex and differ for the various states. The
requirement that teachers be highly-qualified applies to all public
elementary or secondary school teachers employed by a LEA who teach a
core academic subject. Special education teachers who teach core
academic subjects are included in this requirement. In general,
``highly qualified'' means that the teacher--
(1) Has obtained full State certification as a teacher or passed
the State teacher licensing examination, holds a license to teach in
the State, and has not had certification or licensure requirements
waived on an emergency, temporary, or provisional basis (special
education teachers must be certified in special education);
(2) Holds a minimum of a bachelor's degree; and
(3) Has demonstrated subject-matter competency in each of the
academic subjects in which the teacher teaches, in a manner determined
by the State and in compliance with section 9101(23) of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA).
The statutory definition of ``highly qualified'' includes
additional elements that apply differently to veteran teachers and new
teachers, and to elementary, middle, and secondary school teachers. The
complete statutory definition of a ``highly qualified'' teacher is in
section 9101(23) of the ESEA and in section 602(10) of the Individuals
With Disabilities Education Act. The Department's regulations at 34 CFR
200.56 further define ``highly qualified teacher.'' Among other things,
34 CFR 200.56 clarifies when teachers who pursue State certification
through an alternative-route program may be considered fully certified
while they participate in that program. More guidance on the criterion
for being a highly qualified teacher is available at http://www.ed.gov/
teachers/nclbguide/improve-quality.html.
Changes: None.
Post-Baccalaureate Program
Comment: A few commenters raised concerns about the phrase at the
end of paragraph (2) of the definition of post-baccalaureate program
that they believe makes a post-baccalaureate program offered by an
institution that also has an undergraduate teacher preparation program
ineligible for the TEACH Grant program. They suggested that the post-
baccalaureate program and an undergraduate teacher education program
offered by the same institution should both be eligible programs for
TEACH Grant purposes. One of these commenters noted that some
institutions require their undergraduate education majors to complete a
fifth year during which they take coursework necessary to earn a
teaching credential.
Discussion: The definition of post-baccalaureate program in Sec.
686.2(d) is from section 420L(2) of the HEA. That definition limits the
TEACH Grant eligibility of post-baccalaureate programs to those offered
by institutions that do not have an undergraduate teacher preparation
program. In the case of an institution that offers both an
undergraduate teacher preparation program and a post-baccalaureate
program, the institution would be eligible, and it could designate its
teacher preparation program as a TEACH Grant-eligible program. We
understand that some institutions' teacher preparation programs require
students to complete a post-baccalaureate program after earning a
baccalaureate degree in teacher education. However, the statute does
not permit these post-baccalaureate programs to be eligible for the
TEACH Grant program.
Changes: None.
TEACH Grant-Eligible Institution
Comment: One commenter questioned the exclusion of institutions
that fail to meet financial responsibility standards but that qualify
to participate in all of the other Title IV, HEA programs under
alternate standards from participation in the TEACH Grant program.
Discussion: We agree with the commenter that the same standards
should apply for an institution to qualify to participate in the TEACH
Grant program as for all the other Title
[[Page 35476]]
IV programs. Using the same standards will result in consistent
treatment across all programs and reduce the administrative burden on
both institutions and the Department.
Changes: We have amended the definition of TEACH Grant-eligible
institution to allow institutions that do not meet financial
responsibility standards established in 34 CFR part 668, subpart L to
participate in the TEACH Grant program by qualifying under an
alternative standard in 34 CFR 668.175.
Comment: One commenter thanked us for including in the definition
of TEACH Grant-eligible institution institutions whose teacher
preparation programs are approved by a State, include extensive pre-
service clinical experience, and provide pedagogical coursework or the
assistance in the provision of such coursework.
Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's support.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked that we clarify what constitutes
``high-quality'' teacher preparation programs and what ``extensive pre-
service clinical experience'' entails.
Discussion: The definition of TEACH Grant-eligible institution in
Sec. 686.2(d) contains four components that constitute a ``high-
quality'' teacher preparation program. The components are: (1) Approval
by a cognizant authority (either accreditation by a specialized
accrediting agency or State approval); (2) extensive pre-service
clinical experience; (3) direct provision of pedagogical coursework or
assistance in providing such coursework; and (4) provision of
supervision and support services to teachers, or assistance in such
provision. Institutions whose programs are accredited by one of the
specialized accrediting agencies recognized by the Secretary for the
accreditation of professional teacher education programs, which are
listed on the Department's Web site at
http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/accreditation_pg8.html#ed,
are considered to meet the
requirements related to pre-service clinical experience and pedagogical
coursework. While we did not specifically discuss a minimum length of
time for pre-service clinical experience during negotiated rulemaking,
a standard will be necessary from an operational standpoint so that we
can determine whether or not an institution whose teacher preparation
program is not accredited by a specialized accrediting agency meets
this requirement. Accordingly, we reviewed the requirements of all the
States and determined that a majority of States require at least 10
weeks of full-time pre-service clinical experience, while some require
significantly less and a few require more. In addition, in testimony
during a public hearing on the TEACH Grant program, the American
Association of Colleges for Teacher Education recommended 10 weeks of
full-time pre-service clinical experience as a minimum. Therefore, we
have adopted 10 weeks of full-time pre-service clinical experience, or
its equivalent, as the regulatory standard. We considered that a
program might be designed so that students would complete their
clinical experience on a part-time basis and will allow for the
completion of the 10 weeks of full-time pre-service clinical experience
on a part-time basis.
Changes: We have revised paragraph (1)(i)(B) of the definition of
TEACH Grant-eligible program in Sec. 686.2(d) to specify that a
teacher preparation program that is approved by a State must provide a
minimum of 10 weeks of full-time pre-service clinical experience, or
its equivalent.
Comment: One commenter asked whether the reference to ``teachers''
in paragraph (1)(ii) of the definition of TEACH Grant-eligible
institution refers to an employed teacher or a student teacher.
Discussion: The phrase ``provides supervision and support services
to teachers, or assists in the provision of services to teachers''
refers to employed teachers, not to student teachers. Faculty and other
professional personnel at institutions with teacher preparation
programs are expected to share their knowledge with working teachers as
part of their education role.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter wondered what is meant in paragraph
(1)(ii)(B) by the term ``novice'' in the description of the types of
supervision and support services an institution might provide to
teachers. The same commenter asked for further explanation and examples
of ways an institution might meet the supervision and support services
requirement.
Discussion: In general, a novice is an individual who is new to a
field or activity. In the case of teachers, a novice is normally
considered to be one who is involved in the first, second, or third
year of teaching.
The regulations include a few illustrative examples of the types of
supervision and support services an institution might provide to
teachers. We believe that an exclusive list would be too restrictive on
institutions. We expect that institutions with teacher preparation
programs will be able to identify other types of services they provide
that satisfy the requirement based on the illustrative examples.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked for more discussion and examples of
how a community college can become a TEACH Grant-eligible institution.
In particular, the individual wondered whether the community college
must have an articulation agreement with each four-year institution to
which a student would transfer.
Discussion: In order to be a TEACH Grant-eligible institution, a
community college must have an agreement with at least one four-year
institution. The agreement need not be a formal articulation agreement.
However, the agreement must demonstrate (1) that the two-year program
offered by the community college is acceptable for full credit in that
institution's baccalaureate teacher education program, or (2) that the
two-year program is acceptable for full credit in a baccalaureate
degree program in a high-need field at a TEACH Grant-eligible
institution. An agreement that would demonstrate that the two-year
program is acceptable for full credit into a baccalaureate degree in
the high-need field of math, for example, would likely list several
courses that would meet the four-year institution's general education
requirements, some courses that could be electives, and a few lower-
level math courses required for the major. Our expectation is that a
student who follows a pathway established through an agreement would
not have to take additional credits beyond the minimum required for
graduation from the four-year institution.
The agreement is used to establish institutional eligibility. It is
not a requirement that each student enrolled in the two-year program
attend the four-year institution with which the community college has
the agreement. A community college does not have to have more than one
agreement to establish its eligibility.
Changes: None.
TEACH Grant-Eligible Program
Comment: A couple of commenters expressed their appreciation that
the regulations permit institutions to define which programs will be
eligible for the TEACH Grant.
Discussion: We appreciate the support.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked that we explain the criterion of
``fully-qualified'' teacher in the context of preparation in an
eligible program.
[[Page 35477]]
Discussion: We agree with the commenter that the definition of
TEACH Grant-eligible program should make it clear that the program
should be designed to prepare an individual to teach as a highly-
qualified teacher. Preparation of highly-qualified teachers is a key
component of an eligible program, but we also recognize that, given the
various pathways a student might follow to gain the knowledge needed to
become a highly-qualified teacher, the student may need to complete
more than one program. For example, a student may earn a baccalaureate
degree in a high-need field, such as mathematics, and then enroll in a
post-baccalaureate program for the courses needed to receive a
professional certification or licensing credential. Subject area
content knowledge and certification are both components of the
definition of ``highly-qualified'' teacher and, in the situation just
described, a single program would not provide both. With this
clarification, we agree that the definition of TEACH Grant-eligible
program should include a reference to the preparation of a highly-
qualified teacher.
Changes: We have amended the definition of a TEACH Grant-eligible
program in Sec. 686.2(d) to clarify that a TEACH Grant-eligible
program must be designed to prepare an individual to teach as a highly-
qualified teacher.
Comment: Several commenters sought guidance on the amount of
latitude institutions have in designating eligible programs. Some
wondered if an institution could designate only its master's degree
programs, and not its undergraduate programs, or only its teacher
preparation programs or post-baccalaureate programs as TEACH Grant-
eligible.
Discussion: In making a determination of which programs to
designate as TEACH Grant-eligible, an institution may differentiate
between its master's degree programs and its undergraduate programs,
making only its master's degree programs TEACH Grant-eligible. An
institution may also choose to make only its teacher preparation
programs TEACH Grant-eligible, and not include any programs in high-
need fields.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters asked whether institutions could limit
participation in the TEACH Grant program to upper level undergraduate
students. One commenter suggested that institutions should have the
option to determine whether the first two years of a four-year program
are part of an eligible program.
Discussion: An institution may limit participation in the TEACH
Grant program to students who have formally declared a major or who
have been formally admitted to the teacher preparation program. In such
cases, the TEACH Grant-eligible program could effectively involve only
upper-level undergraduate students and the eligible program would not
include the first two years of a four-year program. An institution
could also determine that the first two years are not part of the TEACH
Grant-eligible program. However, if the institution designates a
program as TEACH Grant-eligible it cannot further discriminate among
eligible students in that program. If, for example, an institution
designates a program as TEACH Grant-eligible and that program begins in
the freshman year, the institution may not limit TEACH Grant
participation to upper-level undergraduates in the program.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether a two-year institution could
restrict TEACH Grant-eligibility to programs with some relationship to
teacher preparation and not include programs that transfer into four-
year baccalaureate programs that include high-need majors.
Discussion: An institution may designate only certain programs as
TEACH Grant-eligible and not designate others, even though they may
prepare a student to teach in a high-need field.
Changes: None.
Comment: In questioning whether an institution could require that a
student must have declared an appropriate major, or have been accepted
into a teacher preparation program, one commenter asked whether the
practice would cross the line between program eligibility and student
eligibility.
Discussion: Program eligibility--where the institution may
identify, within the parameters of the regulations, the scope of
institutional programs that are TEACH Grant-eligible--and student
eligibility--where the institution must adhere to the eligibility
criteria identified in the regulations--are closely intertwined in the
TEACH Grant program and there are instances, such as the situation the
commenter describes, where the line between them is crossed. It is
important to note that a program might be defined differently for
general Title IV purposes and for TEACH Grant purposes with the
consequence that, for some period of time, a student could receive
financial assistance from other Title IV programs, but would not
qualify for a TEACH Grant. Ultimately, it is up to the institution to
decide, based on regulatory requirements, what programs are TEACH
Grant-eligible and when a student is considered to be accepted into a
TEACH Grant-eligible program.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether an institution can determine
that only some of the programs for which it currently awards other
Title IV aid are also eligible for TEACH Grant purposes, even if some
programs it does not wish to make TEACH Grant-eligible meet the
regulatory definition.
Discussion: The institution has that discretion.
Changes: None.
Comment: Based on a concern that students will apply for and accept
the TEACH Grant as a way of obtaining more loan funds with no intention
of fulfilling the Agreement to Serve (ATS), one commenter asked the
Secretary to provide more guidance, similar to the list of acceptable
Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) codes in the National
SMART Grant program, for students to determine which programs are TEACH
Grant-eligible.
Discussion: We recognize that institutions may not be able to
control the type of behavior the commenter describes in all instances.
Although an institution may limit the programs it designates as TEACH
Grant-eligible, an institution can never know with certainty whether a
student truly intends to fulfill his or her service obligation. Since
designation of TEACH Grant-eligible programs is an institutional
decision, we do not plan to provide more specific guidance or a list of
CIP codes.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked if, prior to awarding a TEACH Grant,
an institution could require that a student submit a plan to the
institution describing the student's career goal and intended academic
plan to that goal.
Discussion: An institution may require a student to submit a plan
such as the commenter describes. This may be particularly helpful in
situations where the student is enrolled in a program that will not, by
itself, enable the student to begin teaching as a highly-qualified
teacher in a high-need field. However, the plan by itself would not
establish a student's eligibility for a TEACH Grant. A student must be
enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible program to receive a TEACH Grant.
Changes: None.
Comment: A few commenters wondered whether a program that prepares
a student to teach in a high-need field would have to be in the high-
need field in which an individual plans to teach in meeting the service
obligation, or if it could contribute significantly to the TEACH Grant
[[Page 35478]]
recipient's knowledge and instructional capacity in a high-need field.
One commenter asked whether a master's degree program that is not a
teacher preparation program would need to result in a degree in a high-
need field to be considered eligible.
Discussion: An institution has the authority to determine which of
its programs meet the requirements to be TEACH Grant-eligible and may
designate any program that contributes in any way to a student's
preparation to teach in a high-need field as a TEACH Grant-eligible
program. This approach would allow, for example, an institution to
designate its Masters in Business Administration (MBA) Program as a
TEACH Grant-eligible program that will prepare a student to teach in
the high-need field of mathematics, if it determines that the content
of its MBA program would be good preparation for teaching mathematics.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether an institution could consider
as TEACH Grant-eligible a two-year program that appears unrelated to a
high-need field but that will transfer fully into a four-year TEACH
Grant-eligible program.
Discussion: We believe that the institution would have a basis on
which to define such a program as TEACH Grant-eligible.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter inquired whether a two-year school could
offer a TEACH Grant-eligible post-baccalaureate program.
Discussion: These regulations do not restrict the authority of an
institution of higher education to offer a post-baccalaureate program.
If a community college offers such a program, the community college may
use this as the means of establishing its institutional eligibility for
the TEACH Grant program and would not, therefore, need to enter into an
agreement with a four-year institution to establish eligibility.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether a student who returns to the
institution only for teacher certification courses would be eligible
for a grant.
Discussion: A student must be enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible
program, which could be either a post-baccalaureate program of study or
a master's degree program assuming the student already has a
baccalaureate degree. If the student is merely taking courses he or she
needs for certification, but is not enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible
program, then the student would not be eligible for a TEACH Grant.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether a current teacher who decides
to pursue a master's degree in a field that would not result in that
teacher adding a certified area to his or her teaching credential would
be considered to be enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible program and, if
so, if the service performed on the basis of the individual's
undergraduate degree could be used to fulfill the teaching obligation
associated with the TEACH Grant for the master's degree.
Discussion: An institution designates which of its programs are
TEACH Grant-eligible. As long as the student is enrolled in a TEACH
Grant-eligible program that student could receive a TEACH Grant. Prior
experience in the field will not strip a student of his or her
eligibility. However, the teaching service performed prior to
enrollment in the master's degree program cannot be used to meet the
service obligation associated with the TEACH Grant. Full-Time teaching
service while attending school to obtain a master's degree would count
toward the service obligation for any TEACH Grants that were received
for an undergraduate or post-baccalaureate program. The teaching
service performed while the student is enrolled may not be counted
against the service obligation for the program in which the student is
enrolled because the statute specifies that the student must teach
``after completing the course of study for which the applicant received
a TEACH Grant.''
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether a four-year baccalaureate
program that does not include an education component could be
considered TEACH Grant-eligible if a student is able to transfer out of
it after two years, prior to declaring a major, into a teacher
preparation program at the same institution or at another institution
with which the student's first institution has an agreement.
Discussion: The comment addresses institutional eligibility and
program eligibility. In regard to institutional eligibility, an
institution that has a teacher preparation program would not need to
enter into an agreement with another institution to be a TEACH Grant-
eligible institution. The institution could establish eligibility on
the basis of its teacher preparation program, assuming that program
meets the requirements contained in paragraph (1) of the definition of
TEACH Grant-eligible institution in Sec. 686.2(d).
In regard to program eligibility, it is not a requirement that a
program include a teacher education component to be designated a TEACH
Grant-eligible program. An institution may designate a program as TEACH
Grant-eligible if it prepares an individual to teach as a highly-
qualified teacher in a high-need field.
In this example, if the institution has designated both its program
that does not include a teacher education component and its teacher
preparation program as TEACH Grant-eligible, and the student is
admitted to its teacher preparation program in the third year of
undergraduate study, then the student would be eligible for a TEACH
Grant for a total of four years. Since both of the programs in this
example are TEACH Grant-eligible, the student could receive a TEACH
Grant for each year of enrollment in the baccalaureate program without
the education component and for each year of enrollment in the program
with the teacher education component.
Changes: None.
Teacher and Full-Time Teacher
Comment: One commenter asked what a substitute teacher would need
to do to meet the requirement of teaching full-time and other aspects
of the service obligation.
Discussion: A substitute teacher would need to satisfy the same
requirements as a regular teacher as described in Sec. 686.12(b)(1),
(2), and (3). The substitute teaching service must be in a low-income
school and the substitute must teach a majority of courses in a high-
need field, as a highly-qualified teacher, for it to count toward
meeting the service obligation. The substitute teacher must teach
enough to meet the standard used by the State in defining full-time
employment as a teacher. He or she could satisfy the requirement of
teaching full-time by teaching in more than one low-income school and
demonstrating that the combined teaching service was the equivalent of
full-time. The substitute teacher would need to provide documentation
as provided in Sec. 686.40.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter noted that special education teachers and
reading specialists often serve other teachers as a resource or as a
literacy coach and inquired whether such individuals would be
considered teachers for purposes of fulfilling the service obligation.
Discussion: The definition of ``teacher'' specifically includes
special education teachers and reading specialists. Service performed
by special education teachers and reading specialists, such as serving
as a literacy
[[Page 35479]]
coach or resource to another teacher, either in the classroom or in a
classroom-like setting, meets the definition of teacher. In order to
meet the requirements of the service obligation, special education
teachers and reading specialists must spend the majority of time
teaching in a classroom or classroom-like setting, though they may also
serve as a resource for other teachers.
Changes: None.
Duration of Student Eligibility (Sec. 686.3)
Comment: One commenter asked whether a student who already has
earned a baccalaureate degree in a non-TEACH Grant-eligible program
could be considered eligible for a TEACH Grant if the student enrolled
in a TEACH Grant-eligible baccalaureate degree program, since this
would be that student's first such baccalaureate degree. The commenter
asked the same question about post-baccalaureate programs.
Discussion: Section 420M(d)(1) of the HEA provides that a student
may receive grants for the period required for the completion of the
first undergraduate or post-baccalaureate course of study. In reviewing
proposed Sec. 686.3, we have determined that Sec. 686.3 could suggest
that a student who already has a baccalaureate degree in a non-TEACH
Grant-eligible program would be eligible for a TEACH Grant if the
student enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible baccalaureate degree
program. However, that is not what we intended so we have clarified the
regulations. An undergraduate student can get a TEACH Grant only for
their first baccalaureate degree.
Post-baccalaureate programs are by definition TEACH Grant-eligible.
A student can get a TEACH Grant for completion of only one post-
baccalaureate program.
Changes: We amended Sec. 686.3(a) to clarify that a student who
already has completed a baccalaureate or post-baccalaureate program of
study and has enrolled in a TEACH Grant-eligible baccalaureate or post-
baccalaureate program of study will not be able to receive a TEACH
Grant.
Comment: A commenter asked whether a student who has completed the
requirements for teacher certification but elects to remain enrolled in
the institution would continue to be eligible to receive TEACH Grants.
Discussion: If a student has completed the requirements for teacher
certification but remains enrolled in the institution, the student's
eligibility for further TEACH Grants would depend on whether the
student is still considered enrolled in his or her TEACH Grant-eligible
program. If the student completed the requirements for the TEACH Grant-
eligible program's degree or certificate, the student would no longer
be eligible.
Changes: None.
Institutional Participation (Sec. 686.4)
Comment: One commenter expressed appreciation that participation in
the TEACH Grant program is optional for institutions.
Discussion: We appreciate the support.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the regulations should
provide that if an institution ceases to participate in the TEACH Grant
program, the TEACH Grant recipients at that institution would not be
required to repay any TEACH Grant funds they received because it is the
institution, not the student, that has withdrawn from the program.
Discussion: Whether or not the institution continues to participate
in the TEACH Grant program, a grant recipient is responsible for
fulfilling the terms of the ATS that he or she signed. The student
would still be able to continue a program of study to become a teacher,
even if the institution no longer participated in the TEACH Grant
Program, though the student would not receive additional TEACH Grants
for that program. In addition, the student would also have the option
to transfer to another institution to get a teaching credential. If the
recipient fails to meet the requirements of the ATS, the TEACH Grants
will convert to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan.
Changes: None.
Application (Sec. 686.10)
Comment: One commenter supported the Department's use of the FAFSA
as the application for a TEACH Grant.
Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's support.
Changes: None.
Eligibility To Receive a Grant (Sec. 686.11)
Comment: Several comments were received on how admissions tests are
treated as part of student eligibility for a TEACH Grant. One commenter
asked whether an institution must first determine whether a student
achieved a score above the 75th percentile on at least one of the
batteries of a standardized admission test before determining TEACH
Grant eligibility based on the student's grade point average (GPA). One
commenter requested restricting admission test scores by educational
level, while another commenter supported the approach in the proposed
regulations regarding how admission test scores are considered as part
of student eligibility. Another commenter wanted to know how to
determine a home-schooled student's eligibility if the institution does
not require an admissions test. Another commenter asked whether a test
used for admission is acceptable for the 75th percentile determination
even if it is also used as a placement test. Clarification on which
nationally-normed tests qualify a student for a TEACH Grant and how a
test is determined to be nationally-normed was also requested by a
commenter. Finally, one commenter asked whether, in lieu of test score
submissions by the testing entity, a student may submit documentation
of test scores directly to the financial aid office.
Discussion: Section 420N(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II) of the HEA requires an
institution to determine whether the student displayed high academic
aptitude by scoring above the 75th percentile of scores on at least one
of the batteries from a nationally-normed standardized admissions test
and does not restrict the use of admission test scores by undergraduate
or graduate educational level. Because the test scores are intended to
be a measure of high academic aptitude without being associated with a
particular educational level, the Department does not believe that
restricting qualification for a TEACH Grant by test score by
educational level is appropriate. If the student did not achieve a
qualifying test score, an otherwise eligible student may qualify based
on the applicable GPA requirements.
The student's qualifying test score does not need to be used by the
institution as an admissions test at that school. In addition, a
student may qualify based on a score on an admissions test that doubles
as a placement test at the institution. While a home-schooled student
may qualify by scoring above the 75th percentile on a standardized
admissions test, he or she may also qualify based on his or her high
school GPA as documented by the student's parent or other cognizant
authority. Any student who does not qualify by test score or GPA is not
eligible for a TEACH Grant.
All nationally-normed tests are not eligible to qualify a student--
only nationally-normed admission tests qualify. An admissions test is
considered to be nationally-normed if the norming sample is nationally-
representative, that is, individual student test performance can be
[[Page 35480]]
compared to a nationally-drawn peer sample. For documentation purposes,
a student may submit qualifying test scores directly to the financial
aid office in lieu of having the testing entity send the test scores to
the institution. However, if the institution has reason to believe that
the test scores submitted directly by the student are incomplete or
inaccurate, the institution must request test scores from the testing
entity.
Changes: None.
Comment: Three commenters expressed concern about the GPA
requirement to receive a TEACH Grant. One believed that the required
3.25 GPA is too high. Another commenter suggested that students who
qualified for a TEACH Grant by meeting the admission test option should
still have to meet the 3.25 cumulative GPA, or numeric equivalent,
through the most recently completed payment period that is required of
students who did not qualify under the admission test option. Another
commenter recommended that GPA be checked once per year, not once each
term.
Discussion: Under section 420N(a)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the HEA,
achieving a 3.25 GPA on a 4.0 scale allows an otherwise eligible
student who did not qualify via an undergraduate, postbaccalaureate, or
graduate school admissions test score to qualify for a TEACH Grant. The
statute does not require students who qualified using the admission
test score option to maintain a 3.25 GPA in the eligible program, but
does require that a student who qualified using the 3.25 cumulative GPA
option to continue to maintain a GPA of at least 3.25 on a 4.0 scale.
To document that such a student continues to meet the 3.25 GPA
eligibility requirement, Sec. 686.11(a)(1)(v) stipulates that the
institution must check the student's GPA for the most recently
completed payment period by the institution prior to disbursement.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter was concerned that the academic requirements
to receive a TEACH Grant--qualifying test scores or GPA--would impose
an additional burden on financial aid officers.
Discussion: Section 420N(a)(2)(A)(ii)(I) and (II) of the HEA
established the qualifying admission test scores and GPA requirements
for receiving a TEACH Grant that were reflected in the proposed
regulations. Institutions are required to implement these requirements.
The regulations do not specifically stipulate, however, that financial
aid officers make the academic determinations. Rather, institutions
should follow their own institutional policies and procedures to ensure
that these student eligibility requirements are properly administered.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter requested clarification on the methods by
which a former teacher may qualify for a TEACH Grant.
Discussion: Under Sec. 686.11(b), a former teacher is eligible for
a TEACH Grant for a master's degree program or an alternative
certification program as part of a master's degree program. In
addition, a former teacher can qualify under Sec. 686.11(a) for an
eligible undergraduate, post-baccalaureate, or graduate degree program
if he or she meets the academic requirements.
Changes: None.
Agreement To Serve (Sec. 686.12)
Comment: Many commenters were concerned that the basic elements of
the ATS would be difficult for most TEACH Grant recipients to satisfy,
thereby increasing the probability that the majority of TEACH Grants
would convert to Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loans. The commenters
stated that it was not appropriate to expect students, especially lower
classmen who either have not or cannot declare a major, to make a four-
year commitment to serve in a low-income school as a highly-qualified
full-time teacher in a high-need field at such a young age. The
commenters cited the frequency with which students change majors or
career goals upon exposure to coursework or, even later, after exposure
to teaching experience. One commenter suggested that the Department
include, in the ATS, the fact that the Congressional Budget Office has
projected that 80 percent of TEACH Grants will convert to Federal
Direct Unsubsidized Loans.
Discussion: The teaching service requirements contained in the ATS
and described in Sec. 686.12(b) are mandated by section 420N(b) and
(c) of the HEA. In order to receive a TEACH Grant, the HEA requires
that each TEACH Grant recipient agree to serve as a full-time teacher
for a total of not less than four academic years within eight years of
completing the course of study for which a TEACH Grant was received in
a low-income school as a highly-qualified teacher in a high-need field.
The HEA further requires that a grant recipient document each year of
his or her teaching service in the form of a certification by the chief
administrative officer of the school in which the recipient is
teaching. Lastly, the HEA provides that if the recipient fails or
refuses to carry out the service obligation, any TEACH Grants received
are treated as a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan with interest
accruing from the date that each TEACH Grant was disbursed. While we
understand the commenters' concerns, the Secretary does not have the
authority to change statutory requirements. We note, however, that the
ATS that a TEACH Grant recipient must sign each year before receiving a
TEACH Grant contains all of the terms and conditions a recipient must
meet in order to prevent the grant from converting to a Federal Direct
Unsubsidized Loan. Finally, the Secretary does not see the merit of
including Congressional Budget Office projections in the ATS.
Changes: None.
Comment: Many commenters expressed concern that the regulations in
Sec. 686.12(b)(1) do not provide for partial fulfillment of a TEACH
Grant recipient's ATS based on completion of less than four years of
creditable teaching service. The commenters believed that requiring a
teacher who fails to meet any part of the teaching service obligation
to repay the entire amount of the grant award as a Federal Direct
Unsubsidized Loan was unfair and punitive. The commenters strongly
recommended that we allow TEACH Grant recipients to partially fulfill
their ATS based on the number of years taught. For example, if a grant
recipient received $16,000 in TEACH Grants and completed two years of
creditable teaching service in accordance with his or her ATS, the
grant recipient would owe $8,000 in TEACH Grants that would convert to
Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loans.
Other commenters did not believe that a student who receives TEACH
Grants for only one award year while completing coursework necessary to
begin a career in teaching should be required to perform four years of
creditable teaching service in order to keep the TEACH Grants from
converting to Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loans. The commenters
believed that the teaching service obligation should be directly
proportional to the number of years of TEACH Grant support received by
a student. For example, if a student receives TEACH Grants for two
award years, the teaching service obligation associated with the
receipt of grant funds would also be two years.
Discussion: Section 420N(b)(1) of the HEA states that a TEACH Grant
recipient must serve as a full-time teacher for a total of not less
than four academic years within eight years after completing the course
of study for which the applicant received a TEACH Grant. The Secretary
does not have the
[[Page 35481]]
authority to change statutory requirements to allow for partial
fulfillment of an ATS based on a teaching service obligation that is
directly proportional to the number of years of TEACH Grant support
received by a student.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that requiring a TEACH Grant
recipient to perform creditable teaching service in a low-income
elementary or secondary school is a disservice to such schools because
inexperienced teachers trying to satisfy their ATS would be teaching in
an environment where more experienced teachers are needed.
One commenter recommended that the final regulations provide relief
to a TEACH Grant recipient who is unable to fulfill his or her ATS
because there are no low-income elementary or secondary schools within
a reasonable distance of the grant recipient's residence or because the
grant recipient has not been hired by a low-income school.
Finally, one commenter asked whether all of the elementary or
secondary schools at which a grant recipient teaches must be considered
low-income to satisfy the ATS if the grant recipient's full-time status
as a teacher is achieved by employment at more than one school.
Discussion: There is a shortage of teachers in elementary and
secondary low-income schools that experienced teachers have not filled.
The TEACH Grant program was established to address this need, among
others, by providing incentives in the form of grants of up to $4,000
per year to students who make a commitment to teach in a public or
private non-profit elementary or secondary low-income school.
We believe that providing relief to a TEACH Grant recipient who
does not live within a reasonable distance of a low-income school or
who is not hired by a low-income school would be contrary to the intent
of the TEACH Grant program. We believe that under the regulations,
TEACH Grant recipients will receive enough information to make an
informed choice regarding their ability to meet the requirements of the
ATS, including the requirement to teach in a low-income school. Section
686.32 requires that a TEACH Grant recipient receive extensive
counseling before grant funds are disbursed each year that emphasizes
that by receiving TEACH Grant funds, a student is committing to a
teaching service obligation. Both initial and exit counseling
requirements in Sec. 686.32(a)(3)(ii) and (c)(4)(iii), respectively,
require a school to provide grant recipients with information on how to
access the Directory of Low-Income Schools so that TEACH Grant
recipients can familiarize themselves with the name and location of
every designated low-income school in the United States. Moreover,
section 420N(b)(1)(A) of the HEA allows a TEACH Grant recipient eight
years to satisfy his or her teaching service obligation of four years.
This eight-year timeframe builds in four years for TEACH Grant
recipients who do not begin their teaching service immediately and
provides them with ample time to locate and apply to teach in a low-
income elementary or secondary school.
Finally, all of the elementary or secondary schools at which a
grant recipient teaches must be designated as low-income to satisfy the
ATS if the grant recipient's full-time status as a teacher is achieved
by employment at more than one school. This policy is consistent with
the policy applied to borrowers in the Title IV, HEA loan programs with
regard to teacher loan forgiveness.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Secretary include the
definition of ``highly-qualified teacher,'' or a link to a Web site
that contains the definition, in the ATS developed by the Department in
accordance with Sec. 686.12 so that TEACH Grant recipients know what
requirements they must meet to be considered a highly-qualified teacher
and to satisfy their teaching service obligation.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees with the commenter that it is
important for TEACH Grant recipients to have access to the definition
of ``highly-qualified teacher.'' We will ensure that the initial
version of the ATS includes the appropriate statutory cites so that a
TEACH Grant recipient can research the definition of highly-qualified
teacher. We will consider other options for providing this information
when the Agreement is revised in the future.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter supported the provisions of Sec.
686.12(c)(1) that allow creditable teaching service to apply to more
than one ATS.
One commenter believed that Sec. 686.12(c)(1) should allow a
student to incur only one ATS, instead of one ATS for each program of
study for which a student received TEACH Grants, if a student must
complete both a baccalaureate and a post-baccalaureate degree in order
to begin a career in teaching.
Another commenter requested that we clarify whether a teacher who
received Stafford Loans as an undergraduate and who successfully
completed five years of teaching service to obtain loan forgiveness on
those loans could use the same teaching service to immediately satisfy
an ATS associated with the receipt of TEACH Grants for a subsequent
master's degree.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that, under certain circumstances,
it is appropriate to apply creditable teaching service to more than one
ATS and appreciates the commenter's support for this provision. For
instance, if a grant recipient completes a TEACH Grant-eligible program
at a TEACH Grant-eligible institution and immediately enrolls in
another TEACH Grant-eligible program at a TEACH Grant-eligible
institution before beginning a career in teaching, the recipient may
request a suspension of the eight-year time period under Sec.
686.41(a)(1) for the period of enrollment in the subsequent program and
upon completion of the subsequent program, apply all qualified teaching
service to both service obligations.
Another example would be when a grant recipient completes a TEACH
Grant-eligible program at a TEACH Grant-eligible institution and begins
qualified teaching service to meet the service obligation before
enrolling in a subsequent TEACH Grant-eligible program. In this case,
the recipient may request a suspension of the eight-year time period
associated with the first service obligation under Sec. 686.41(a)(1)
for the period of enrollment in a subsequent program and, upon
completion of the subsequent program, apply qualified teaching service
performed after the completion of the subsequent program to both
service obligations. The qualified teaching service performed before
the suspension would count only toward fulfillment of the first service
obligation.
The requirement in Sec. 686.12(c)(1) that a TEACH Grant recipient
must complete an ATS for each program of study for which the recipient
received a TEACH Grant is based on section 420N(b)(1)(A) of the HEA.
The Secretary does not have the authority to change a statutory
requirement.
Lastly, a TEACH Grant recipient can use only prospective,
creditable teaching service performed after the student completed or
ceased to be enrolled in the program for which the TEACH Grant was
received to satisfy the requirements of the ATS, not teaching service
performed before or during the time the student received a TEACH Grant.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter believed that Sec. 686.12(b)(2), which
requires a TEACH Grant recipient to annually
[[Page 35482]]
submit documentation of creditable teaching service in the form of a
certification by a chief administrative officer of the school, should
provide protection to TEACH Grant recipients who fail to provide such
documentation in a timely manner.
Discussion: A TEACH Grant recipient must annually submit
documentation of his or her teaching service or intent to teach within
a timeframe necessary to keep the TEACH Grants from converting to
Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loans in accordance with the provisions of
Sec. Sec. 686.40 and 686.43. The Secretary believes that these
timeframes are reasonable for grant recipients to meet and protect the
Federal fiscal interest by allowing for the conversion of TEACH Grants
to loans when the Secretary cannot verify or document a grant
recipient's intent to satisfy the ATS.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters recommended that the Secretary amend
Sec. 686.12(d) to allow a TEACH Grant recipient who completes a TEACH
Grant-eligible program in a field that is listed in the Nationwide List
to satisfy the requirement to teach in a high-need field if the high-
need field in which he or she prepared to teach is no longer listed in
the Nationwide List for the State in which the grant recipient begins
teaching. The commenters believed that a TEACH Grant recipient, who in
good faith undertakes the coursework necessary to teach in a designated
high-need field, should not be punished for circumstances that are
beyond his or her control.
Discussion: The HEA specifically states in section 420N(b)(1)(C)
that a TEACH Grant recipient must ``teach'' in a high-need field in
accordance with their ATS. We do not have the authority to allow a
TEACH Grant recipient who completes a TEACH Grant-eligible program in a
field that is listed in the Nationwide List to satisfy the requirement
to teach in a high-need field if the high-need field in which he or she
prepared to teach is no longer considered a high-need field in the
recipient's state and is no longer included in the Nationwide List for
the State in which the grant recipient begins teaching. If the high-
need field in which a TEACH Grant recipient prepared to teach is
included in the Nationwide List for a State other than the State in
which the grant recipient planned to teach, the grant recipient may
apply to teach in that State in order to fulfill his or her ATS.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters were concerned that TEACH Grant
recipients who intend to become elementary school teachers may not be
able to meet their teaching service obligation because, as elementary
school teachers, they may not be able to teach the majority of their
classes in high-need fields as required by Sec. 686.40(c)(1). The
commenters suggested that Sec. 686.12 specifically state how
elementary school teachers can demonstrate that they are teaching in
high-need fields.
Another commenter suggested that, because the purpose of the TEACH
Grant program is to provide an incentive to get highly-qualified
teachers into low-income schools, it would be consistent with this
purpose for the Secretary to define all classroom teaching in
elementary schools that includes math, science, and other defined high-
need fields as qualifying teaching service in a high-need field.
One commenter suggested that the ATS include information alerting
TEACH Grant recipients who intend to become elementary school teachers
that they may not be able to meet their teaching service obligation to
teach the majority of their classes in high-need fields so that
students in a TEACH Grant eligible program can make a more informed
decision regarding receipt of a grant.
Discussion: Section 420N(b)(1)(C) of the HEA requires that a TEACH
Grant recipient enter into an agreement in which he or she commits to
teach in mathematics, science, a foreign language, bilingual education,
special education, as a reading specialist, or in any other high-need
field documented by the Federal government or a State or local
government and approved by the Secretary in exchange for the grant. In
recognition of the fact that TEACH Grant recipients who intend to
become elementary school teachers may not be able to meet the
requirement to teach in a high-need field because of the nature of
elementary school curriculum, Sec. Sec. 686.12(b)(1)(iii) and
686.40(c)(1)(i) and (ii) permit a teacher to fulfill the requirement to
teach in a high-need field if the majority of classes taught are in a
high-need field. We believe that these provisions sufficiently address
how an elementary school teacher can meet the requirements of his or
her ATS.
Because the statute requires a TEACH Grant recipient to teach in a
high-need field, we do not believe that we have the authority to
interpret this provision to consider all classroom teaching in
elementary schools that includes math, science, and other defined high-
need fields as qualifying teaching service in a high-need field.
We also do not believe that it is appropriate to include a warning
in the ATS that TEACH Grant recipients who intend to become elementary
school teachers may not be able to meet their teaching service
obligation unless they teach the majority of their classes in high-need
fields. Instead, we will make it clear in the ATS that a teacher may
fulfill the requirement to teach in a high-need field if the majority
of classes taught are in a high-need field.
It is important to note in this discussion that an elementary
school teacher can also satisfy the requirement to teach in a high-need
field if the State in which he or she teaches designates ``elementary
school teachers'' as a high-need field. In this case, the designation
alone satisfies the requirement to teach in a high-need field,
regardless of whether the majority of the classes taught by the grant
recipient were taught in a high-need field. An elementary school
teacher can also satisfy the requirement to teach in a high-need field
if he or she is a full-time teacher in mathematics, science, a foreign
language, bilingual education, or special education or is a reading
specialist.
Changes: None.
Submission Process and Deadline for a SAR or ISIR (Sec. 686.20)
Comment: One commenter asked how an institution would have an
official EFC computed by the Central Processing System (CPS) and an
accurate EFC without having a valid SAR or valid ISIR. The commenter
also questioned whether the intent of the proposed regulations was to
provide for an institutional or third-party need analysis.
Discussion: As with the other Title IV, HEA programs, the EFC must
be calculated using the Federal methodology need analysis provided in
Title IV, Part F of the HEA (Federal Methodology). An institution may
receive an official EFC computed by CPS that is not based on accurate
information. To determine the amount of a student's TEACH Grant in
accordance with Sec. 686.21(c), an institution would need an EFC based
on accurate information, even if the EFC is not computed by CPS. In
lieu of a CPS-calculated EFC based on information from a valid SAR or
valid ISIR, an institution may hand-calculate a Federal Methodology EFC
based on accurate information, or the institution may use a vendor's
product to calculate a Federal EFC. An institution may not use the EFC
of a need analysis methodology other than the Federal Methodology.
Changes: None.
[[Page 35483]]
Calculation of a Grant and Calculation of a Grant for a Payment Period
(Sec. Sec. 686.21 and 686.22)
Comment: One commenter was concerned with the relationship between
payments for payment periods and a student's TEACH Grant Scheduled
Awards. The commenter cited the example of a program that operates on a
quarter schedule with three quarters in the fall through spring and a
summer quarter, each with 11 weeks of instructional time, and the
summer quarter is treated as part of the prior award year. In this
example, the institution has defined its academic year as being 44
weeks of instructional time and 48 quarter hours and uses the payment
methodology described in Sec. 686.22(b), commonly referred to as
Formula 1. A student attends three quarters starting in the fall
quarter, full-time for the first quarter and half-time for the winter
and spring quarters, and receives TEACH Grant disbursements of $1,000,
$500, and $500 for each of the respective terms from an initial
Scheduled Award. The commenter questioned whether the payment for full-
time attendance in the following summer term would be $1,000 or the
$2,000 balance of the Scheduled Award and, if the amount was $1,000,
what would be the disposition of the remaining $1,000 of the student's
Scheduled Award and future Scheduled Awards.
Discussion: In a manner similar to the Academic Competitiveness
Grant (ACG) and National SMART Grant programs, and unlike the Federal
Pell Grant program, a TEACH Grant Scheduled Award is not limited to an
award year and remains available to a student until that Scheduled
Award is completely disbursed. Payments of a Scheduled Award are
calculated by payment period as provided in Sec. Sec. 686.22 and
686.25.
In the commenter's example, the student would receive a $1,000
disbursement in the summer term, the payment for the payment period as
calculated under Sec. 686.22(b). The remaining balance of $1,000 from
the Scheduled Award remains available for the next payment period in
which the student enrolls. As an example, assume a student is otherwise
TEACH Grant-eligible and enrolls in the subsequent fall and winter
quarters as a half-time student and then in the spring quarter as a
full-time student. The student would receive $500 payments for the fall
and winter quarters from the initial Scheduled Award partially
disbursed in the prior award year and would complete the use of that
Scheduled Award. In the subsequent spring quarter, the student would
receive an initial $1,000 disbursement from the student's next
Scheduled Award.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked for clarification of the relationship
between the payment methodologies to calculate a grant under Sec. Sec.
686.22 and 686.25 and the requirement that the grant, in combination
with Federal and other student financial assistance that a student may
receive, may not exceed the Title IV, HEA program cost of attendance
(COA). The commenter also questioned the relationship between annual
awards that take into account part-time attendance and full-time COA
and part-time COA in determining the amount of a student's TEACH Grant.
The commenter suggested that it would be simpler to follow the model of
determining payments under the campus-based programs (i.e. , Federal
Perkins Loan Program and Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity
Grant Program).
Discussion: An institution is required to calculate a TEACH Grant
payment for each payment period. However, if the student's TEACH Grant
in combination with other aid for the enrollment period covered by the
aid, e.g. , a one-term period of enrollment, exceeds the student's COA
for the enrollment period, the payment of the TEACH Grant must be
reduced. This same principle would hold true in the treatment of a
part-time COA in combination with a part-time TEACH Grant payment for a
period of enrollment covered by the aid and COA.
Section 401M(c)(1) of the HEA requires that a student's TEACH Grant
payments must be reduced if the student is not attending full-time. The
amount of the grant is reduced in proportion to the degree to which the
student is not attending on a full-time basis. Similar adjustments must
be made in the Federal Pell Grant, ACG, and National SMART Grant
programs. There is no comparable adjustment required under the HEA for
the campus-based programs. These regulations, therefore, use the same
methodologies for calculating a payment for a payment period as do the
Federal Pell Grant, ACG, and National SMART Grant programs.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter sought confirmation that it is the
institution's option to use the grant as a replacement for EFC.
Discussion: Under Sec. 686.21(d), an institution is not required
to replace a student's EFC with a TEACH Grant. If an institution does
replace a student's EFC with a TEACH Grant, the amount of the grant
that exceeds the student's EFC is considered estimated financial
assistance under 34 CFR 673.5(c).
Changes: None.
Determination of Eligibility for Payment (Sec. 686.31)
Comment: Several commenters expressed concern about the requirement
in Sec. 686.31(a)(2) that for each payment period, an institution may
pay a TEACH Grant to an eligible student only after determining that
the student has completed the relevant counseling. The commenters
interpreted this provision to require recipients to receive counseling
prior to each grant disbursement, which they believe to be excessive.
Discussion: We intended Sec. 686.31(a)(2) to require institutions
to ensure that initial counseling is conducted prior to making the
first disbursement of the student's first TEACH Grant and subsequent
counseling is conducted prior to making the first disbursement of any
subsequent TEACH Grant. Because these counseling requirements are
triggered only by the first disbursement of a TEACH Grant, they are
only required annually. For clarity, we have amended Sec. 686.31(a)(2)
to reflect the annual nature of the counseling.
Changes: Section 686.31(a)(2) is amended by adding the words
``initial or subsequent'' before ``counseling''.
Counseling Requirements (Sec. 686.32)
Comment: We received several comments suggesting that the TEACH
Grant counseling requirements reflected in Sec. 686.32 will place an
additional burden on financial aid offices. Some commenters requested
that the Department develop counseling materials for institutions to
use or develop and make available to students applying for a TEACH
Grant an online, interactive counseling program. One commenter
requested that the Department make an online counseling program a
priority so that it could be available for the 2008-2009 award year. A
few commenters suggested that required counseling could be
electronically connected to the ATS, which the student will complete
online. Another commenter noted that many students already resist
current financial aid counseling that is offered and, for that reason,
they do not believe that students will embrace the additional TEACH
Grant counseling requirements. One commenter supported comprehensive
counseling while another commenter asked the Department to eliminate
the subsequent
[[Page 35484]]
counseling requirements in Sec. 686.32(b) altogether.
One commenter asked the Department to add a requirement that
students have documentation, either from the Department or from a
college financial aid office, showing that they completed the required
counseling before an institution can disburse the TEACH Grant. Another
commenter asked the Department to clarify what the timeframe is in
which counseling must be provided to students. Finally, one commenter
noted that there are slight differences between the TEACH Grant
counseling requirements and the Stafford Loan counseling requirements
and asked the Department to clarify whether or not these differences
are intentional.
Discussion: We appreciate the administrative burden associated with
the counseling requirements, but we strongly believe that extensive
counseling is necessary given the complex nature of the TEACH Grant
program and, in particular, the potential for a grant under this
program to convert to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan. As mentioned
in the preamble to the NPRM, the Department and the non-Federal
negotiators who participated in the negotiated rulemaking sessions for
the TEACH Grant program agreed that students should be given as much
information as possible about the TEACH Grant program and its
requirements. The Department believes that providing initial counseling
for students is necessary so that each TEACH Grant recipient
understands the rights and responsibilities that are attached to a
grant award. Subsequent counseling sessions remind students of those
rights and responsibilities. Exit counseling reminds students about
their service obligation and gives them information similar to that
given to loan recipients when they leave school. Students who do not
complete the initial or subsequent counseling requirements, whichever
is appropriate, will not be eligible to receive a TEACH Grant. Thus,
students who are interested in receiving a TEACH Grant will have to
complete the annual counseling requirement regardless of whether or not
they agree with the requirement.
The Department intends to provide online, interactive counseling
that will be connected to the ATS. Once this online counseling is in
place, students will be required to complete it before they can access
and sign the ATS. Because students who do not complete an ATS are not
eligible to receive a TEACH Grant, this ensures that all recipients
will have completed the counseling. Unfortunately, the Department will
not be able to provide online counseling during the 2008-2009 award
year, but we are hopeful that on-line counseling will be available
beginning with the 2009-2010 award year.
Under Sec. 686.32, an institution is required to ensure that
initial, subsequent, and exit counseling is provided, as appropriate,
to each TEACH Grant recipient. Institutions, therefore, will be
required to provide counseling until the Department makes an online
TEACH Grant counseling program available. At that time, to fulfill the
requirements of Sec. 686.32, institutions will be responsible not for
providing the counseling, but instead for ensuring that the necessary
counseling has been provided (i.e., obtaining documentation evidencing
that the student received appropriate counseling).
To provide institutions as much flexibility as possible, the
Department has decided not to require institutions to collect a
specific form from students to show that they have completed the
required counseling. However, institutions can require their students
to submit a specific form, if they choose. Once the Department begins
to offer online counseling with the ATS, students will be able to print
off a copy of the ATS, which could serve as proof that they have
completed the online counseling (they will be unable to access and sign
the ATS without first completing the online counseling session). If it
chooses, an institution can request that each student provide a copy of
his or her completed ATS for that student's file. Also, nothing in the
regulations prohibits institutions from requiring students to receive
additional in-person counseling, prior to receiving a TEACH Grant.
The regulations indicate that an institution must ensure that a
student receives either initial or subsequent counseling, whichever is
appropriate, prior to the first disbursement of the grant award. While
the Department would prefer that institutions provide initial and
subsequent counseling to students before the students sign an ATS, we
realize that this could be difficult and so the Department did not
specify in the regulations the specific timeframe in which counseling
must take place. We believe that this gives institutions flexibility
and will allow them to provide counseling at a time that best suits
their needs and the needs of their students so long as students receive
counseling before the first disbursement of the TEACH Grant.
The Department used the current counseling requirements for the
William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program as an example when
formulating the TEACH Grant counseling requirements. However, the
requirements for the Direct Loan Program and the TEACH Grant program do
differ slightly. These differences are intentional. For example, the
initial counseling requirements for the Direct Loan Program state that
the initial counseling must explain the use of a Master Promissory Note
(MPN) whereas, because the TEACH Grant program does not use a MPN, this
requirement is not included in the TEACH Grant counseling requirements.
Also, the exit counseling section of the Direct Loan regulations states
that the exit counseling must inform the student borrower of the
average anticipated monthly payment amount based on the student's
overall indebtedness or on the average indebtedness of Direct
Subsidized Loan and Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan borrowers at the
same school or in the same program of study. In the TEACH Grant
regulations the Department requires that exit counseling inform the
student of the average anticipated monthly amount based only on the
student's TEACH Grant indebtedness, which could be in addition to any
other loan indebtedness that the student may incur. This is due to the
fact that institutions will not have an average indebtedness of TEACH
Grant recipients. Most TEACH Grants that convert to a loan will not do
so until several years after a TEACH Grant recipient has left the
institution.
Changes: None.
Recalculation of TEACH Grant Award Amounts (Sec. 686.35)
Comment: One commenter suggested that we change the title of this
section to ``Recalculation of eligibility for TEACH Grant award'' to be
consistent with a similar section of the Pell Grant Program
regulations.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the heading for this section
should reflect better the substance of the section. Under this section,
an institution can recalculate the amount of a TEACH Grant award in
response to changes in the student's enrollment status and changes in
the student's cost of attendance.
Changes: The section heading of Sec. 686.35 is changed to
``Recalculation of TEACH Grant award amounts.''
Documenting the Service Obligation (Sec. 686.40) and Periods of
Suspension (Sec. 686.41)
Comment: None.
Discussion: After negotiated rulemaking was completed, the
Department learned that two new
[[Page 35485]]
military family leave provisions were added to the Family and Medical
Leave Act (FMLA) by the National Defense Authorization Act Fiscal Year
2008 (Pub. L. 110-181) and that the Department of Labor was in the
process of receiving public comment on an NPRM for the FMLA
implementing regulations, which included a description of the new
military family leave provisions, a discussion of the issues, and a
series of questions seeking public comment on subjects and issues to be
addressed in final regulations. The Secretary committed in the TEACH
Grant NPRM to consult with the Department of Labor when developing
TEACH Grant final regulations so that the provisions in Sec. Sec.
686.40(e)(1) and 686.41(a)(1) would accurately reflect qualifying
reasons for leave under the FMLA, including qualifying leave reasons
under the new military family leave provisions. At the time of
publication of the final TEACH Grant program regulations, the
Department of Labor was still reviewing the comments received on the
FMLA NPRM and had not published revised final regulations.
Additionally, it was brought to our attention that references to
``conditions covered under the FMLA'' could imply that the coverage,
eligibility, notification, certification and other provisions of the
FMLA might need to be met in order for the condition to be one which
merited extension of the pay back time. It is not our intention that
other qualifying criteria for employees to take leave under the FMLA
apply, or even that leave be taken as a result of such condition. The
criteria will be met if a TEACH Grant recipient is unable to meet
obligations of the grant due to a condition that would be a qualifying
reason for leave under the FMLA. Moreover, because the FMLA may change,
as it did in 2008, by Congressional action in the future, we believe
that it is appropriate for the TEACH Grant regulations to reference the
applicable provisions of the FMLA, rather than to repeat those
provisions in the text of the TEACH Grant program regulations. We
believe that these references will be a more accurate source of
information for TEACH Grant recipients who are seeking a suspension
from the Secretary of the eight-year period for completion of the
service obligation when complying with Sec. Sec. 686.40 and 686.41 of
the TEACH Grant regulations based on a condition that would be
considered a qualifying reason for leave under the FMLA.
Changes: We have amended Sec. Sec. 686.40 and 686.41 by removing
the ``list of conditions covered'' by the FMLA and adding, in its
place, a reference to qualifying reasons for leave under the FMLA (29
U.S.C. 2612(a)(1) and (3)).
Periods of Suspension (Sec. 686.41)
Comment: Several commenters supported the addition of suspension
periods to the TEACH Grant program as a measure of protection for grant
recipients who, for reasons beyond their control, need an extension of
the eight-year period for completion of the teaching service
obligation.
Discussion: The Secretary appreciates the commenters' support.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters suggested that Sec. 686.41(b) be
amended to allow TEACH Grant recipients to request a suspension within
a 12-month period--rather than a 6-month period--after the date that
they either stop teaching or complete or otherwise cease enrollment in
a TEACH Grant-eligible program.
Another commenter noted that under current Sec. 686.41(b), a TEACH
Grant recipient must request a suspension within six months of ceasing
enrollment in a TEACH Grant-eligible program and that this period of
time conflicts with the trigger for conversion of a TEACH Grant to a
Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan in Sec. 686.43(a)(2) because, under
that provision, conversion occurs within 120 days of ceasing enrollment
in the TEACH Grant-eligible program if the grant recipient fails to
notify the Secretary that he or she is teaching or still intends to
teach full-time in accordance with the ATS. The commenters suggested
that the Secretary synchronize the timeframes for requesting a
suspension and the timeframes under which a TEACH Grant could convert
to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan so that a grant is not converted
to a loan before the TEACH Grant recipient has an opportunity to
request a suspension.
Discussion: We agree that the deadline by which a TEACH Grant
recipient must request a suspension and the time that a TEACH Grant may
convert to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan should not conflict.
However, we do not believe that amending the regulations to require
TEACH Grant recipients to request a suspension within 12 months of
completing or ceasing enrollment in a TEACH Grant-eligible program or
stopping teaching service is appropriate because such a change would
not resolve the conflicts between Sec. 686.41(b), which gives a
student 12 months to request a suspension, and Sec. 686.43(a)(2),
under which a TEACH Grant could convert to a Federal Direct
Unsubsidized Loan 120 days after the recipient completes a TEACH Grant-
eligible program if the student does not notify the Secretary.
To address the potential conflict, we amended Sec. 686.41(b) in
two ways: (1) By removing the requirement that a TEACH Grant recipient
make a request for a suspension within six months of completing or
otherwise ceasing enrollment or after he or she stops teaching; and (2)
by adding, in its place, a requirement that a TEACH Grant recipient
request a suspension prior to being subject to any of the conditions
under Sec. 686.43(a)(1) through (a)(5) that would cause the TEACH
Grant to convert to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan. With these
changes, a suspension request would have to be made by the TEACH Grant
recipient within 120 days of ceasing enrollment in a TEACH Grant-
eligible program if the grant recipient has failed to confirm with the
Secretary, within the 120-day period, that he or she is or intends to
be employed full-time in accordance with the terms and conditions of
the student's ATS. If the recipient notifies the Secretary in
accordance with Sec. 686.40(a), he or she still may request a
suspension, but must do so before any of the conditions identified in
Sec. 686.43(a)(1), (a)(3), (a)(4), and (a)(5) occur.
Changes: We amended Sec. 686.41(b) to require that a grant
recipient must apply for a suspension prior to being subject to any
conditions in Sec. 686.43(a)(1) through (a)(5) that would convert the
TEACH Grant to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan.
Comment: One commenter asked if it would be appropriate to add the
phrase ``as a highly-qualified teacher'' to the end of Sec.
686.41(a)(1)(i). The commenter believed this additional language would
assist a TEACH Grant recipient by broadening the circumstances under
which a suspension can be requested to include enrollment in programs
that confer the status of ``highly qualified.''
Discussion: We do not believe it is necessary to add the phrase
``as a highly-qualified teacher'' to the end of Sec. 686.41(a)(1)(i).
If a student is seeking a suspension to enroll in a program of study
that has been determined by a State to satisfy the requirements for
certification or licensure to teach in the State's elementary or
secondary schools, the program's course work must address the State-
determined standards for highly-qualified teachers by definition.
Changes: None.
Obligation To Repay the Grant (Sec. 686.43)
Comment: One commenter asked if the counseling requirements in
Sec. 686.32
[[Page 35486]]
require an institution to determine when a TEACH Grant converts to a
Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan and, if so, whether an institution
would be required to participate in the Federal Direct Loan Program in
order to participate in the TEACH Grant program.
Discussion: The Secretary will determine when a TEACH Grant
converts to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan in accordance with Sec.
686.43(a). The counseling requirements in Sec. 686.32 in no way
require an institution that participates in the TEACH Grant program to
convert a TEACH Grant to a loan. Moreover, nothing in the TEACH Grant
program regulations requires institutions that participate in the TEACH
Grant program to participate in the Direct Loan Program. Under Sec.
686.40(a), it is the responsibility of the TEACH Grant recipient to
notify the Secretary within 120 days of completing or ceasing
enrollment in a TEACH Grant-eligible program and annually thereafter
about his or her plans to satisfy the ATS, to request a suspension, and
to document creditable teaching service. The Secretary will track a
TEACH Grant recipient's enrollment status and progress in meeting the
terms and conditions of the recipient's ATS and will determine if and
when a TEACH Grant converts to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan based
on this information.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters were concerned that no appeal process
is available to a TEACH Grant recipient whose TEACH Grant converts to a
Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan. The commenters believed that the
regulations should provide for an appeal process so that a TEACH Grant
recipient's individual circumstances that caused the recipient to fail
to satisfy the terms and conditions of his or her ATS could be
evaluated or so that a conversion of a TEACH Grant to a loan that was
done in error could be corrected.
Discussion: We do not believe that an appeals process is necessary
because a number of protections are already built into the TEACH Grant
program. First, under the HEA, recipients have eight years to complete
a four-year service obligation--this builds in four extra years for
recipients with ``mitigating circumstances'' to satisfy their service
obligation. Moreover, suspensions of the service obligation
requirements are available under a number of defined situations a
recipient could face. For example, Sec. 686.41(a) provides up to three
years of eligibility for a suspension of the eight-year period in which
a TEACH Grant recipient has to satisfy the conditions of his or her ATS
based on enrollment in a TEACH Grant-eligible program or a program of
study to obtain a State license to teach, or a condition that is a
qualifying reason for leave under the FMLA. TEACH Grant recipients also
may request a suspension for an unlimited period of time to meet
certain military obligations. Finally, if a TEACH Grant is converted to
a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan in error, the grant recipient may
contact the Department of Education's Student Loan Ombudsman or other
Department staff to resolve the matter.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters recommended that the regulations permit
a TEACH Grant recipient to cancel the TEACH Grant within a reasonable
timeframe. The commenters noted that otherwise, a TEACH Grant recipient
would be required to request conversion of the TEACH Grant to a Federal
Direct Unsubsidized Loan under Sec. 686.43(a)(1) if the recipient
decided that he or she does not want the TEACH Grant.
Discussion: We agree that a TEACH Grant recipient should be able to
cancel all or part of a TEACH Grant within a reasonable time without
having to request that the TEACH Grant be converted to a Federal Direct
Unsubsidized Loan. We have added a new paragraph (e) to Sec. 686.31
and amended 34 CFR 668.165 to require that an institution provide the
same notices and cancellation opportunities to TEACH Grant recipients
that it provides to borrowers in the Title IV, HEA loan programs.
Changes: We have added a new paragraph (e) to Sec. 686.31 of the
TEACH Grant program regulations and amended 34 CFR 668.165(a)(2) to
provide that, before disbursing a TEACH Grant for any award year, an
institution must notify the student of the amount of TEACH Grant funds
that the student is eligible to receive, how and when those funds will
be disbursed, and the student's right to cancel all or a portion of the
TEACH Grant. Under Sec. 686.31(e)(1)(ii) and 34 CFR 668.165(a)(4), an
institution must also return the TEACH Grant proceeds, cancel the TEACH
Grant, or do both, if the institution receives a TEACH Grant
cancellation request from the student no later than the first day of a
payment period or 14 days after the date it notifies the student of his
or her right to cancel all or a portion of a TEACH Grant. Under Sec.
686.31(e)(2)(i) and 34 CFR 668.165(a)(4)(iii), if a student requests
cancellation of a TEACH Grant after the first day of a payment period
or 14 days after the date the institution notifies the student of his
or her right to cancel, but within 120 days of the TEACH Grant
disbursement date, the institution may return the TEACH Grant proceeds
or cancel the TEACH Grant, or both. Finally, under Sec.
686.31(e)(2)(ii), if the institution does not return the TEACH Grant
proceeds, or cancel the TEACH Grant, the institution must notify the
student that he or she may contact the Secretary to request that the
TEACH Grant be converted to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan.
Comment: One commenter stated that interest should begin accruing
on the date that a TEACH Grant is converted to a Federal Direct
Unsubsidized Loan, not on the date that the TEACH Grant was disbursed.
Discussion: Section 420N(c) of the HEA provides that interest
accrues from the date that a TEACH Grant was disbursed. The Secretary
does not have the authority to change this statutory requirement.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether the Department would assess
origination or insurance fees on a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan
that was originally a TEACH Grant.
Discussion: The Secretary has no plans to assess origination or
insurance fees on a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan that was
originally a TEACH Grant.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter supported Sec. 686.43(b), which exempts
TEACH Grants that convert to Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loans from
annual and aggregate loan limits, as an appropriate protection for
TEACH Grant recipients who, for reasons beyond their control, may be
unable to satisfy their ATS but still may need Federal student aid.
Another commenter stated that the regulations exempting TEACH Grants
that convert to Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loans from annual loan
limits is unwise because students who have no plans to teach may accept
TEACH Grants as a means of borrowing more than current annual loan
limits allow.
Discussion: There are many reasons why a TEACH Grant recipient may
be unable to fulfill his or her ATS, thereby triggering conversion of
TEACH Grants to Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loans. In some cases, TEACH
Grant recipients whose grants convert to Federal Direct Unsubsidized
Loans might immediately exceed aggregate loan limits and be declared
ineligible for further Title IV, HEA aid until the loans are paid down.
[[Page 35487]]
The Secretary believes this approach is overly punitive.
As discussed earlier in this preamble, although an institution may
limit the programs it designates as TEACH Grant-eligible, an
institution can never know with certainty whether a student truly
intends to fulfill his or her service obligation or whether the student
applies for and receives a TEACH Grant only to circumvent loan limits
in the Direct Loan Program. We also believe that the extensive
counseling and materials provided to TEACH Grant recipients will ensure
that only those students who intend to teach receive TEACH Grants.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that we amend the regulations in
Sec. 686.43(c) to provide a grace period for a grant recipient whose
TEACH Grant has been converted to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan.
The commenter stated that the purpose of a grace period is to allow
adequate time for a graduate to find employment before beginning
repayment. The commenter believed that it was unfair to expect a TEACH
Grant recipient to begin repayment immediately.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees with the commenter. We have
reviewed our initial budget assumptions and have determined that there
is no cost associated with making a change to the final regulations and
providing a grace period in Sec. 686.43(c) to a grant recipient whose
TEACH Grant has been converted to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan.
The provision of a grace period to a TEACH Grant recipient whose grant
has converted to a loan also mirrors the terms of the Direct Loan
Program with regard to entering repayment.
Changes: We have amended Sec. 686.43(c) to provide a grace period
for a grant recipient whose TEACH Grant has been converted to a Federal
Direct Unsubsidized Loan.
Comment: One commenter recommended that Sec. 686.43(c) specify
that a grant recipient who is in school when his or her TEACH Grant
converts to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan is eligible for an in-
school deferment so that such students do not have to begin making
payments immediately upon conversion of the TEACH Grant.
Discussion: A grant recipient whose TEACH Grant has been converted
to a Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loan is eligible for most of the
benefits of the Direct Loan Program. These benefits include an in-
school deferment as long as the borrower is eligible under 34 CFR
685.204(b)(1). We agree that the regulations should highlight this
benefit so that TEACH Grant recipients who are in school at the time of
conversion are aware of it.
Changes: We have amended Sec. 686.43(c)(2) by adding the words ``,
including an in-school deferment'' at the end of the paragraph.
Executive Order 12866
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine 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 set forth in the Executive order.
Pursuant to the terms of the Executive Order, it has been
determined that this regulatory action will have an annual effect on
the economy of more than $100 million. Therefore, this action is
``economically significant'' and subject to OMB review under section
3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the Secretary has
assessed potential costs and benefits of this regulatory action and has
determined the benefits justify the costs.
Need for Federal Regulatory Action
As discussed in the NPRM, these regulations are needed to implement
provisions of the HEA, as amended by the CCRAA, that established the
TEACH Grant program. The Secretary has exercised limited discretion in
implementing the CCRAA provisions in the following areas:
Definition of elementary and secondary academic year: The
CCRAA provides that a grant recipient must serve as a full-time teacher
for a total of not less than four academic years within eight years
after completing the program of study for which he or she received a
TEACH Grant.
TEACH Grant-eligible institution: The CCRAA provides that
an eligible institution for purposes of the TEACH Grant program must be
an institution of higher education as defined in section 102 of the HEA
that is financially responsible and that provides: High-quality teacher
preparation and professional development services, including extensive
clinical experience as part of pre-service preparation; pedagogical
coursework, or assistance in the provision of such coursework; and
supervision and support services to teachers, or assistance in the
provision of such services, or that provides a post-baccalaureate
program of instruction.
Calculation of Grade-Point Average for Transfer Students:
The CCRAA requires students to have a grade-point average of 3.25 on a
4.0 scale to be eligible to receive a TEACH Grant; and
Counseling: The CCRAA requires schools to provide
counseling at a number of points to provide participating students with
information on the program and, in particular, to underscore the
student's responsibilities in the event the program's service
requirements are not fulfilled.
Discharge of Service Agreement: The CCRAA does not address
the discharge of a service obligation if a TEACH Grant recipient dies
or becomes totally and permanently disabled.
The following section addresses the alternatives that the Secretary
considered in implementing these discretionary portions of the CCRAA
provisions.
Regulatory Alternatives Considered
A broad range of alternatives to the regulations was considered as
part of the negotiated rulemaking process. These alternatives were
reviewed in detail in the preamble to the NPRM under both the
Regulatory Impact Analysis and the Reasons sections accompanying the
discussion of each proposed regulatory provision. To the extent they
were addressed in response to comments received on the NPRM,
alternatives are also considered elsewhere in the preamble to these
final regulations under the Discussion sections related to each
provision. No comments were received related to the Regulatory Impact
Analysis discussion of these alternatives.
Net Budget Impacts
As noted in the NPRM, the TEACH Grant program is estimated to have
a net budget impact of $7 million in 2008 and $74 million over FY 2008-
2012. For budget, financial management, and cost estimation purposes,
TEACH Grants will be operated as a loan program with
[[Page 35488]]
100 percent forgiveness of outstanding principal and interest upon
completion of a student's service obligation. Consistent with the
requirements of the Credit Reform Act of 1990, budget cost estimates
for this program reflect the estimated net present value of all future
non-administrative Federal costs associated with awards made in a given
fiscal year. Details on how these estimates were developed are provided
in the Regulatory Impact Analysis section of the NPRM.
The administrative burden associated with Sec. Sec. 686.4, 686.11,
686.32, and 686.34 of the TEACH Grant final regulation package has been
estimated in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and
Bureau of Labor Statistics wage information. The total increase in PRA
burden associated with the regulations is estimated to be $2.6 million | | |
