August 2009 Archives

The U.S. Department of Education's Race to the Top program director, Joanne Weiss, has a big job on her hands now that hundreds of comments have been filed on the 19 criteria that the department proposes to use in awarding $4 billion in competitive grants. I've read most of the comments, and folks raise tons of good questions that showcase just how difficult it is try to apply one set of criteria to 50 different states. The comments also foreshadow how difficult it will be to fairly judge these states, which have different constitutions and governance structures, different politicians, and operate in different contexts.

There are the predictable comments, such as from states without charter schools that object to that being used as one of the criteria on which states will be judged. Plenty of others are objecting to the components of the criteria that seek to improve teacher and principal effectiveness. And the National Conference of State Legislatures, predictably, wants to be recognized in the criteria for the role its members have in education policy.

Weiss has said that the department will take time to read each comment and make any changes to the proposed criteria, with the goal being to have the final regulations done by October or early November.

Consider this a brief summary of other comments, organized around common themes.

Paperwork burden: Several state officials say that the documentation required for the application could be overly burdensome. They want more clarification on the department's requirement that states obtain memoranda-of-understanding from participating school districts (as in all of them?) And many think that requiring a state's attorney general to sign off on the interpretation of state laws that are used as evidence for meeting a criteria will take too long. Education chiefs in Massachusetts and Florida suggested that each education department's chief legal counsel could do that job. The National Governors Association thinks the attorney-general requirement should be removed altogether. (And the NGA also says that some governors object to the requirement that the state board of education president must sign on to the Race to the Top Fund application).

"Participating LEAs": States and education groups are curious as to whether they can award the second half of their Race to the Top funds to a select group of school districts, or if they have to dole out money to all of them. (The first half of the money is doled out per the Title I formula.) States are making it clear that they may want to direct their Race to the Top money to a select group of schools where the most good can be done.

IEPs: Many states, special education advocacy groups, and even U.S. Rep. George Miller, the California Democrat and chairman of the House education committee, object to language about how states should measure achievement for special education students. The criteria call for using students' Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) as a gauge for measuring their achievement in non-tested subjects. All point out that IEPs are meant to set goals, not to measure student achievement.

Transparency and accountability: Many states (such as Washington, Colorado, Texas, Kentucky), want to know, going in, what the scoring rubric will be on meeting the criteria, and whether failing to meet a single criterion will knock a state out of the running. They want to know which criteria will be given the most weight, and how the peer reviewers will be picked. The Coalition for Student Achievement wants the Education Department to post all of the state applications online, even before they're approved. And the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation wants the education department to hold back some of a winning state's grant money as leverage to make sure the state delivers on its reform plan.

Common standards: The NGA and the Council of Chief State School Officers, which are partnering in the common standards effort, point out that the time line for states to adopt common standards is far more aggressive in the Education Department's criteria than in the agreement reached by states. (The states agreed to adopt standards within three years; the criteria call for them to be adopted in just one year.) In addition, the department's criteria call for all standards to be "identical" across states, whereas the states have agreed that 85 percent of their standards should match.

Early learning: State officials from Colorado and Kentucky, along with foundations such as The Pew Charitable Trusts, are encouraging the Education Department to ask states to integrate early learning and pre-K programs into their Race to the Top applications.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 4:52 PM | Permalink | 6 Comments | Recommend

The deadline for comments on the Race to the Top guidance is rapidly approaching, so hurry up and get your critiques in.

Then, if you haven't already, be sure to read my colleague Steve Sawchuk's story on NEA's comments.

And, (almost) hot off the presses, four education redesign-oriented groups have teamed up on a list of Race to the Top comments. They include the Center for American Progress, Democrats for Education Reform, the Ed Trust, and the Education Equality Project.

The groups recommend, among other ideas, that the Department of Education:

*Ask states how K-12 dollars are distributed, not just about how much they spend, to make sure poor and minority kids get their fair of the funding

*Require the state's top higher education official to sign off on its application. Their approval would be a sign that the state's standards really are "college-ready" and would show that universities are prepared to help with teacher professional development.

*Call on states to go beyond the National Assessment of Educational Progress in reporting progress at closing the achievement gap. That's necessary partly because there are no mandatory, state-by-state results on NAEP at the high school level in reading and math, like there are for fourth and eighth grade. Instead, states should also be required to take a look at how their kids are progressing on state tests, the advocates say.

The groups also have some ideas for the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund guidance, which are worth taking a look at.

After you've checked them out, be sure to post any comments on the comments.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 2:15 PM | Permalink | 4 Comments | Recommend

Everyone agrees that it will be a long time before there's another Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions chairman like the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass. Folks described him as a passionate advocate for disadvantaged kids and marveled at his ability to bring disparate groups around the table.

Still, the committee has a lot of business to tackle, including the reauthorizations of the No Child Left Behind Act and the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act. Someone will have to shepherd those measures through, and we'll likely find out who that will be soon.

The smart money says it will either be Sen. Chris Dodd, of Connecticut, the top ranking Democrat on the committee, or Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa.

Dodd was one of Kennedy's closest friends in the Senate and has been leading the charge on health care, the top domestic priority for congressional Democrats. But he'd have to give up his chairmanship of the Senate Banking Committee.

The complication: Dodd is in a precarious position in terms of reelection, mostly because of his handling of the financial crisis. (Check out this poll, which has him trailing a Republican contender, former Rep. Rob Simmons, by nine points, not good for an incumbent who's been around for more than three decades.)

It might not be a great idea for Dodd to look like he's turning his back on banking, an issue that's hugely important to his home state. Of course, his leadership on health care might affect his reelection chances.

If Dodd decides he's better off sticking with his banking position, and if his colleagues don't decide to waive the rules to let him have two committees at once, Harkin would be likely to step in. Harkin, a long-time champion of kids with disabilities and a big fan of federal funding for school facilities, is already the chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee.

But lots of folks think he'd be willing to give up that job, especially since he's also the chairman of the subcommittee that oversees education spending. If he took the helm at the Senate education committee, he would be in charge of both money and policy for K-12, great news for Harkin fans.

Another important question: Who are some of the rising stars in the Senate who share Kennedy's passion for education? Many folks point to Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado, also a Democrat and the former superintendent of Denver public schools. One lobbyist told me he's a point guy for the White House on K-12 issues, even though he's not on the Senate education committee.

UPDATE: In the comments section, Washington folks pointed to two potential power-brokers I missed: Sens. Patty Murray of Washington and Barbra Mikulski of Maryland.

Any other suggestions?

Posted by Alyson Klein at 11:23 AM | Permalink | 3 Comments | Recommend

Education Secretary Arne Duncan today spelled out how he wants states to spend $3.5 billion in Title I school improvement money over the next three years.

This grant funding ($3 billion from the economic-stimulus package and $546 million from fiscal 2009 appropriations) will flow to states based on the Title I formula for aid to disadvantaged students, but states will have discretion in how they award the money. The U.S. Department of Education, in its regulations, however, prescribes how the money would be awarded. States would award grants to districts that agree to adopt one of these four models (with some exceptions):

*Turnaround Model: This would include among other actions, replacing the principal and at least 50 percent of a school's staff, adopting a new governance structure and implementing a new or revised instructional program.

*Restart Model: School districts would close failing schools and reopen them under the management of a charter school operator, a charter management organization, or an educational management organization selected through a rigorous review process. A restart school would be required to admit, within the grades it serves, any former student who wishes to attend.

*School Closure: The district would close a failing school and enroll the students who attended that school in high-achieving schools in the district.

*Transformational Model: Districts would address four specific areas: 1) developing teacher and school leader effectiveness, which includes replacing the principal who led the school prior to commencement of the transformational model, 2) implementing comprehensive instructional reform strategies, 3) extending learning and teacher planning time and creating community-oriented schools, and 4) providing operating flexibility and sustained support.

In a nod to how important Duncan thinks school leadership is, all of these would put the school principal on the chopping block.

It's also worth noting school districts have a big incentive to adopt the "turnaround" or "restart" model. If they choose one of those two models, the regulations would allow states to seek a waiver to allow those districts to restart the NCLB school improvement clock and no longer be required to provide public school choice or supplemental education services.

This money could be a significant lever for school improvement, especially since Duncan has made turning around the lowest-performing 5 percent of schools a priority.

It's important to put this dollar amount in perspective. It is almost as big as the $4 billion Race to the Top Fund, and it's far bigger than the new i3 Investing in Innovation Fund. Also, the fiscal 2009 appropriation for school improvement grants is just $546 million.

What do you think of these proposed regulations?

Posted by Michele McNeil at 11:46 AM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Sad news in the K-12 community today: Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., the chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, passed away.

Kennedy was a key—make that "the key"—voice in the Senate on education issues. In recent years, he's probably best known for his role as one of the main authors of the No Child Left Behind Act, the bipartisan initiative during President George W. Bush's administration to reshape the education landscape. And, earlier this year, he helped advocate a major national-service bill that became known as the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act.

Over his decades in the Senate, Kennedy also championed the Americans With Disabilities Act and was a major proponent of Title IX, the 1972 law against sex discrimination in education that is credited with boosting the participation of women and girls in sports.

Back when Kennedy was diagnosed with terminal cancer, I wrote this story about how his illness might affect education legislation. Everyone I talked to for the story said it would be much, much harder to find common ground on education issues without his leadership.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 9:30 AM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

...all at the same time?

Not really.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 11:11 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

If you're enough of an education policy geek to read this blog regularly, you probably remember the Aspen Commission on the Future of No Child Left Behind, which ramped up in 2006 and was charged with devising a bipartisan set of recommendations for improving the law.

At the helm were two former governors, Tommy Thompson, a Republican from Wisconsin, and Roy Barnes, a Democrat from Georgia. And leading the staff was Alex Nock, who is now a top aide for Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee.

Recommendations included providing states with incentives for tracking teacher effectiveness and a move towards more common standards. (Sound familiar, stimulus watchers?)

Many of the recommendations were incorporated into a bill introduced by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., and Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., who was defeated in the 2008 election.

Well, now Congress is supposedly going to get going on NCLB reauthorization early next year. So the commission is back in business and plans to hold a series of hearings over the next four months on issues including turning around low-performing schools and high school improvement. Early next year, it will release an addendum to its original report.

The first hearing will be held next Wednesday, Sept. 2, at Howard University in D.C. It will focus on turnarounds. Witnesses include:

*Steve Barr, founder and chairman, Green Dot Public Schools in Los Angeles
*Natalie Elder, principal, Hardy Elementary School in Chattanooga, Tenn.
*Phyllis Lockett, president and CEO, the Renaissance Schools Fund in Chicago
*Ronald Peiffer, deputy state superintendent for Maryland

Thompson and Barnes are still on board, but the commission also has some new members. The new ones include:

*Danika Lacroix, principal, Young Scholars’ Academy for Discovery and Exploration, Brooklyn, N.Y.
*Michael Lomax, president and CEO, United Negro College Fund
*Paul Pastorek, state superintendent of education for Louisiana
*Greg Richmond, president and CEO, National Association of Charter School Authorizers
*Andres Alonso, superintendent, Baltimore City Public Schools
*F. Philip Handy, CEO of Strategic Industries, and former chairman of the Florida State Board of Education
*Delia Pompa, vice president for education, National Council of La Raza
*Jane Hannaway, director, Education Policy Center at the Urban Institute
*Mike Johnston, state senator and former principal in Colorado
*Tasia Providence, master educator, District of Columbia Public Schools
*Eduardo Cancino, superintendent, Hidalgo Independent School District in Texas
*Dan Schab, mathematics teacher and former Michigan teacher of the year, Williamston High School in Michigan
*Laysha Ward, president of community relations, Target Corp., and president, Target Foundation

Returning members include:

*Dr. Edward Sontag, chief management official, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
*Judith Heumann, director, Department of Disability Services, District of Columbia
*J. Michael Ortiz, president, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, Calif.
*Andrea Messina, member, Charlotte County School Board, Florida

Posted by Alyson Klein at 11:51 AM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Check out the following:

In answering a question during yesterday's edweek.org stimulus webinar, the U.S. Department of Education's Race to the Top director Joanne Weiss said officials will be posting an open letter seeking Race to the Top peer reviewers within days.

Among EdWeek blog highlights, Stephen Sawchuk foreshadows the AFT's official comments to the Education Department on Race to the Top, Mary Ann Zehr shows that the White House is trying to pay attention to Latino education issues, and Lesli Maxwell and Dakarai Aarons launch their new District Dossier blog, while Christina Samuels sunsets On Special Education for awhile as she embarks on a journalism fellowship.

Over at The American Prospect, Dana Goldstein takes note of the strong ties between Education Secretary Arne Duncan & Crew and the Gates Foundation.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 2:45 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

If the competition for a slice of the $4.35 billion Race to the Top Fund were a K-12 class, Colorado would be the kid sitting right up front, wearing gigantic glasses, furiously taking notes, and leaping up to answer every single one of the teacher's questions.

The latest effort? A petition, sent to folks in Colorado, urging them to endorse the state's bid.

Here's the crux of their argument, as outlined by Lt. Gov. Barbara O'Brien, who's spearheading the state's effort:

We have enacted some of the nation's most robust data-measurement policies so that students and teachers can determine what works -- and what doesn't. We fulfilled our promise to get young children off to a smart start by expanding high-quality preschool programs and full-day kindergarten. We have implemented the Colorado Achievement Plan For Kids -- a complete 21st century review and alignment of what we teach and how we assess student knowledge from preschool to graduate school. And we have initiated Colorado ASCENT, a groundbreaking statewide fifth-year program that allows students to earn a high school and associates degree simultaneously. These are just a handful of the future-oriented education reforms we have brought to Colorado. Imagine how much more our schools, teachers, and students can accomplish with additional federal funding.

Of course, the application process hasn't even been finalized. And Colorado, like every other state, hasn't been specific yet about what it would do with the money. The email says that the petition is being financed by the re-election campaign of Gov. Bill Ritter, a Democrat.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 12:01 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

If you live in California, you may have a front row seat for the most tense showdown in education policy this fall.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, is calling a special session to make sure the state can get a slice of the $4.35 billion Race to the Top grant money.

As I'm sure you'll recall, California, New York, and Wisconsin were basically eliminated from the competition at the starting gate because they have laws that prohibit linking student and teacher test score data.

Now it looks like Schwarzenegger is ready to scrap the law so that his state can get much needed funds. By early October, he wants to see legislation that would:

*Link student achievement and teacher performance data

*Repeal California’s charter school cap – which his statement calls "an unnecessary barrier to innovation"

*Expand public school choice

*Step up turnaround efforts at the 5 percent of schools in the state that consistently fail to meet benchmarks

*Give extra pay to "teachers who are consistently doing the toughest jobs. Alternative pay schedules highlight effective teaching practices and create incentives to improve our education system."(Hard to say whether that means merit pay or extra money for working with the neediest populations or in hard-to-staff subjects.)

*Change how the state uses data to measure student, teacher, and school performance. (The specifics on that should be interesting.)

Schwarzenegger may face an uphill battle. The California Teachers Association has been staunchly in favor of the law, because it doesn't want to see student test-score data used as a factor in teacher evaluations. And it'll be interesting to see the union's reaction to some of the other proposals, such as alternative pay and lifting the cap on charters.

From Schwarzenegger's statement, it looks like the political positioning has already begun. He's using the Obama administration for political cover. That might help give his proposals a boost with the Democratically controlled legislature and with voters in one of the bluest states in the country.

Here's a snippet from his statement:

I stand with President Obama and Secretary Duncan in pushing these education reforms not only to ensure California is eligible and competes for billions in Recovery education dollars, but because I believe they will help provide a better education for California’s children. California and its education system have felt the effects of the economic downturn and with every child in every classroom depending on us – I call on the legislature to ensure California leads the Race to the Top.

I'm sure Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, who has been bemoaning the state's data "firewall" for months, and Rep. George Miller, the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, a California lawmaker who has been very disparaging of his home state's law, are high-fiving as we speak.

UPDATE: Miller put out a statement calling the move an "important step forward to push for real reform for every child in California and, if done correctly, to provide more transparency that will end the educational inequities and improve classrooms all across the state."

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:43 PM | Permalink | 9 Comments | Recommend

Attention nonprofits and school districts: Dust off those bold ideas for "expanding islands of excellence."
In prepared remarks for a speech today in Washington, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan outlined some specifics on just how that $650 million in "innovation" money made available under the stimulus will be doled out.

The first notice on the grants will be published in the fall, and the initial round of funding will start going out in early 2010. Successful applicants will have a track record of improving student achievement, graduation rates, and student matriculation.

They'll be proposing ideas that can be scaled up and sustained, which means they'll have to have some other source of private or public dollars. Grants can go to districts and nonprofits, including colleges, turnaround specialists, charter schools, companies, and others.

And grants for "proven programs" will likely be bigger than those for "promising but untested" programs, Duncan said in prepared remarks. There will be three categories of grants:

*Pure Innovation grants of up to about $5 million to try out interesting ideas.

*Strategic Investment grants of up to around $30 million for programs that need more research or capacity to scale up.

*Grow What Works grant, which can be as big as $50 million for programs that have already proven themselves and ready to grow and expand.

Since the fund itself is just $650 million, I'm betting there aren't going to be too many programs or districts that are going to get a grant from those last two categories. I'm guessing there aren't going to be 13 maximum Grow What Works grants and nothing else.

But it seems there are already some "teacher's pet" programs that could make a serious play for those last two categories. In his speech, Duncan signaled out the Teaching Fellows program and said Mastery Charters, Green Dot, and Academy for Urban School Leadership are doing a good job spearheading turnarounds of failing schools.

And he devoted a pretty sizable portion of his speech to praising Wendy Kopp, then a Princeton undergraduate, for starting Teach for America.

Michele will have more later, so check Edweek.org early and often.

Credit: Christopher Powers/Education Week

Posted by Alyson Klein at 10:54 AM | Permalink | 3 Comments | Recommend

Hungry for more details on the most-watched slice of the stimulus? You're in luck. Edweek.org is holding a webinar tomorrow at 2 p.m. on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and, in particular, the $4.35 billion Race to the Top Fund grant program.

Guests will include Joanne Weiss, Race to the Top director at the U.S. Department of Education, and Susan A. Gendron, Maine’s commissioner of education and board president of the Council of Chief State School Officers. Politics K-12's own Michele McNeil will be moderating.

You can preregister and watch it live. And if you miss it, the webinar will be available on demand.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 12:23 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

by guest blogger Lesli A. Maxwell

She's been on the cover of Time. She's been the subject of an ongoing PBS series on leadership. She's been hailed as a visionary leader on the editorial pages of The Washington Post and invited everywhere to talk about her plans for dramatic change in Washington's public schools. So it was probably just a matter of time until Michelle Rhee, the chancellor of the District of Columbia public schools, caught the attention of Oprah, who has just published her first-ever "Power List."

Rhee, who has now been at the helm of the D.C. schools for two years, is called a "remarkable visionary" in the O magazine Power List and is described as one of Washington's most controversial but effective leaders. The write-up on Rhee duly notes the achievement gains that have happened on her watch, pointing out that "within her first year, the number of schools with proficiency rates below 20 percent dropped by almost half." Of course, it's debatable how much credit she ought to get for that first year of gains.

Now that Rhee has reached the pop culture pinnacle--Oprah is, after all, a king, err, queenmaker--will she finally be able to cut a deal with the Washington Teachers' Union on a contract that she has pledged could be revolutionary?

Posted by at 12:45 PM | Permalink | 5 Comments | Recommend

It goes without saying that U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who spent his educational career in big-city settings, is not as attuned to the needs of rural districts as the needs of urban ones.

Duncan appeared at a town hall meeting with Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack (the former Democratic governor of Iowa), in the small town of Hamlet, N.C., which is near the South Carolina border, a good 90 minutes from the nearest big city of Charlotte, and two hours from Raleigh. (And I can say from my experience yesterday that there's also little on the drive between Raleigh and Hamlet, except for an almost ghost-of-a-racetrack in Rockingham where NASCAR drivers once raced.)

When someone at the forum asked about housing issues facing rural educators, Duncan said he was talking to the Housing and Urban Development agency about what can be done. To which Vilsack amusingly chided his peer that HUD is for urban housing, and that his ag department could actually be a resource for rural housing issues. And the ag secretary also talked about how the promise of broadband Internet access in rural areas can make people feel more connected.

Asked about the challenge in finding good principals for rural schools, Duncan replied that the issue of recruiting and retaining good leaders is not "unique to rural communities."

But certainly the context is different. School leaders I spoke with from Richmond County Schools, in Hamlet, talked about the difficulty in getting young promising leaders to move to, and stay in, such rural, out-the-way places. (There isn't even a movie theater in Hamlet, for example.)

And another hot-button education reform issue that Duncan has championed—charter schools—also wouldn't likely flourish, either, in somewhat remote places where there isn't a big concentration of students, rural educators say. (No one asked about charter schools during yesterday's town hall; however, one man did ask about vouchers—to which Duncan talked up charter schools instead.)

I'm told that Duncan's staff is trying to figure out how to ensure that the rural perspective factors into their policymaking. What's still unclear is whether contextual factors, such as the rural or urban character of a state, will factor into that all-important $4.35 billion Race to the Top competition.

(Photo: Sen. Richard Burr, left, R-NC, U.S. Agricultural Secretary Tom Vilsack, third from left, and Congressman Larry Kissell, right, 8th District NC, listen to U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan speak on Aug. 17, during a rural community forum held on the campus of Richmond Community College in Hamlet, N.C.)

Posted by Michele McNeil at 11:00 AM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

For states grappling with the complex and burdensome administrative and reporting requirements that go along with the federal stimulus package, help is one the way.

Proposed rules published to be published in the Federal Register on Monday would allow states to set aside a small portion of their stimulus funding from special education and Title I for administering those two programs. The percentages states are allowed to keep range from .1 percent to .5 percent, but amount to at least $200,000 for even the smallest states, and up to $1.5 million for the biggest.

States have been griping about the need for some more administrative resources for months. But districts may be less enthusiastic about the change, since they say they need all the stimulus cash they can get. (Read all about it in this story).

Find out how much your state gets in the chart at the end of this press release.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:58 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

If you were in Minnesota for the Republican convention last year or in D.C, during the inauguration you may have been lucky enough to catch the Al and Newt Education Equality Project Show.

In case you missed it, it basically involves Rev. Al Sharpton and former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich high-fiving and fist-bumping and telling everyone about how their similarities on education policy transcend their differences on... just about everything else. They're pro-charter, pro-merit pay, pro-accountability, and they play well with all sorts of audiences.

At the convention, a room full of conservative Republican delegates gave Sharpton a standing ovation, while, during the inauguration festivities, a crowd at an inner-city high school in majority black and Democratic D.C. took cell phone pictures of Gingrich (although he kinda got upstaged by another Republican, Sen. John McCain of Arizona).

Well, now U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is hopping on the tour.

Duncan, Sharpton, and Gingrich will visit Philadelphia in September and Baltimore, and New Orleans in November. Those cities were chosen in part because of their efforts on education reforms that the administration would like to see duplicated elsewhere. (For example, New Orleans has been a welcoming place for charters.) The tour may also include a rural site, to be finalized later.

Probably not surprisingly, the superintendents in all three cities have joined up with the Education Equality Project, which was founded by Sharpton and NYC schools Chancellor Joel Klein.

As you probably remember, the group released a "No Excuses" blueprint for education redesign during the presidential campaign that was often compared to another education manifesto, put out by the Bolder, Broader Coalition.

The two documents, which sucked up a lot of the K-12 oxygen during the campaign, were said to epitomize the differences within the Democratic party on education. McCain signed onto the Education Equality Project's manifesto, while President Barack Obama said he agreed with both, but signed neither.

Later, Duncan was seen as a compromise choice for secretary, in part because he signed both documents. But then, Duncan showed up at the Equality Project's inauguration event. And, since he became secretary, some Bolder, Broader folks say he's been trending towards that line of thinking.

So this tour brings up a bunch of questions: Does it mean Duncan is officially on the EEP's team? Or does he still see these agendas as complementary (as he told me when he first took office)? And also, should there be some sort of T-shirt for the Arne, Newt, and Al Tour?

Posted by Alyson Klein at 11:01 PM | Permalink | 4 Comments | Recommend

So this week, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, a former big city superintendent, is headed up to Alaska as part of a cabinet-level push to connect with rural states.

The tour has been going on all summer, but the Last Frontier is Duncan's first stop.

The trip is part of a larger effort to reach out to rural America, but the education emphasis may be coming just in time to soothe some friction between rural schools and the administration.

For instance, on a call last week, one rural official said he thought the competitive grant programs created under the economic stimulus program penalized rural districts, which are unlikely to be able to find private partners to provide the "matching" funds that could be required under the Innovation grant program, which is meant to reward districts. (Department officials encouraged him to apply and said they would work with rural districts to help them figure out how to meet the criteria, which haven't been released yet).

And this commentary, published last month in Rural Policy Matters, the magazine of the Rural School and Community Trust, ponders whether Duncan and other cabinet officials on the tour are actually just trying to help Democratic incumbents who are likely to face tough re-election battles (like Rep. Larry Kissell of North Carolina, a former high school social studies teacher who ran on an anti-NCLB platform).

The stop in Kissell's district, which will focus on education, could be beneficial "only if the Secretary will listen rather that preach two of his favorite turnaround solutions: charter schools and paying teachers according to the test scores of their students," the commentary
suggests.

And it continues:

If participants in the Rural Tour listen well during the rural education stop in Hamlet, North Carolina they will hear that rural poverty can’t be overcome by labeling schools failures, that schools can’t hang on to poorly paid teachers by bullying them to improve test scores, and that fiscally starved traditional public schools can’t get better by sending their funds to charters.

That sounds like a direct rebuttal of Duncan's EdWeek commentary, in which he wrote that, "Rural schools shouldn’t let their unique challenges become excuses for keeping the status quo." That may have rankled some folks.

Andy Rotherham, of Eduwonk fame, predicted a few months ago that the rural/urban divide could pop up in education policy debates.

What do you think? Major tensions with the rural community, or just the usual back-and-forth between the feds and the states? And, if there is an issue here, can the tour make a difference?

Posted by Alyson Klein at 5:27 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

In the $4.35 billion Race to the Top Fund competition, 15 states are getting an important, early boost courtesy of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The foundation has hand-picked these states to receive up to $250,000 each to hire consultants to help them fill out their applications. (McKinsey & Co. and The Bridgespan Group are two examples of consulting firms states are considering.)

The 15 states are: Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas.

These states represent either those in which Gates is already invested—or that the foundation thinks are on the right path to reform. Word about Gates' involvement in Race to the Top has been simmering for weeks now—and it's not secret to states getting the money—but the Foundation still isn't saying anything official.

Given how complex and lengthy the Race to the Top application process is, and how many different criteria states need to address, many will likely struggle to get everything done in time for Phase 1. (Applications will be due before the end of the year.) So having some high-powered consultants to help could make a big difference.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:42 PM | Permalink | 5 Comments | Recommend

In a short video narrated by my colleague and Politics K-12 guest blogger Dakarai Aarons, Detroit Federation of Teachers President Keith Johnson raises the idea of a "lockbox" on education and financial reform.

He was referring to the big changes going on in Detroit Public Schools, as chronicled by Dakarai in this must-read story. Johnson said that whatever education and budgetary reform initiatives that the district's state-appointed emergency financial manager helps implement need to be carried through by his successors. Or, as he described in the video embedded below, these reforms need to be "lockboxed."

In a much different sense, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is asking states and other school districts to embark on transformative change, too. And he's using the Race to the Top program as his instrument to leverage this change. But soon, we're going to start seeing new education chiefs, governors, and state board of education members take the helm. They may be from different political parties -- and they may, or may not, have had a role in deciding how to use a Race to the Top grant or other stimulus money for education reform.

Can, or should, stimulus reforms be lockboxed?

Decline and Fall from Education Week on Vimeo.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 1:50 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

States that want a piece of the $4.35 billion Race to the Top Fund will have to roll up their sleeves and put in some manpower.

According to the U.S. Department of Education's criteria, it's going to take states a total of 642 hours to complete the applications.

That means that it would take two staff members, working full-time on just the Race to the Top criteria and nothing else, about two months.

The time requirements, advocates say, might be particularly tough on rural states that just don't have a lot of extra capacity. (Of course, some lucky states—such as Kentucky—seem to be getting a hand from the Gates Foundation with filling out their applications).

The time crunch could have an even bigger impact on districts that have to provide states with much of the information, advocates say. Again, that might be particularly tricky for rural districts that don't have a lot of personnel to devote to the applications.

The department's draft regulations ask states and other stakeholders to comment on the paperwork burden, so we'll see if that's a recurring theme once the comments start rolling in.

My co-blogger, Michele, is working on a story about this issue of capacity, and is looking for more perspectives. So, what do you think? Are there too many hoops to jump through? Or is this a good way to set a high bar early on the process, in that if you want a Race to the Top grant, you're really going to have to log some time?

Posted by Alyson Klein at 10:36 AM | Permalink | 5 Comments | Recommend

Former U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings has taken on a new gig, as the executive vice-president of the National Chamber Foundation, a non-profit arm of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The Chamber has been really active on education issues for a long time, and its views tend to dovetail pretty well with Spellings'; the group has been very supportive of accountability through testing, for instance.

Apparently, Spellings started serving as a senior adviser to the Chamber back in April, even as she was working as the president and CEO of Margaret Spellings and Company, a public policy consulting firm.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 9:31 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

One important criteria on which states would be judged in the Race to the Top competition is the extent to which they get support for their education reform proposals from key stakeholders.

In the proposed criteria, the U.S. Department of Education counts among stakeholders: charter school authorizers, teachers' unions, foundations, school districts, and community groups. Though these groups wouldn't have veto power, their support will be judged as part of a state's application. But to even submit an application, a governor must get a sign-off from the state's education chief and the president of the state's board of education, according to the department's draft of the Race to the Top guidelines.

The department seems to have left off a key constituency whose support is required in any significant education reform push: state legislators.

You know, those are the guys and gals who make laws and pass budgets (including K-12 appropriations). But you'd be hard-pressed to find the words "legislator" or "legislature" (when pertaining to a state) in a search of the dozens of pages of proposed criteria.

Much of the education reform that Education Secretary Arne Duncan and Crew envision can't happen without the state legislature, which determines how much money will go to public schools and sets policy and law on everything from whether there should be a cap on charter schools in the state to what kind of authority a state education department has to turn around failing schools. Sometimes, the most powerful people in education reform in a state are the chairs of the House or Senate education committees.

What's more, state legislators will likely play a crucial role after a state wins Race to the Top funding. While half of the award money will go to school districts based on the Title I formula, the remaining dollars will be spent according to the state's Race to the Top plan. But most, if not all, state constitutions give the power of appropriations to state legislatures (with some exceptions, like in emergencies). So what if a governor pitches a plan to the department to spend the money on a merit-pay plan for teachers, wins the award based on this plan, but the legislature won't play along?

Even a token nod to this group of people would seem to be advisable. Perhaps when the department comes out with its final criteria, adding state legislators to the list of "key stakeholders" in the criteria would be a first step.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 1:32 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

Jim Shelton, the Education Department's assistant deputy secretary for innovation and improvement, who will be spearheading the process for doling out $650 million in Investing in Innovation grants to be made available under the economic-stimulus package, gave state and local officials a clearer picture of what he's looking for on a conference call today.

The official word on the Innovation grants isn't available yet. But Shelton, in a call with other top Education Department officials, said the department would be looking at student graduation, student matriculation, and student achievement in doling out the grants.

And he said the department also would be weighing the sustainability of each project, the likelihood of the project being continued after the grant has dissipated, and the scalability of the project. It appears that he wants models with staying power that can be replicated elsewhere.

He said the grants would follow a similar time line to the Race to the Top Fund, with two closing dates: one in the winter and one in the spring.That sounded to me like there will be two rounds of funding.

Shelton said that "applicants must also include private partnerships that will produce matching funds." That sounded to me like districts should have the ability to find some matching funds, but it was tough to tell for sure from Shelton's wording. It's possible that the department may just want districts to specify whether they'll be able to get matching funds or not.

Still, Shelton's statement raised the eyebrows of one rural official, who pointed out on the call that it's going to be a lot tougher for rural schools to get local matching funds. Shelton said that the department is aware of the issue and is trying to figure out a way to help rural districts deal with it.

Joanne Weiss, who is overseeing the $4.35 billion Race to the Top fund, which is meant to reward states that are making progress on school improvement, teacher distribution and in other areas, stressed that states should get buy-in from districts on their plan. She suggested that states enter into a "memorandum of understanding" with local districts.

One official asked whether states could target specific high-need districts in their applications. Weiss said that was a great point and suggested the questioner put it in writing so the department could respond to it through official channels.

One listener from California asked whether districts would be eligible for innovation money even if the state isn't eligible or doesn't get a grant. (I guess this official had heard something about that fire wall issue involving the use of data.) The answer was an emphatic, "Yes."

Another official asked if states could work on their applications in groups, even though they have to apply individually. The department folks said that would be fine.

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan let Shelton and Weiss do most of the talking. But he kicked off the call with a warning about the H1N1 flu virus. He said that some schools may need to close if the virus kicks back up in the fall. The U.S. Department will be issuing guidance on the flu this Friday, he said.

And Duncan stressed that schools should expand online learning and correspondence course options so that kids don't miss out on learning, even if a school is closed because of the flu.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 5:00 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Over at This Week in Education, Alexander Russo wonders whether ex-Chicago Public Schools chief and now Education Secretary Arne Duncan has also been subpoenaed by federal officials in an investigation over allegations that well-connected parents called in favors to get their kids into elite public schools. (The Chicago Board of Education President has disclosed he has received a subpoena, the Chicago Sun-Times reports.)

Good question. So I asked.

John White, the press secretary for Duncan and the U.S. Department of Education, told me in an email today: "We have not been contacted."

Posted by Michele McNeil at 2:58 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

from guest blogger Lesli A. Maxwell

The drama over whether California is disqualified from competing for a share of the $4.35 billion Race to the Top Fund may end up before the singular Jerry Brown, the state's attorney general and a candidate for governor in 2010. Mr. Brown (a former two-term governor, first elected in 1974) has apparently been tasked with parsing a section of the state education code that the Obama Administration has said prohibits the use of student achievement data to appraise the effectiveness of teachers.

Yesterday, at a Washington gathering of education bigwigs involved with the Strategic Management of Human Capital project, there was lots of talk about the Race to the Top competition and the prospect that California, with an eye-popping 7 million public school students, would be shut out of getting any of that money because of its so called data "fire wall." Linking student data and teacher evaluations is proposed to be a non-negotiable requirement for states to be eligible for the money.

Last week, California's schools chief Jack O'Connell came out publicly to say that state law doesn't keep local school districts from using student data in that very way and pointed to Long Beach Unified as an example, albeit a rare one.

So whose interpretation is right and how do we know that the former Gov. Moonbeam must weigh in on this matter?

Yvonne Chan, the principal at Vaughn Next Century Learning Center in Los Angeles, and a member of California's state board of education, took advantage of a moment of face-to-face access to Education Secretary Arne Duncan at the SMHC meeting to inquire. Ms. Chan told us that Sec. Duncan said that "it's up to Jerry Brown" to interpret what the law really allows for. That was news to her, so she headed off to make some calls back home to share that tidbit.

We got no such candor from the secretary when we asked about the California situation. "They can put their best foot forward and apply," is all he told us before adding, "just use my quotes from before on California." Thanks, Mr. Secretary.

In any case, putting the matter in Jerry Brown's hands should prove interesting. He is the top legal counsel to state officers, state agencies, boards and commissions, so it certainly seems within his job description to review this matter. And the proposed Race to the Top rules require that attorney generals sign off on any state statutes presented as evidence of eligibility. But the politics could get dicey for Brown. As a Democratic candidate for governor next year, he may be reluctant to tick off the powerful 340,000-member California Teachers Association, which has been steadfastly opposed to linking student achievement data to teacher evaluations. On the other hand, as mayor of Oakland, he founded two charter schools, one of them military-themed, and otherwise showed an independent streak when it came to education issues.

On a totally unrelated but irresistible Jerry Brown side note...check out his gubernatorial portrait, the coolest of the lot of them hanging around the Capitol building in Sacramento.

Posted by at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Posted by Alyson Klein at 2:31 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

...doesn't mean states and school districts will spend their money faster.

The U.S. Department of Education announced today that it is releasing nearly $11.4 billion in Title I, special education, and vocational rehabilitation funding a month early to "help save jobs and drive reform," according to a press release. Rather than getting these stimulus funds at the end of September, states and school districts will have access to the money around Sept. 1.

But as we've written before, states have been slow to draw down their allocations. As of July 24, states had only drawn down about 22 percent of their available stimulus funds. So don't think this will necessarily unleash a flood of cash into states.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:56 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend