I'm at a two-day symposium in New York City put on by the Campaign for Educational Equity (and sponsored by Teachers College, Columbia University) that's examining whether the stimulus funds have been spent and used equitably to help improve achievement, especially among at-risk students.

Sam Dillon did a piece previewing the papers being presented, in which he focused on the funding cliff that the stimulus is creating. Since we've already written a lot about the funding cliff, I thought the more interesting part of these papers, and the symposium itself, was the warning flags being raised about some of the long-term consequences of the stimulus package.

Although I'll have a more complete story soon, here's what I'm talking about:

• Since the stimulus law required roughly $48 billion in State Fiscal Stabilization Funds to be distributed through a state's primary funding formula, the "maintenance of effort" provision that required a state to maintain its own funding only applied to this formula. But this ignores the fact that in many states, there are smaller categorical funds that make up total state aid, but aren't given out to school districts by a formula. This paper, by David Sciarra and Danielle Farrie of the Education Law Center and Bruce Baker of Rutgers University, points out that in Pennsylvania, for example, only 57 percent of funds are driven through the "primary" formula. What does this mean? States tended to avoid cuts in their primary formulas to meet federal requirements, but may have slashed the heck out of other programs--programs that could be targeting low-income, minority, and other at-risk children.
• Because of a quirk in the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and we've written about this issue some, too, states are able to lower their own funding levels for special education by certain amounts because of the increase in new federal aid. What does this mean going forward? States will have a lower funding base they'll be required to meet, which will likely mean less state aid for special education once the stimulus funding runs out. You can read more about this, and other issues, in this paper by Jessica Wolff and Daniel Yaverbaum of the Campaign for Educational Equity.
• And, as several papers point out, states used an influx of Title I funds to expand services to more at-risk students--essentially lowering the poverty threshold so more students became eligible. That seems great, but there's a downside, too. Once the stimulus funding runs out, either they'll have to take services away from those new Title I kids, or spread existing resources more thinly across more kids. That's a dilemma.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 7:40 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

As we've already reported, the U.S. Department of Education put out a bold new budget proposal last week that includes major program consolidations and sketches out the preliminary details of the administration's plan to renew the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

That reauthorization would have to pass this year for many of the budget proposals to become reality. Many folks think that's a long shot. And it appears that the department is at least preparing for the possibility that the bill won't make it to prime time this year.

Buried in the mega-thick budget document is the administration's budget contingency plan, in case there's no reauthorization. (For the full proposal go here, then click on the link that says Fiscal Year 2011 Education Budget Summary and Background Information. The chart is on page 33.)

The headline? The contingency request seeks $900 million for the Teacher Incentive Fund, more than double the $400 million the program received in fiscal year 2010. That's about the same level as the $950 million Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund, which is one of the new funding streams proposed in the department's budget.

But last year, folks in Congress were skeptical about the TIF's effectiveness when the administration was seeking to bring it to $487 million. This bigger proposed hike is likely to prompt even more probing.

And the administration's plan to revamp teacher and leader quality is evident in other requests, not dependent on a reauthorization of ESEA, such as $50 million for a new teacher recruitment initiative and $79.2 million for school leadership programs, a $50 million hike over fiscal year 2011.

The request also seeks $310 million for charter schools, a $54 million increase over fiscal year 2011.

The administration is also asking for $1.35 billion to continue the $4 billion Race to the Top competition beyond this year and open it up to districts. And it's asking for $500 million to continue the Investing in Innovation Fund, which scales up promising practices in districts.

Both the RTTT and i3 requests are also part of the traditional, non-contingency budget, although Andy Smarick points out here it's tough to tell if the grants for those programs are working ... since none have actually been given out yet.

The administration is also asking for $900 million for School Improvement Grants, and $210 million for the Promise Neighborhood initiative, which supports education programs that are bolstered by a range of other services, such as prekindergarten and health. Both of those requests are part of the regular budget blueprint, too.

The consolidations being proposed may be a long shot. What do you think of the prospects for Budget Plan B?

Posted by Alyson Klein at 1:27 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

In a sign that the final regulations for the $650 million Investing in Innovation competition are just about ready, the Education Department has put out a call for peer reviewers. The deadline for those interested to apply is March 1.

In many ways, the i3 competition is a much bigger logistical problem for the department than Race to the Top, which has higher stakes. For Race to the Top, only states (and D.C.) could apply, limiting the number of applications. But i3 is open to all school districts, of which there are thousands across the country. Plus, within i3, there are three levels of grants, creating mini-competitions within a larger competition.

It will be difficult for the department to find i3 judges who are knowledgeable enough to judge all parts of an application. Since a big chunk of i3 is about providing evidence that a program does or might work, the Education Department will have to find experts in statistics, experimental and quasi-experimental models, and general research principles. Thus, the department is looking for people who are experts in at least one of these areas: education reform and policy, evidence, innovation, strategy, and application review as defined below. Likely candidates will be preK-12 teachers and principals, college and university educators, researchers and evaluators, social entrepreneurs, strategy consultants, grantmakers and managers.

I'm not sure how many peer reviewers they're looking for, but given that they needed about 60 for the first round of Race to the Top, my guess is they'll need at least double that.

Peer reviewers will be screened for conflicts of interest, and must be available for training sessions and to read applications for four weeks from May to July. There's an honorarium attached, although I'm not sure how much. Race to the Top judges get $5,000.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 10:41 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

We may not know who the Race to the Top peer reviewers are, but the Education Department has provided some basic demographic information on this jury that will help dole out the first round of $4 billion in competitive grants.

Not that these tidbits will satisfy the critics of the department's decision to keep the panelists' identities secret, but they're worth sharing nonetheless.

The crew of 58 looks like this:

• 15 are former principals, 30 are former K-12 teachers


• 4 are attorneys


• 35 have doctoral degrees


• 12 have served on state or local boards of education


• 15 are former state or district superintendents


• 25 are from the Northeast, 13 from the West, 13 from the South, and seven from the Midwest


• 32 are women, and 26 are men

So that seems to indicate that the composite picture of the average peer reviewer is a former female teacher from the Northeast who has a PhD.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 5:09 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

From State EdWatch blogger Lesli Maxwell

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan says he's sorry for saying that Hurricane Katrina was the best thing that had happened to the education system in New Orleans. This morning on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program, he told host Joe Scarborough that the remarks were a "dumb" thing to say and that he had expressed them in a "poor way."

Since the remarks were made public last Friday, the blogosphere and Twitterverse have been ablaze with chatter, much of it critical, about the secretary's choice of words in an interview he did for "Washington Watch with Roland Martin," which aired on Sunday on the cable channel TV One.

The Washington Post reported yesterday that the secretary had phoned New Orleans Mayor C. Ray Nagin on Friday night to explain his comments. And look here for a story from my colleague Mary Ann Zehr about local reaction to what the secretary said.

Here's the secretary's interview from this morning:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Posted by Lesli Maxwell at 11:02 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

The Obama administration is seeking to revamp adequate yearly progress, the main vehicle for gauging student progress under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, according to budget documents. It would be replaced with a system that measures whether students are ready for college and careers.

The total budget for fiscal year 2011 would be $49.7 billion, as compared to last year's $46.8 billion. Those totals include a proposal, also released last year, that would move Pell Grants to the mandatory side of the ledger, meaning they wouldn't be subject to the whims of the appropriations process.

The budget also includes a $3 billion increase in competitive funding for ESEA. That includes $1.35 billion to continue Race to the Top, plus $500 million for the Investing in Innovation Fund, which is meant to scale up promising practices.

And it would include $950 million in competitive grants to states and school districts that build comprehensive systems to recruit, prepare, retain, and reward effective teachers and principals. We don't have all the details yet, but it would seem that at least some of the money for the competitive teacher-quality program would come from consolidating other funding streams. (Last week, the Department announced that it would consolidate 38 programs into 11 under the budget.)

The budget also includes $210 million for Promise Neighborhoods, to help communities create schools that are bolstered by other support services, such as health programs, pre-kindergarten, and college counseling.

More updates when we have them!

UPDATE: We still don't have all the details yet. But if you remember, last week the Education Department said it would seek an additional $1 billion from Congress if ESEA is reauthorized. That money would be for Title I grants to districts, state assessments, and a revamped version of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program, which now pays for after-school programs and tends to be popular with Congress.

It also looks like Title I would have a new name under the administration's yet-to-be-unveiled reauthorization proposal. It would be called College-and-Career Ready Students. In one of the summary documents posted by the OMB, it looks like that program would get $14.5 billion in fiscal year 2011, about the same level Title I received in fiscal year 2010. But we don't have all the details yet, so it's tough to say if that amount would go to the same activities and flow through the same formula as Title I.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 10:11 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

From State EdWatch blogger Lesli A. Maxwell

Did the usually smooth-tongued U.S. Secretary of Education really say that Hurricane Katrina was the best thing to happen to the education system in New Orleans? Oh yes, he did.

In an interview to be broadcast this weekend on Washington Watch With Roland Martin, Arne Duncan says, "I think the best thing that happened to the education system in New Orleans was Hurricane Katrina. That education system was a disaster, and it took Hurricane Katrina to wake up the community to say that 'we have to do better.'"

Arne Duncan does speak frankly when it comes to the shortcomings of urban school districts, but this comment seems unusually callous, even though we know what the secretary is trying to say. The public schools were a wreck before the storm, no real debate there. And, yes, the schooling options for many students are better in the city now, and student achievement is slowly, but surely on the rise.

But to the thousands of teachers, students, and school employees who lost colleagues, jobs, classrooms, school records, and the like, a remark like that from the nation's top education official is beyond insensitive.

Thanks to an enterprising public relations shop that sent out these blurbs on a Friday afternoon. Here are the two blurbs in full:

UPDATE: The folks over at the Ed. Dept. called to air concerns about this post (especially the headline), saying that it doesn't fully reflect the context in which the secretary made his comments and his obvious concern and sensitivities about the people and students in New Orleans. They wanted to share a bit fuller version of the transcript, and a follow-up statement from Sec. Duncan this afternoon.

Here's the transcript:
Roland Martin: I was talking to you on James Carville and Mary Matalin. They're of course very involved in what's happening in New Orleans. What's amazing is New Orleans, is that everything was devastated because of Hurricane Katrina. But because everything was wiped out, in essence, you are building from ground zero to change the dynamic of education in that city.

Arne Duncan: That's a fascinating one. I've spent a lot of time in New Orleans and this is a tough thing to say but I'm going to be really honest. The best thing that happened to the education system in New Orleans was Hurricane Katrina. That education system was a disaster. And it took Hurricane Katrina to wake up the community to say that we have to do better. And the progress that it made in four years since the hurricane, is unbelievable. They have a chance to create a phenomenal school district. Long way to go, but that city was not serious about its education. Those children were being desperately underserved prior. And the amount of progress and the amount of reform we're seeing in a short amount of time has been absolutely amazing. I have so much respect for the adults, the teachers, the principals that are working hard. I've spent a lot of time talking to students at John Mack high school there. Many who had missed school for six months, eight months, 13 months after the Hurricane and still came back to get an education. Children in our country, they want to learn. They're resilient. They're tough. We have to meet them half-way. We have to give them opportunity. And New Orleans is doing a phenomenal job of getting that system to an entirely different level.

And here is the secretary's statement: "As I heard repeatedly during my visits to New Orleans, for whatever reason, it took the devastating tragedy of the hurricane to wake up the community to demand more and expect better for their children."

Let me just say one last thing about this. During the 2007-2008 school year, I spent one week every month in New Orleans reporting about the overwhelming challenges of rebuilding the city's public school system in the wake of the hurricane. And while many of the long-time educators I got to know there recognized that the storm had provided a sort of fresh start, they were angry, and frankly weary, of hearing well-meaning outsiders talk about the opportunities that such a devastating event brought to their city. I don't think any of us can know, unless we're from New Orleans, how raw the emotions still are about Katrina.

Posted by Lesli Maxwell at 3:32 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Edubloggers, including none other than Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, are having quite the back-and-forth on the issue of whether the list of Race to the Top judges should be kept a secret:

Quick Reacap: Michele brought up the question last week.

Then AEI's resident edu-smartypants Rick Hess gave his take. Duncan didn't respond directly, but addressed the issue here.

Hess shot back, reminding the Education Department what happened when allegations of conflict of interest were raised about Reading First. And Eduwonk engaged in a lively debate... with himself. Hess explained here why one of the debating Eduwonks is wrong and also Bill Clintonesque.

And the Fordham Institute's Mike Petrilli argued that Duncan could be playing with political dynamite, in a post featuring a guest quote from Hypothetical Rahm Emanuel, who doesn't make appearances in edublogs nearly often enough.

Eduwonk comes back this time wondering if the administration's goals (which he can understand) are worth it, giving the political risk of releasing criticism along the lines of what he calls Hess' "jihad." Hess gets this in the final-for-now word. Unless of course, I missed something.

Now, if you've managed to digest all that and you're still a fan of edublogs ... EdWeek has a new one!

Please welcome State EdWatch, by Lesli Maxwell, who has blogged for Politics K12 on everything from the nitty-gritty of school improvement grants to Governor Moonbeam.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 2:28 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Good news for fans of overhauling high schools: Two veterans of the Alliance for Excellent Education, whose signature issues include boosting graduation rates and high school quality, are likely to play key roles in helping lawmakers craft the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Bethany Little already serves as the top education adviser on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.

Now, Jamie Fasteau has been hired by Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, as a senior education policy adviser. The position was left vacant when Alice Johnson Cain left the committee to work on teacher quality issues for the Hope Street Group.

Most recently Fasteau, whose bio you can find here, served as a vice president at the alliance. Before that, she worked for Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., focusing on legislation affecting children and families. And she was a senior lobbyist for the National PTA, as well as a government-relations manager for the American Association of University Women.

The alliance, which is headed by former West Virginia Gov. Bob Wise, a Democrat, has been instrumental in shining a spotlight on schools with very high dropout rates, and in helping to champion legislative remedies such as these bills. Having Little and Fasteau in such important staff positions could give a boost to those efforts.

And the organization has had a hand in the Common Core State Standards Initiative, an effort headed by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association to craft more rigorous, common state standards. The feds, including Congress, are largely staying out of that effort.

UPDATE: Jason Amos at the alliance emailed me to say that Gov. Wise did not start the group, as I had originally stated. He wrote, "The Alliance was founded in 2001 by philanthropists Gerard and Lilo Leeds. Susan Frost was the Alliance's first president and served from 2001-2004. Gov. Wise came aboard in 2005." Thanks Jason!

Posted by Alyson Klein at 2:29 PM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)

Yesterday, Obama administration officials made it clear that a) they want reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to happen this year and b) they want it to be bipartisan.

So do key Republicans on the House Education and Labor Committee think that's possible? Back in 2007, the panel attempted to reauthorize the ESEA, whose current version is the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, but never gained much traction.

Sounds like the picture is mixed this time around. Here's a snippet from a statement that Rep. John Kline of Minnesota, the top Republican on the House education committee put out right after the speech:

There is no doubt we need to reform our federal education laws, and Republicans are anxious to enact policies that empower parents, teachers, and communities to provide a quality education for all our nation's students. The President and Education Secretary Duncan have indicated a surprising willingness to take on the education special interests. For too long, unions and advocacy groups have stood in the way of meaningful reform. I am ready to stand alongside this Administration in their efforts to loosen the grip of special interests on our schools and put parents and communities back in control of education.

The statement goes on to chide the administration for its student-loan proposal, which was generally a partisan issue in the House.

And last night, after the speech, I caught up with Rep. Mike Castle, R-Del., the top Republican on the subcommittee that oversees K-12 eduction policy. (Along with Kline, he's one of the "Big 8" the administration is meeting with about the bill. Also, he's running for the Senate.)

"If there's a major piece of legislation that has a chance to be bipartisan, this is it," Castle said, although he cautioned that "it's not a slam dunk." Preliminary talks have "gotten off to a good start, he said, but the administration will need to continue to reach out GOP lawmakers.

And he said he doesn't see Secretary of Education Arne Duncan as "a politically motivated person." He's glad that Duncan has talked so much about policies likely to appeal to Republicans, such as merit pay and charter schools.

I also talked to Rep. Tom Price of Georgia, a senior committee member who tends to be much more conservative than Castle. He said he hoped that there could be a bipartisan renewal of the ESEA, but that it is a long shot. "The words are wonderful," he said. "But the fact of the matter is we haven't seen any bipartisanship out of this administration."

Posted by Alyson Klein at 10:00 AM | Permalink | No Comments | TrackBacks (0)