Three Issaquah elementary schools sent out letters this week notifying parents that they were failing federal performance standards.

Briarwood, Clark and Issaquah Valley elementary schools each sent out notices letting parents know that they had not met Adequate Yearly Progress standards under the No Child Left Behind act and what options were available for allowing their student to transfer schools under the law.

It’s a situation that’s become familiar this summer to school districts that receive federal Title I, Part A funding to serve high populations of low income students.

It’s also a situation that’s become unavoidable in the face of testing standards that require 100 percent proficiency in reading and math regardless of factors like special needs or students speaking English as a second language, according to an open letter signed by Issaquah School District Superintendent Ron Thiele and 27 other superintendents in Aug. 2014.

“The label of ‘failing’ schools is regressive and punitive, as nearly every Washington school will not meet the [No Child Left Behind] Requirements,” that letter read. “Some of our state’s and districts’ most successful and highly recognized schools are now being labeled ‘failing’ by an antiquated law that most educators and elected officials — as well as the U.S. Department of Education — acknowledge isn’t working.”

U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan revoked Washington state’s conditional No Child Left Behind waiver in March 2014, citing the state legislature’s failure to deliver on a promise to tie teacher evaluations to standardized test scores. Duncan notified state leaders that reinstatement of the waiver would be linked to delivering on that promise and expanding charter schools.

Now, with failure letters going out to parents, districts are reverting to No Child Left Behind’s one-fifth requirement, in which 20 percent of failing schools’ federal education dollars must be earmarked for student transfers and intervention methods like tutoring.

But the education landscape could soon change — in Washington state and nationwide — if two reform bills that passed the House and Senate this summer can be compromised into a bill that will meet with White House approval.

In July, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan education reform bill co-authored by Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), which would perpetuate federal measurements of student progress while returning responsibility for low performing schools to the judgment of states and local school districts.

Soon afterward, the House narrowly passed its own reform bill drafted by 2nd District Rep. John Kline.

Speaking with journalists from Eastside Reporter newspapers on Aug. 13, Murray expressed confidence that the two bills would successfully make it through a congressional conference committee that opened discussion in late July, despite drastic differences like a provision in the House bill supporting portability — a policy allowing Title I funding to follow low income students to the school of their choice. President Barack Obama spoke strongly against portability in Kline’s Student Success Act in February, though he fell shy of threatening a veto.

“It won’t be in the final bill,” Murray said.

Duncan gave mixed praise in his response to the Murray/Alexander bill, applauding many of its reforms yet wondering aloud if local officials could manage low performing schools without oversight.

“Arne Duncan would tell you our bill is better than current federal law, but he had his weight taken away,” Murray said. “From his point of view, we took his power away.”