Just because Michigan wasn’t a Race to the Top finalist doesn’t mean they can’t get other federal funds. I guess everybody wins — well, unless you were vying for a slot in the D.C. school lottery. At least they can dream. And from political tools to political weapons — the Department of Education purchases 27 Remington shotguns…the jokes just write themselves.
–Marisa Goldstein, Fordham intern
This Post article about Duncan’s speech to the nation’s governors focusses primarily on potential teacher layoffs (giving more reason to suspect we’re about to see a second stimulus, at least for schools).
But buried in the ninth paragraph is this newsworthy item: RTT finalists will be announced next week.
States reaching the finals will come to DC to make presentations to the Department and peer reviewers, explaining why their proposals merit awards.
–Andy Smarick
MD with some impressive AP results
But nationally more students failing AP tests
AL House rejects charter school bill, but MS senate passes one
VA gov backs better charter law
Good article on WA’s attempts to get with RTT reforms
Ed Week on edu-jobs saved by ARRA
Bold reform proposal for Chicago schools
–Andy Smarick
I’m back after some time buried in other projects. Here are a few interesting things I found while trying to catch up:
–Andy Smarick
The Washington Post weighs in on Maryland, the nation’s most disappointing RTT state
ED to unveil new National Center for Research in Advanced Information and Digital Technologies
Among public, 3/4 believe stimulus funds were wasted. Wow, did they read this Ed Next article already?
–Andy Smarick
Now that the dust has settled from the stampede of states turning in Race to the Top applications and media outlets far and wide covering the deadline from every angle possible, our attention should turn to making sure this promising program does as much good as possible.
How do we make sure the money doesn’t go to sustain the status quo like previous ARRA education money?
How can we tell if states and districts intend to implement the promises in their proposals?
What can Secretary Duncan do to squeeze every ounce of reform out of this unprecedented opportunity?
This and much, much more discussed in this Education Next article. If you want the condensed version, listen to DFER’s all-around good and funny guy Joe Williams grill me on it here, or watch Fordham honcho and anthropologist of hyped education reforms Checker Finn do the same here.
–Andy Smarick
Today is the first RTT deadline. States seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in the first round of payouts need to send their applications in by close of business today. To be sure, lots will be written in the days to come about these proposals and the Department’s process for evaluating them.
In advance of that, you might consider reading my new article in Education Next. Released today to coincide with state submissions and the pressing federal work about to begin, the article makes the case that the Department and its peer reviewers are going to have to work overtime to ensure that state proposals generate the reforms needed and expected.
I take a look back on the previous ARRA education spending and find that it was used to prop up the status quo. The factors that led to these disappointing spending patterns are still in play today, threatening the ultimate impact of RTT. As the article concludes, “when state proposals hit Arne Duncan’s desk, the secretary must become the toughest schoolmarm in America.”
If you’re interested, you have several options, thanks to the tech savvy folks at Education Next.
The full article is here (text). Checker Finn interviews me here (video). Joe Williams interviews me here (audio)
Image from Education Next
A little more than a year ago, President Obama ended our “name the next education secretary tracking poll” contest by nominating Arne Duncan to head the U.S. Department of Education. (Though our smart insiders saw this one coming from the start.)
And let’s admit it: Arne had a pretty good year. First he got to bail out local school districts to the tune of $100 billion, and then he got to use $4 billion in borrowed money to push state legislators to embrace his preferred reforms. His boss can now crow to his base–the teachers unions–about how “there” he’s been for them through this tough time, but he can also seize the mantle of a reformer.
That’s not to say that the Administration’s policies have been perfect; far from it. I have grave concerns about the Race to the Top’s long-term impact on education federalism, and doubt that the reforms states are now embracing (under duress) will actually turn out to be well implemented in the end. I also believe that some tough love for bloated school districts–in other words, turning off the federal funding spigot–would force some much-overdue and needed changes.
But that’s a policy wonk’s view. The average voter is happy that his kid’s teacher hasn’t been laid off, and to the extent that he’s heard of the “Race to the Top” might be pleasantly surprised that a Democrat president is pushing for reforms like charter schools and merit pay. This stuff will play very well in next year’s midterms.
Arne looks especially good in comparison to the rest of the Cabinet. Yes, Timothy Geithner helped to save the world from the second Great Depression, but members of Congress and their constituents back home still love to hate him. Hillary Clinton has traveled the world but has accomplished little in the Middle East, and the Pentagon is of course still facing a quagmire in Afghanistan. Kathleen Sebelius has failed to deliver a health care bill yet (p.s. she’s the Health and Human Services Secretary) and what’s-his-name at Energy didn’t get a cap-and-trade bill done, either.
So if the President is handing out Christmas bonuses this year, the biggest one (along with a big kiss) should go to Arne.
–Mike Petrilli
Yesterday, the US Department of Education released documents related to the second and final batch of funding (~$11 billion) under the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund.
Unable–due to the wording of the law–to withhold future federal funding or force states and districts to spend the money wisely, the Department was left to merely require states to provide information.
To the Department’s credit though, they made the most of the situation by asking for some quite important data (e.g. on teacher quality, charters, low-performing schools) that will be interesting and hopefully influence discussions and policy down the road.
But, needless to say, $50 billion is A LOT of money to pay for some information.
I give this a slightly longer treatment here.
Obviously, I’ve been playing the lecturing schoolmarm about RTT, warning that we have to increase our skepticism and manage our expectations. I’ve been looking for a pithy way to summarize my concern that states are much more interested in getting these federal funds than in pursuing the reforms those funds are meant to support.
I’ve tried “Trojan Horse” applications and other formulations but nothing has stuck. Fortunately, a state representative from Wisconsin has stepped up.
Rep. Steve Nass pointed out that his state’s firewall legislation that caught the Obama administration’s attention actually will do little by way of reform. Noting that under the just-passed law, data can’t be used to remove the worst teachers from the classroom and that any evaluation process must be agreed to by teachers unions, Nass questioned the real intent of the legislation.
This bill does nothing for quality education…This is basically a race for the money, not a race for the top.
Despite Secretary Duncan’s imploring states and districts to use formula-based ARRA funding for reform, it appears that nearly all of it went to job protection.
According to Education Week, only $600 million of $14 billion spent so far has been directed to things other than jobs. So what might have (should have) been a 50-50 split between reform and stabilization has turned into a 4-96 split.
Just another reason to wonder whether states really plan to use RTT funds for reform or if these grants will somehow be directed to preservation of the status quo.
Quotable:
“There is just no excuse not to deal with this issue and deal with it quickly, deal with it directly, and deal with it in a straightforward manner. Put the kids back in school, get the instructional days back on the board, and then face up to whatever else you have to do in order to meet your fiscal obligations.”
-U.S. Rep. Neil Abercrombie, on Hawaii’s teacher furlough dilemma
Honolulu Advertiser: Hawaii stimulus funds use draws fire
Notable:
325,000:
Number of education jobs–teachers, principals and other educators–retained or created through American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding, according to figures given to the federal government by individual states.
Washington Post: Education jobs boost connected to stimulus
The Department’s latest weekly update on the ARRA (released on 10/21) included the following:
The Department submitted to OMB and internal clearance the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria; the notice inviting applications; and the application for the $4.35 billion Race to the Top competitive grant program.
The internal document clearance process can take a while (a bunch of offices must approve), and getting OMB and White House sign-off can take even longer (again, lots of cooks in the kitchen), but this suggests that these important RTT docs aren’t far from being finalized and released.
The National Association of Scholars has posted an article that highlights the work Andy Smarick has done tracking the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, the economic stimulus).
Andy’s two reports in the series, "Education Stimulus Watch ," were published by the American Enterprise Institute, where he’s an adjunct fellow (he’s also a distinguished visiting fellow here at Fordham of course!). The reports analyze ARRA’s key education components and why they might not deliver and track ARRA’s contribution to the three points of reform : Recovery-First Funds, the Race to the Top program, improvements in state education policies. NAS also highlights an AEI blog post Andy did this week regarding ARRA. He has written a few Flypaper posts on the subject as well.
Congrats to Andy on his interesting work! The NAS article states: "We applaud Smarick’s work in providing accountability for how the education funds of the stimulus bill are being allocated, and we look forward to reading his findings in the next report."
I just finished reading Diane Ravitch’s 2000 book Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms. I recommend it strongly.
Though I’m currently focusing intently on changing education systems, Left Back is an excellent history of the century-long war over what goes on inside our public school classrooms. Our current debates over expectations, standards, assessments, innovation, and more have a long, fascinating, and (at times) shameful pedigree. In short, we didn’t get where we are today randomly or by accident.
Ravitch’s lesson is a modest, even sage one: We need to avoid new “movements” like the plague and give “more attention to fundamental, time-tested truths.”
Massive changes in curricula and pedagogy should be based on solid research and careful field-tested demonstration before they are imposed on entire school districts and states. There has been no shortage of innovation in American education; what is needed before broad implementation of any innovation is clear evidence of its effectiveness.
I find myself disagreeing with many of Dr. Ravitch’s current policy views (e.g. charters, assessments), but there’s a great deal to be learned from this history and her conclusions. I certainly now better understand the roots of her criticisms of the Race to the Top’s favored strategies.
If you’re not in the market for a dose of humility, this probably isn’t your bag. If read with an open mind, it’s sobering stuff for hard-charging reformers chock-full of certainty. But part of me thinks it should be required reading for anyone handing out big philanthropic grants or overseeing massive government education programs, especially those dedicated to innovation, like the much-discussed 13 program.
The Council on American Private Education (CAPE) has submitted superb public comments on the i3 fund. They address the Department’s unfortunate and unnecessary decision to exclude nonpublic schools from this competition (for background, see here and here).
It’s a quick read and very much worth the time if you are interested in the i3. In addition to asking a few very important questions, the document makes three particularly forceful arguments:
Religious and independent schools have an outstanding record of serving high-need students…Many private schools provide innovative and successful approaches to serving students at risk. The Cristo Rey Network of Schools, for example, which educates inner-city students through an innovative work-study model, has 99 percent of its graduates accepted into college.
Numerous well-implemented, well-designed, large-scale experimental studies (the kind the Education Department is looking for to support Scale-up Grants) have documented the effects of various private school programs. Patrick Wolf, the lead researcher for the U.S. Department of Education’s gold-standard study of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, which allows students to attend religious and independent schools, recently reported that the program “has proven to be the most effective education policy evaluated by the federal government’s official education research arm so far.”
If the Education Department is interested in finding and scaling-up successful programs to improve performance, close the achievement gap, and prepare students for college, the workplace, and life, it should enlist the efforts of all schools—public and private—that have a history of exemplary accomplishment. Excluding an entire group of proven programs from eligibility for the fund is not in the best interests of the nation or its students.
Very well said.
More evidence that the education components of the ARRA have been about jobs, jobs, jobs.
ED official (rightly) lectures Maine on lack of charter law
Russo on yesterday’s NAEP coverage
Oregon provides more evidence that the ARRA’s education components are about jobs
Tom Cruise gives us another reason to save Catholic schools
Excellent Ed Week articles on school boards and governors and education and use of ARRA funds
Maine considers finally passing a charter law
Time Magazine on Catholic schools crisis and related news in Philly
Eduwonk summarizes and comments on RaymondHoxybyCharterQuality-gate
On Race to the Top, Nevada not willing to play ball
ED just hosted a webinar on the i3, led by OII head Jim Shelton. Though the basic information in the presentation tracked faithfully with the priorities document (so nothing terribly new or different), some of the Q&A was quite interesting.
I’m not sure if they will make the audio available, but there are docs on the ed.gov site. Also, I tweeted during the event–you can check those out at my twitter account, @smarick.
Jim and his team have done their homework on this. Apart from the issue in my big complaint, this seems to be thoughtfully put together.
Read the Education Gadfly every Thursday at edexcellence.net/gadfly.
Powered by WordPress
Subscribe
to Flypaper via RSS