The Race to the Top: The carrot that feels like a stick
I’m pleased to announce this summer’s latest blockbuster , from the creators of No Child Left Behind, it’s: "NCLB 2: The Carrot That Feels Like a Stick."
At least that’s how I suspect the proposed Race to the Top application is going to seem to the states. If you found No Child Left Behind prescriptive, just wait till you take a look at this baby. (It’s due out at noon on Friday.)
To be clear, the application is jam-packed with reform ideas that I find promising, even exciting (the "whole enchilada," as I told USA Today ). Evaluate teachers in part based on student achievement gains! Replicate excellent charter schools and ramp up accountability for lackluster ones! Expand high-quality alternate route programs! If even a few states change their policies to be in alignment with the vision articulated here, our country will be the better for it.
But while the substance is worth celebrating, I can’t help but feel remorse for the death of federalism. Granted, as a former Bush Administration official, this is like me expressing regret that the Obama team is blowing a hole in the federal budget. They are merely reaping what we sowed.
But the Obama Administration had a choice. It could have asked states for their best ideas for achieving big objectives, like improving teacher quality or turning around low-performing schools. Instead, it has published a list of 19 of its best ideas, few of which are truly "evidence-based," regardless of what President Obama says , and told states to adopt as many of them as possible if they want to get the money. It’s as if a bunch of do-gooders sat together at the NewSchools Venture Fund summit and brainstormed a list of popular reform ideas, and are now going to force them upon the states. (Wait, I think that is how this list got developed.)
This is Washington Knows Best at its worst, and runs the risk of seeing states superficially swear allegiance to these reform ideas but implement them half-heartedly down the road.
Still, I have to admit to being torn. I like the ideas embedded in the application (and yes, I enjoy attending the NewSchools summit too!). And after seeing what Arne Duncan has been able to accomplish on the charter school cap front, just by dangling extra money out there, I suspect that this approach might actually work in terms of moving the needle on state policy.
But get ready for a backlash. States don’t take kindly to Washington pushing them around, and kicking a dog that’s down isn’t always the smartest strategy.
Arne Duncan has made some promising comments about moving federal policy to be "tight" on results and "loose" on process. It’s impossible to see how that jibes with the application released today. He’d better start walking that talk, lest he lose support from the field before the even bigger No Child Left Behind debates get underway.
Note: See coverage from the Washington Post , including a transcript of its interview with President Obama . Also see USA Today , AP , Education Week , the Wall Street Journal , and the New York Times .
Update : You can view the Race to the Top application for yourself here .
Related posts:
- Ohio unions are hand in glove with writers of Buckeye State’s Race to the Top application – why this is a bad thing
- A “Race to the Top” flip-flop
- If Ohio ends up getting “race to the top” funds…
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
July 24th, 2009 at 5:35 am
Holding teachers accountable…
No Child Left Behind is a massive invitation to scapegoating. By setting unserious goals that cannot be met, it manufactures a steady stream of bad news headlines. Of course, this is manna for the noisy poseurs who afflict our political discourse, hold…
July 24th, 2009 at 10:05 am
mike, what are the 19 ideas? srj
July 24th, 2009 at 11:04 am
[...] Behind prescriptive, just wait till you take
July 24th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
[...] The Carrot That Feels Like a Stick, writes Mike Petrilli on Flypaper. He likes the reform ideas but dislikes the Washington Knows Best [...]
July 24th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
I’ve been scratching my head at the entire stimulus package for education.
There’s a financial crisis, so we’re going to throw $100B into the kitty and give K12 systems a two-year buffer – fine. But the guidance, whether it’s general stimulus or RttT, is all focused on academic improvement – virtually nothing about reducing costs in anticipation of the funding cliff that we can all see coming two years out. Nothing about finding operational improvements, streamlining districts, alternate models to teacher-led instruction, improving energy efficiency (ok, there’s a little bit on that, but still)…
What happens when the money runs out? Is everybody banking on Stimulus II? Or are we just going to undo any improvements we made in the meantime?
July 24th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Brett,
The government operates like a drug dealer. First they give it away, and then once the customer is hooked, they make them start paying for it.
So they give things to the States and local districts, the State governments codify the enhancements in regulations or even law and then when the Federal government funding dries-up, the State Courts MANDATE that the local population be required to continue paying for the services.
July 24th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
[...] Mike Petrilli on Race to the Top, “the carrot that felt like a stick.” [...]
July 25th, 2009 at 6:46 am
[...] the data.
July 25th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
I personally think we should hold local politicians accountable and punish THEM if low-income students’ achievement doesn’t improve. After all, they’re responsible for the social programs that are supposed to lift the underprivileged higher up the social ladder, and bear more responsibility for the community culture, crime and other factors that impact kids’ lives than teachers do.
And also, how about the press? Who else disseminates ideas and information thoughout the community? If what they disseminate isn’t making an impact, shouldn’t they bear the responsibility?
And then there are the think tanks. Aren’t they really running the show? SHouldn’t they bear the ultimate responsibility and thus take the credit for success and take the punishment for failures?
July 26th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
was this post written by the same mike petrilli who recently posted on his horrifying experience at the ncsl conference?
i had rather thought that mike had had his nose rubbed in the realities of how little interest there is in many states in real reform. in fact, i had mistakenly concluded that mike had experienced his second, and truer, enlightenment on the road to damascus. apparently not.
mike now seems to be back on his “let’s just trust it all to the states” tour. i say let’s book mike again at next year’s ncsl summer conference. the “learning” didn’t take this summer.
July 27th, 2009 at 10:09 am
Sandy, you’re not the only one who thinks there are two Mike Petrilli’s. Greg Forster says so too (http://jaypgreene.com/2009/07/22/more-administration-talkwalk-disconnect/).
Look, as I said, I’m torn. I certainly don’t think we should just “trust the states.” But the Race to the Top is a competitive program. The Department could have crafted the application in such a way that a state with some really bold reform ideas that aren’t in the list of 19 could have scored well. Now that’s pretty much precluded. I see that as a lost opportunity. But I wouldn’t go so far as to say that any state that wants to do any “reform” should get the money. That’s called Title I, and we already know that it doesn’t do much good.
July 27th, 2009 at 10:36 am
good points, mike.
July 28th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
I’m with Caroline. We should hold politicians accountable when students fail! I would propose we hold something… let’s call it an “election”… and we could have something leading up to it… like a “campaign season”… that forces politicians to find support among various constituencies and special interest groups to help them win these “elections”. These constituent groups should not currently wield much influence in policy debates and they should be motivated solely by their concern about the performance of students–not broader, self-interested concerns like working conditions. Off the top of my head, I think these constituency groups might include teachers and their unions. Anyway, they could donate millions of dollars and provide thousands of ready volunteers during this “campaign season” and bring much more to bear on the legislative process than they do now.
Meanwhile, we should do more to limit the nefarious grip think tanks like Fordham have on politicians. Their vast networks of pointy-headed academics are clearly too powerful and hold too much sway over politicians and political outcomes. They simply overpower the voices of vast networks of teachers, and after all, they don’t even spend 8 hours a day with the kids who are failing.
August 26th, 2009 at 10:52 am
[...] on how states respond to the grant competition (and its many requirements, garnering many mixed reviews) to be run in two phases (late 2009 and Spring 2010), and how the U.S. DoED judges and funds these [...]
August 26th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
[...] on how states respond to the grant competition (and its many requirements, garnering many mixed reviews) to be run in two phases (late 2009 and Spring 2010), and how the U.S. DoED judges and funds these [...]
March 25th, 2010 at 8:40 am
[...] "It's as if a bunch of do-gooders sat together at the Newschools Venture Fund summit and brainstormed a list of popular reforms ideas, and now they are going to force them upon the states," writes Ravitch, quoting Mike Petrilli's "NCLB2: The Carrot That Feels Like a Stick." [...]