September 2009 Archives

Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colorado, a former Denver schools chief, has taken the slot on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee made vacant by the death of Sen. Edward M. Kennnedy, D-Mass.

Bennet's move has got to be good news for Democrats who support policies such as alternative pay and charter schools (including these folks). They have high hopes that Bennet, with his real-world, on-the-ground experience, could help fill the void on education issues in the Senate created by Kennedy's passing. Bennet, who seems particularly interested in teacher quality, is said to be one of the Obama administration's Senate allies on K-12 policy.

Bennet, however, is likely to face a tough primary challenge from former Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff. Bennet has already garnered the endorsement of President Barack Obama. Still, if he makes it through the primary, he may also have an uphill general election battle. Republican contenders include former Lt. Gov. Jane Norton.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 12:38 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

States are still waiting for the final rules for the $4 billion Race to the Top grant program, which is meant to reward states for helping to close the achievement gap.

In the meantime, the U.S. House of Representatives has taken the concept (big, highly coveted pot of competitive money that the feds can use to prod states to adopt certain policies) and gone all P-16 with it.

Using some of the $87 billion in projected savings that would be freed up by a major overhaul to the student loan program, the House is looking to create three new Race-to-the-Top-like programs, one for state prekindergarten programs, one for community colleges, and another to encourage colleges to boost their retention and graduation rates.

The pre-K money, called the Early Learning Challenge grants, would amount to $8 billion over eight years and would encourage states to improve their early learning standards, provide comprehensive professional development, and assess students' readiness for success in school, among other outcomes.There would also be $10 million for grants to challenge community colleges to improve programs like transfer agreements, dual enrollment, and remediation. And there would be another $3 billion for the College Access and Completion Fund, which is intended to help colleges improve their graduation rates.

Of course, it remains to be seen whether these programs will make it into the final version of the student loan bill. (The Senate has yet to introduce its version.) And the U.S. Department of Education's implementation of these programs would determine just how Race-to-the-Top-like they end up being.

But I think these programs, which are largely based on administration proposals, give us an indication of the direction the administration and Congress are headed when it comes to education funding. Specifically, they seem to be moving away from formula grants and into competitive ones.

There was some evidence of this in the president's fiscal 2010 budget, which sought to replace a state formula grant program for school safety with more funding for a national, competitive program. It also would have shifted money to Title I School Improvement grants (which can be competitive within districts) from Title I grants to districts (a formula program that got big bucks under the stimulus).

Do you think it's good, bad, or neutral that the Obama administration and some Democrats in Congress seems to favor competitive grant programs over formula ones?

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:23 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

Today at 2 p.m. EDT, I'll be moderating an online chat on the latest common standards movement, which is now being undertaken by 48 states. And we need your questions!

My guests are Dane Linn, the education division director of the National Governors Association's Center for Best Practices, and Alan Farstrup, the former executive director of the International Reading Association. Linn's group is helping spearhead this latest effort, alongside the Council of Chief State School Officers. Farstrup has been-there done-that, as he was active in similar efforts in the 1990s.

If you can't join us for the live chat, submit a question now. Or check back later for an archive of the chat.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 11:56 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

In another indication that no one is immune from this economic downturn, a new study reveals that, for the first time ever, the gambling industry is down on its luck.

And this is yet another blow for state budgets.

A new report from the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government reveals that gambling revenue in fiscal 2009 (which ended June 30) is down 2.8 percent from fiscal 2008.

This poses both a direct, and an indirect, problem for states and for K-12 education.

Directly, many states use gambling to pay a small part of the tab for K-12 education. Think of those "education" lotteries out there (in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee, to name a few). Overall, lottery revenue is down 2.6 percent. Casino revenue, which helps some states fund schools, is down 8.5 percent.

Indirectly, any slump in revenue from any source further throws state budgets out of whack, so states that have the heaviest reliance on gambling revenue could suffer the most. It's no surprise that Nevada, which gets 13.6 percent of its state revenue from gambling, is tops in reliance on gambling revenue. Second, though, is West Virginia, which gets 9.2 percent of its revenue from gambling.

So this might be a warning sign out there for governors and legislators who look to gambling to help patch budgets. Case in point is Ohio, where state officials were dealt a setback from the State Supreme Court, which ruled that a proposal to put slots in racetracks (which would help fund K-12 budgets) must be subject to a public referendum.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 1:14 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

More than 200 advocates from a wide range of groups packed the U.S. Department of Education today to hear Secretary of Education Arne Duncan outline his priorities for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act -- better known over the last eight years as the No Child Left Behind Act.

Duncan didn't say anything he hasn't said before, but he used the high-profile forum to stress some priorities, including extended learning time, using data to track student and teacher effectiveness, and systems to better measure individual student progress. (That's code for growth models, which are expected to be a given in this reauthorization.)

Two assistant secretaries - Carmel Martin and Thelma Melendez - also outlined the department's extensive process for getting feedback from stakeholders, including education associations, the business community, practitioners and parents, to help inform the development of the department's legislative draft. Apparently, there will be five more meetings this fall in Washington, including two next month, two in November and one in December. And the department is seeking written comments at esea.comments@ed.gov.

After the kick-off, the department got right to the feedback, hearing from about two dozen different advocates, including school superintendents, representatives of community organizations, the business community, and unions, as well as proponents of arts education and public school facilities.

No major surprises from those comments, though they were a good sampling of the broad range of opinions the department is likely to hear as it gets going on what is sure to be a pretty tricky reauthorization.

Charles Weis, a superintendent from California said he was worried that the assessments used in the current NCLB law don't do a good enough job of measuring skills like critical thinking - a perennial, but important, criticism of NCLB. And lots of folks brought up the importance of making sure that schools don't focus too heavily on math and reading - the subjects students are tested in annually - to the exclusion of social studies, arts, and other subjects. Others voiced support for making prekindergarten a key part of reauthorization. And community-based organizations made it clear that they want their voices to be heard along with national groups.

Reginald Felton, the director of federal relations at the National School Boards Association, asked the $64 question: When does the department actually expect to get its draft together? He said a new law is urgent because school districts around the country are currently subject to the sanctions in the original law, which Felton described as "costly and severe."

Martin, who worked on the 2002 authorization of NCLB as a top staffer on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, said that the department doesn't have a specific time line yet for releasing a draft, but is hoping to move quickly. Melendez suggested that districts look into some of the waivers the department has proposed.

Much more on the speech and the comments to come, so keep checking back at edweek.org.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 2:02 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

It sounds as if the Department of Education is ready to get rolling on reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

On Thursday, Secretary Arne Duncan will do the "inside the Beltway" version of his listening and learning tour. Around 200 education advocates, representing nearly all the major education organizations, will be on hand. The meeting is just the first in a series seeking input from Washington-based advocates, think tanks, and other interested parties.

And, according to an e-mail circulated by the department Wednesday afternoon, the groups have been told to start working on their suggestions for reauthorization:

Two of our assistant secretaries, Carmel Martin of the policy office, and Thelma Melendez of the elementary and secondary office, will give an overview of next steps in the ESEA reauthorization process and outline a series of opportunities this fall at which your organizations will be able to offer input to the department. A transcript and video of Thursday's forum should be on ED.gov early next week. We at the department hope that your organizations and members agree that we cannot wait to take up the essential task of reauthorizing ESEA -- together. We look forward to continued collaboration with you.

Duncan will address many of the oft-repeated concerns about the federal law in its No Child Left Behind incarnation, including its heavy reliance on standardized testing to determine student progress. He notes that the department will provide resources through the Race to the Top program to help states develop better assessments, since the current tests don't always provide the best picture of student achievement.

And, according to his prepared remarks, he'll repeat his assertion that "we should be tight on the goals -- with clear standards set by states that truly prepare young people for college and careers -- but loose on the means for meeting those goals."

Duncan won't give any of his own specific proposals for reauthorization, but he will stress that the new version of the ESEA should treat teachers as the professionals they are, reward excellence, and tie accountability to student growth.

That seems to be the direction in which implementation of NCLB was headed anyway, given the Race to the Top program, the Obama administration's emphasis on merit pay, and even some of the actions of the Bush administration, such as opening the growth-model pilot project to all states.

As a reporter, I have to give the department a tip of the hat for making this meeting public and open to the press. Of course, I have no idea what is going on behind closed doors; this could just be the show-and-tell version. But still, it seems to be a step toward the department's promised transparency.

You can check out Duncan's full prepared remarks here. UPDATE: Read the final, edited version of his prepared remarks here.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 5:04 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Buried deep within the latest GAO report on states' use of economic-stimulus funds is some interesting insight into how the U.S. Department of Education is trying to minimize the potential for fraud and misuse of money.

The first step, apparently, is to identify "high risk" states and give them intensive technical assistance to help them implement good practices in using stimulus funds. According to the report (advance to page 61 of the PDF document), states were selected because of things "such as the number of monitoring or audit findings in the state and the level of turnover in education leadership within the state."

The four states that got the stimulus equivalent of their names written on the chalkboard are: California, Illinois, Michigan, and Texas. The District of Columbia and Puerto Rico also made the list.

The department will provide these states and territories with both financial and programmatic expertise, which could include on-site visits, according to the report by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.

These six potential troublemakers have been identified as posing risks to a variety of programs, meaning the Education Department is concerned about their use of all stimulus aid, from State Fiscal Stabilization Fund money to smaller grant programs.

The department has also identified an additional 12 states as "high risk" when it comes to use of Title I funds—based on previous monitoring findings, state coordinator turnover, and size of the Title I allocation. They are: Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, and Oklahoma.

It's apparently a good thing that the Education Department is closely monitoring Illinois and California, because GAO already found cash-management problems with those two states. (Fast forward to page 65 of the PDF document.) Illinois, for example, is apparently sending State Fiscal Stabilization Fund money to local school districts before they're prepared to spend the funds, which is a red flag for auditors.

And some school districts in California have large pots of stimulus funds just sitting around after the state drew down 80 percent of its Title I funds and immediately sent the money to districts, apparently before they were ready to spend it. (The Education Department's inspector general raised red flags about this general issue in California in March.) This time, GAO auditors surveyed 10 districts in California that had received the largest amounts of Title I funds and found that seven had not spent any of these funds and that all 10 reported large cash balances--ranging from $4.5 million to about $135 million.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 1:07 PM | Permalink | 3 Comments | Recommend

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which handpicked 15 states for $250,000 each in funding to help them prepare their Race to the Top Fund applications, is going to offer assistance to the remaining 35 states—if they meet eight education reform criteria.

That's according to a memo Vicki Phillips, the foundation's director of education, college ready, sent yesterday to the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers.

But before states can get an unspecified amount of money, they must meet eight criteria (outlined in Phillips' memo) that mirror the criteria by which the U.S. Department of Education has proposed judging applications for $4 billion in aid under the education-reform competition.

The Gates Foundation criteria includes whether states have signed onto the NGA-CCSSO common standards effort, whether they have alternative routes to teacher certification, and whether they have no firewall barring the use of student achievement data in teacher evaluations.

Chris Williams, a spokesman for the foundation, said he couldn't say how much money states might receive, either individually or collectively. He also wouldn't elaborate on why the Gates Foundation decided to open up its resources to the rest of the country.

However, Phillips' email gives a clue, indicating that whatever the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers said to foundation officials in response to the Chosen 15 was effective. In her email, Phillips indicates the change was the result of "much discussion and careful consideration of your feedback."

UPDATE: Dane Linn, the education division director of the NGA's Center for Best Practices, said that there was concern—especially in this economic downturn—that some states would have an advantage over others. "We are really pleased that Gates will make investments that will put everyone on equal footing," he said this morning. "We've got to create national momentum. We can't have reform in just [a few] states."

The foundation's initial Chosen 15 were: Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas.

After these states were chosen, there was a lot of discussion in the ed policy world that these 15 had an early edge in Race to the Top.

It's clear these states are still foundation favorites. Phillips' email says: "These states...are poised to successfully scale reform efforts that can dramatically improve student achievement. Accordingly, these states will be targets for further foundation investment provided they continue to follow through on these commitments."

UPDATE: I should point out that Gates is going to use the Arabella Legacy Fund to serve as the middleman for this grant. This is a grant management group that Gates has used before for some of its global health initiatives. Arabella staff will be the ones to run what seems to be the official warm-up to the Race to the Top—they will, on behalf of Gates, review the grant proposals from the states, answer questions, make the awards, and execute contracts.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 9:36 AM | Permalink | 4 Comments | Recommend

Remember the compromise Congress came up with on school facilities in order to pass the economic-stimulus package? Proponents decided to ditch the billions in school construction grants to win support from moderate lawmakers for the overall stimulus. Instead, school districts were allowed to use a portion of their State Fiscal Stabilization Fund money (whatever was leftover after backfilling cuts) for school modernization, along with a whole bunch of other options.

Have any of them actually been able to take advantage of that? As we've written before, most of the $39 billion in state stabilization funding went to make up for cuts states had made to K-12 and higher education.

So far, it appears that just three states - Arkansas, Oklahoma, and West Virginia - have been able to use a portion of the governor's share of state stabilization money for school modernization and repair, according to a preliminary analysis by the very knowledgeable folks at the 21st Century School Fund, which advocates for school facilities funding, particularly for districts that serve low-income students.

Of course, not all the state stabilization money has flowed just yet, so there could be more school modernization spending down the road. But my guess is that it will be in states that are in comparatively good financial shape, since others will need the money just to make up for what they've lost.

That leaves the school construction bonding authority in the stimulus. States are just beginning to spend one large piece of that, the $22 billion in school construction bonds. Some advocates are worried that needy school districts won't be able to take advantage of the bonds because they can't even put up the principle.

But Bob Canavan, of Rebuild America's Schools, a coalition that advocates for school facilities, tells me that the bonds are very popular. In fact, out in California, school districts submitted proposals for over $3 billion worth of projects, even though the state has an allocation of just $700 million for the bonds. The Golden State is holding a lottery to decide who gets the funding, which may be more efficient, but doesn't take need into account, some advocates say.

Right now, Congress is trying to get some grant money for school facilities, both in the Senate version of next year's education spending bill and in the "bombshell" student loan bill.

But many GOP lawmakers and some moderate Democrats contend the feds have other school responsibilities to take care of first, such as special education. And they're worried that if Congress starts putting up funding for facilities, school districts and states may stop doing it themselves.

I'm exploring how much the stimulus has helped schools with construction, and I'm looking for some local examples. If you're a superintendent or administrator who has been helped (or wish you had) by the school construction money in the stimulus, please email me or, better yet, post in the comments section. And if you're skeptical of the federal role in school construction, I want to hear from you, too.

UPDATE: The original version of this blog post listed two different states, Wyoming and North Dakota, as having used the governor's share of the state stabilization money for school facilities. But an Education Week analysis and the 21st Century Schools Fund found that it was actually West Virginia and Oklahoma.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 1:02 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Steve Robinson, who was hired by Education Secretary Arne Duncan as a special adviser on math, science and other issues, is moving to the White House—a small but not insignificant shift in job duties.

The education department says he's still working as a special assistant in the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, but will be doing so from the White House's Domestic Policy Council.

"Having Steve over there allows the [department] to maximize coordination" between the education department, the White House, and other agencies, an Education Department spokeswoman said.

Just last week, Robinson, a former high school science teacher who worked for Obama when he was in the U.S. Senate, was a focus of an EdWeek story on Washington fellowships for teachers.

What's interesting about Robinson's shift is that it further signals that STEM is a really big issue for President Obama, but perhaps not as significant for his education secretary. (UPDATE: The department wants to stress that STEM is just as significant for Duncan as it is for Obama, and that Robinson's move is more of a re-location than anything else.)

President Obama has talked about science, technology, engineering and math (the STEM subjects) a lot in major speeches. Today, President Obama spoke at a New York community college to emphasize innovation and technology, according to prepared remarks.

In an August speech on the economy, he said: "Right now, our schools continue to trail many of our competitors, and that's why I've challenged states to dramatically improve achievement by raising standards and modernizing science labs, upgrading curriculum, forming new partnerships to promote math and science, and improving the use of technology in the classroom."

In the many, many, many speeches Obama's education secretary has given, Duncan doesn't often focus on things like modernizing science labs, or improving technology. That's not to say Duncan isn't in favor of these things. (UPDATE: I was neglectful in not highlighting the March speech he gave to the National Science Teachers Association, when he stressed getting great talent into STEM subjects. Or his Aug. 25 remarks to the National Science Board panel.) It's just that he's much more keenly focused on teacher quality, data systems, academic standards, and low-performing schools. And probably rightly so, since Congress identified those areas, or "assurances", as priorities in implementing the $787 billion economic-stimulus act, $100 billion of which is for education.

So in many ways, it seems Robinson is a better fit for the White House than the Education Department.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 2:17 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The National Education Association, which is pouring money and manpower into the effort led by Democrats to overhaul the health care system, is less than thrilled with the new bill released earlier this week by the Senate Finance Committee.

The nation's largest union put out a statement today saying that the proposal "does not meet the guidelines set by President Obama in his speech to Congress last week. The bill fails to provide affordable coverage for the 46 million uninsured through a public option, and will raise costs even more for middle-income workers."

In addition to the affordability issue, NEA is disappointed the bill doesn't include a public option. Under the House measure, a government-run plan would compete with private insurance for the business of folks who don't get insurance through their employer.

Three House committees have also approved a bill, which the union supports. But the Senate Finance Committee's effort is widely viewed as the likely compromise vehicle, so groups like the NEA are watching it especially closely.

Will the union's opposition lead to big changes in the final product? Hard to say, but it may be important for Democratic leaders that groups like the NEA support their bill, particularly if there aren't any GOP takers. Of course, leaders are also working hard to get moderate Democrats on board, who might have a different view from the NEA's.

And the NEA isn't the only education organization that found something to dislike in the Finance Committee legislation. Unlike the House measure, it doesn't appear to include a provision that would expand school-based health centers, disappointing advocates of those programs.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:30 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

So that bombshell student loan bill we've told you about passed the House just a little while ago, by a vote of 253 to 171.

Although the bill's provisions on student loans were attracting most of the attention and controversy, the interesting part for K-12 is the funding set aside for school facilities, or about $4 billion over two years. There's also $1 billion annually for prekindergarten programs doled out to states competitively (seems a little bit like a pre-K version of the $4 billion Race to the Top fund, at least to me).

Plus there's money for community colleges, including for K-12ish activities, such as dual enrollment programs. It's a very P-16ish bill.

The bill's passage today wasn't really in doubt, since Democrats control the House. The interesting part? Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, the brand-new chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, put out a statement just moments after the bill's passage, congratulating the House and saying that he plans to introduce "similar" legislation.

A Senate Democratic aide told me Harkin's bill, which will likely get committee consideration in the coming weeks, will include money for prekindergarten, community colleges, and school facilities. No word though on just how much.

But Republicans over on the Senate side, including deficit hawks like Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, are worried about the House bill's cost. (More on that here). House GOP lawmakers expressed similar concerns during floor debate, but expect those arguments to get even more consideration over on the Senate side.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:42 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

So, remember that listening-and-learning tour that U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan embarked on to get a sense of what Americans think of the No Child Left Behind Act? Well, he took the tour to the airwaves (sort of) earlier this week, holding a national town hall meeting that was televised in many places. Check it out online here.

There wasn't much said at Tuesday's event that was new to me. The criticisms he heard of NCLB were important, but relatively predictable (too much testing, too much focus on the core subjects at the expense of physical education, art, and other interests).

And Duncan's answers were similar to what he's said on those topics before. He wants tighter control from the federal government on what states' goals should be, but would like to consider how there can be more flexibility in how they get students there. (Is that attitude evident in the guidance the department has put out so far, dealing with Race to the Top Fund and other programs? Discuss.)

When it comes to teachers, he thinks student achievement data should be part of the equation in measuring effectiveness, but he also said that it doesn't tell the whole story. Principal observations and peer feedback counts too, he said.

"We need a menu of options," he said.

Duncan took questions from folks in Hillsborough County, Fla., school system, which includes Tampa. The superintendent there, MaryEllen Elia, recommended national standards, to allow for better comparisons across state lines.

"Amen," said Duncan.

Interesting factoid: Duncan did not have a TV in his house growing up. Instead, his parents read to him and his sibilings from classic literature, including the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Huckleberry Finn, and Moby Dick. Makes me wonder if his own children have a television.

Speaking of TV, despite lots of help from the U.S. Department of Education, I had a tough time finding a place to watch live on television. It's not clear that the event was broadcast in Washington, D.C., or in parts of suburban Maryland, for instance, just a few miles from where it was being taped in Shirlington, Va. Although Duncan said the program was being broadcast on 800 stations nationwide, I guess mine wasn't one of them. I suspect that's at the discretion of local providers...there probably wasn't much the department could have done about it.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 6:55 PM | Permalink | 6 Comments | Recommend

South Carolina Superintendent of Education Jim Rex, a Democrat who has squared off against Republican Gov. Mark Sanford over school choice, stimulus funding, and whether the state would participate in the common standards movement, now wants Sanford's job.

In an opinion piece in The State newspaper, he declared his plans to run as a "turnaround governor" in the 2010 election. Sanford, who famously disappeared for days to Argentina over the summer and ended up admitting an extramarital affair, is term-limited. Rex was elected in 2006 in a tight race that ended in a recount.

When I interviewed Rex in April 2008 for a story on single-gender schools—part of his broader push for more school choice options—I sensed in the interview he had higher ambitions.

And that was confirmed that same day when, in his office, I spotted large postcards he was mailing out to South Carolina residents. In bold letters on the front, was a quote: "South Carolinians expect and demand choices in their lives. They shouldn't have to make an exception for public education."

It was signed Jim Rex.

Those campaign-style postcards seemed to be a smart way to start building name recognition throughout the state—a necessary step in any successful bid for governor.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 4:07 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

The House of Representatives is set to consider this legislation as early as tomorrow that would significantly expand the federal direct lending program, in which students borrow right from the U.S. Treasury. And it would effectively end the Federal Family Education Loan Program, which uses subsidized lenders.

That's the controversial part of the legislation, but it's not the part that's most interesting for K-12 education. The bill also includes major new investments in community colleges, which could be used for dual enrollment programs, a brand-new prekindergarten grant program, plus funding for school facilities. It would pay for those new programs by using $87 billion in projected savings from the end of loan subsidies. (There's considerable debate as to whether that's a reliable number.)

The bill's detractors have some notable criticisms of those proposed new programs. (Check out this story, in which Rep. Michael N. Castle, a Republican from Delaware, points out that Congress is financing these new activities without first fully funding special education.) But in the general debate over the legislation, those objections are likely to be more of an afterthought. Most of the attention will be on the lending changes.

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, and others held a pep rally for the bill today. And it will probably pass the House this week.

That vote will put additional pressure on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, which hasn't yet introduced its bill, to get going. (Over at the New America Foundation's Higher Education blog, Stephen Burd has much more on the dynamics in the Senate.

It's not clear that the Senate will go along with the student loan changes, much less the new education programs. We'll see what brand-new chairman Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, decides to do.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:37 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Andy Rotherham, one of the Godfathers of education blogging and a co-founder of Education Sector, is giving up his day job this spring.

He'll be leaving EdSector, which the organization's other co-founder, Tom Toch, announced he did about six months ago.

But never fear, Eduwonk fans. The blog will live on, Rotherham says, although it will likely be re-branded once his future becomes more clear.

Rotherham, who confirmed his departure after I called him to bug him about a rumor I'd heard, said he has several career options and plans to stay in the Washington, D.C., area. Though he wants to work on broader issues, Rotherham—who worked on education issues under President Clinton and served for four years on the Virginia Board of Education—says he's not leaving the education space and is committed to working to "dramatically transform our system of schools."

EdSector plans to officially announce the news tomorrow. (UPDATE: Read the official press release here.)

Rotherham, 38, an avid fly fisherman and the father of two young daughters, told me that he's ready for something different. It will be very interesting to see where Rotherham, an oft-quoted education expert who has an extensive policy portfolio, lands. After all, the Washingtonian magazine in 2007 declared him one of the "40 under 40" people to watch.

At one point, lots of people speculated he was in line for a top job in the Obama administration at the U.S. Department of Education, and there was enough talk to even spark a letter-writing campaign against him by some of his critics. Alas, he didn't join the department.

Rotherham and Toch (who is an EdWeek alum) founded EdSector five years ago as a hybrid group "formed at the intersection of research, public policy, and journalism."

What does this mean for the future of EdSector? “It’s a challenge," he said, "but it's one the organization is well-positioned to meet.”

Posted by Michele McNeil at 8:00 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Happy Friday! Now that you've gotten through the first week of back-to-school madness, you can relax and check out these good reads:

*The administration says the stimulus saved or created 1 million jobs. Does that sound about right to you?

*Secretary of Education Arne Duncan urges colleges to help out K-12 schools, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education.

*Speaking of Duncan, clear your calendar Tuesday night for this Must See TV.

*Joanne Jacobs finds out where “college dreams go to die.” (The answer is in community college remediation classes.)

*Rep. John Kline of Minnesota, the top Republican on the House Education and Labor Committee, reacts to President Barack Obama's speech, tying the controversy to the debate over the feds setting curriculum.

*Checker Finn wonders if it's time to throw in the towel on education reform.

*And Lesli Maxwell notes that Duncan may be his softening his stance when it comes to mayoral control.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 1:32 PM | Permalink | 2 Comments | Recommend

Schools and community organizations that want to use K-12 facilities for mentoring, academic enrichment, and health services could get an assist from the federal government under a bill introduced yesterday by Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., the House Majority Leader, and Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, a moderate Democrat who is often a key swing vote.

The bill would be aimed at expanding the reach of "full-service community schools." It would help schools, community organizations, and private-public partnerships offer a whole range of programs, including remedial education and academic enrichment, family literacy, mental health, adult education, nutrition services, and early childhood education.

So why should this bill be on your radar screen?

First of all, it's being sponsored by some very influential lawmakers.

Second, as Congress begins to consider a renewal of the No Child Left Behind Act, a measure like this one could be a good way to get some love from the folks who feel strongly that health, social services, and extracurricular activities are an important piece of the puzzle when it comes to boosting student achievement.

And finally, there's some star power behind it...actress Jennifer Garner showed up at the bill's introduction and even wrote about it on the Huffington Post.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:37 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

It's official! Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa is going to be the chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Comittee. As we've said before, this puts Harkin, who already has control of the Senate subcommittee that oversees education spending, in a very powerful position.

He's now the go-to guy in the Senate on both money and policy for K-12 schools, just as the reauthorizations of No Child Left Behind and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act are likely to get going.

So what will this mean? Mandatory full funding of special education may actually become a reality, for one. And Harkin will almost certainly push for a federal school facilities program.

And he may give the administration some push back on K-12 issues.

Earlier today, Michele spoke with Frederick Hess, the director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank. Hess said he sees Harkin as “more of a traditional Democrat on education issues” than Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee and an author of the NCLB law.

“Assuming that the administration is interested in promoting Race to the Top-style priorities through the [NCLB] reauthorization, Harkin could be trickier for them,” Mr. Hess said

As chairman, Harkin may provide a needed check on the administration’s agenda, Hess said. “We need more speed bumps, and Harkin is certainty more likely to be a speed bump than Dodd” would have been.

Much more to come, so check back at Edweek.org often.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:33 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Sen. Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, is going to stick with the Senate Banking Committee, according to published reports. (Dodd denies there's been any decision yet).

Dodd, whose state sued the federal government over the No Child Left Behind law, had the chance to jump over to the education chairmanship when his close friend, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., passed away.

This means that the Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa, the second ranking Democrat on the committee, has a chance to step in. Harkin would have to give up his chairmanship of the Senate Agriculture Committee, which deals with issues important to his state. Still, a number of education advocates have told me there's a very good chance he'll step into the education chairmanship.

If Harkin took the job, he'd have a lot of control over both policy and money for K-12 programs, since he already heads up the subcommittee on education spending. That's great news if you're a Harkin fan.

During his time on the committee, Harkin has been a champion for federal funding for school facilities and students in special education. He wasn't a huge supporter of the Obama administration's proposal to shift money from Title I grants for districts into the school improvement program. And at first, he seemed wary of the administration's proposal to boost the Teacher Incentive Fund. He supported it, but only after proposing changes to the program to require input from teachers.

If Harkin says no, next in line is Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, who has been known for her leadership on labor issues.

UPDATE: A spokeswoman for Sen. Harkin said he "doesn't have a decision to make until Sen. Dodd makes his." Dodd is likely to make an official announcement today.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 10:50 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The honor of introducing President Barack Obama at Wakefield High School today went to senior Tim Spicer, who has to be one of the most popular kids in school today.

He told Alyson, who called in just a few minutes ago from the school, that not only did he get a presidential seal as a thank-you gift from Obama, but he also got the president to autograph the introductory remarks he had carefully typed out.

Spicer acknowledged, though, that he was far more nervous meeting Obama before the speech than actually standing in front of a televised audience and introducing the president.

As for the all of the hubbub that preceded the speech, Spicer told Alyson the controversy was "pointless."

And 14-year-old Elizabeth Brantley, who was one of 40 9th graders who participated in a round table before the speech with Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan, called the controversy "kind of dumb."

Another 14-year-old, Max Rosenberg, had even stronger words in speaking to Alyson, saying people who didn't want Obama to address students are "racist."

The 20-minute round table in the school's library featured these 9th graders—nearly 40 in all—who had all sorts of questions for Obama—none of which focused on the controversy that engulfed Obama before the address. Instead, they wanted to know: How has your life changed? How would your life have been different if your dad had been around when growing up? Why did you pick Wakefield over other schools? How can I become president?

To the last one, Obama advised: Don't post anything on Facebook or YouTube that you'll later regret, work hard in school, and be passionate about something.

The very last question from students involved health care: Why can't the United States have universal health coverage?

And so Obama got to tout his big health-care address to Congress tomorrow.

Read Obama's full answers to these questions and more in this transcript.

By the way, EdSec Duncan was at the round table, too. But Alyson reported that he was not nearly the star of the show, as the students called him the "other guy" in the room.

(Photo: Wakefield High School Senior Tim Spicer and President Obama. Gerald Herbert/AP)

Posted by Michele McNeil at 2:00 PM | Permalink | 14 Comments | Recommend

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said today at Wakefield High School, where President Obama is set to deliver his back-to-school speech at noon, that the controversy surrounding the remarks has “absolutely not” undermined the president’s intended message of personal responsibility and the need for students to stay in school and stay focused. He said such controversies roll off him like “water off a duck’s back,” and said that one of the problems in education policy today is that we “focus on adult issues and adult drama,” instead of paying attention to the huge challenges facing school systems. (This is similar to what Duncan told Bob Schieffer on CBS' Face the Nation on Sunday.)

Duncan stressed that watching the speech is entirely voluntary—students can watch in school today, online later, or not at all. As for the suggested lesson plans and classroom activities that some conservative critics have said violate restrictions against the federal government setting curriculum, Duncan said the lessons were put together by “some of the best teachers in the country”—participants in the Education Department’s Teaching Ambassador fellowship program. He conceded that some the original wording of those activities focused too heavily on the president’s goals and that the wording was modified in some cases to focus more heavily on students’ goals.

Before the speech, Secretary Duncan and President Obama planned to hold a round-table discussion with ninth-graders at Wakefield High School to listen to their concerns about their own educations. And he wasn’t the only cabinet secretary planning to visit a school—nearly two dozen cabinet secretaries and other high administration officials were expected to fan out today in support of the president’s pep rally.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 11:18 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

When President Obama addresses the nation's students today (or at least those who are allowed to watch), he'll deliver a back-to-school pep talk that surely doesn't live up to the controversy it created.

In prepared remarks, he takes a walk down his own memory lane by recalling early morning tutoring sessions and a dad that wasn't around. He acknowledges that many students out there aren't learning under the best of conditions—that they may live in neighborhoods that aren't safe, or in families affected by job losses.

"That’s no excuse for not trying," he is expected to say during his noon speech at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Va., which my colleague Alyson Klein will be staffing.

And he'll tell students: "You make your own future."

It's a feel-good message about personal responsibility. What will be really interesting is to see the reaction after he delivers it, especially from those who thought Obama would push a "socialist" agenda.

UPDATE: Alyson just reported in from the scene at Wakefield High School, where about a half-dozen protesters are holding up signs that read "Children of God, not Obama" and "Obamanation."

Posted by Michele McNeil at 9:16 AM | Permalink | 3 Comments | Recommend

Alaska, Louisiana, New Hampshire, New Mexico.

These four haven't drawn down any of the money that's been made available to them via state stimulus grants, according to the latest spending report from the U.S. Department of Education. (You can check out edweek.org's nifty interactive follow-the-money map here.) This means these states haven't spent any of their special education, Title I, stabilization fund, education technology, or other smaller grants, such as vocational rehabilitation. Note the zeros in the "outlay" category in the department's report.

You'll note on the Education Department's spending report that, within these states, a portion of grants to other entities, such as higher education institutions and local school districts, have been spent.

What's interesting is that even South Carolina, where Gov. Mark Sanford unsuccessfully tried to refuse stimulus money, has spent some of its share.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 8:17 AM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

Rep. John Kline, the top Republican on the House Education and Labor Committee, sent a letter to the White House asking President Barack Obama to publicly release the text of his back-to-school address to kids, to be delivered next week. (According to this Washington Post story, Obama already had planned to do just that). UPDATE: And indeed, the White House said today that the text of the speech will be available on Monday at whitehouse.gov.

As you may know, some Texas districts have expressed qualms about letting kids listen, because of language in one of the lesson plans accompanying the speech that gave students suggestions for how they could "help" the president, prompting claims that the speech would politically indoctrinate kids.

Releasing the speech would allow parents to look at what Obama's message will be and decide whether or not they want their children to listen to the speech, Kline said.

Kline was joined by Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Mich., who heads up the House Republican Policy Committee.

Here's a bit of Kline's letter:

As you know, parents play a pivotal role in their children’s education. Just as parents are able to review a textbook before it is used or consider a planned field trip before children leave the classroom, public consideration of your remarks in advance of the live address would ensure parents can review them, make an informed decision about whether the material is appropriate for their children, and engage them accordingly.

What's your take on the politics at play here? And if you work in a school or district, have you heard concerns from parents?

Comments section is open!

UPDATE: Tom Horne, Arizona's superintendent of public instruction, put out his own statement, with an education-oriented critique of the speech and its lesson plans.

Here's a snippet from his statement:

The White House materials call for a worshipful, rather than critical approach to this speech. For example, the White House communication calls for the students to have 'notable quotes excerpted (and posted in large print on the board),' and for the students to discuss 'how will he inspire us,' among other things. ...In general, in keeping with good education practice, students should be taught to read and think critically about statements coming from politicians and historical figures.

And a spokesman for the South Carolina Department of Education told my colleague, Catherine Gewertz, that his office has been getting calls, both from districts and the general public about the speech, including one woman who said she planned to keep her granddaughter home from school. District officials themselves are "getting swamped" with questions and comments, he said.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 10:43 AM | Permalink | 63 Comments | Recommend

To push states into undertaking education reform, President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan are using $4 billion from the Race to the Top Fund as leverage.

But when it comes to making students and parents take more responsibility for their own educational futures, Obama and Duncan have little more than their bully pulpits—and now a $1,000 cash prize.

When Obama delivers a Sept. 8 back-to-school speech, he will emphasize personal responsibility on the part of students and parents and urge the nation's schoolchildren to set short-term and long-term goals. These are themes that he touted during his campaign. The noon EDT speech will be carried live on C-SPAN and on whitehouse.gov. (UPDATE: By the way, Obama will deliver his speech at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Va., which has gotten some love from his administration before.)

UPDATE: The speech, and accompanying "lesson plans" that the education department shared with teachers and school districts, is already causing quite a stir. The department is having to retract one lesson plan that asked students to write letters on how they might "help" the president, according to the Washington Times and Talking Points Memo. Meanwhile, school districts, such as those in the Dallas, Texas area, are struggling with concerns from parents who may not want their children to watch the speech.

In helping the White House gear up for the speech, Duncan taped a promo this morning in his office that will run on MTV on Sept. 8, urging kids to watch the speech by tuning into C-SPAN (and urging MTV viewers to flip to C-SPAN is no easy pitch).

And as part of this back-to-school message, Duncan also taped a commercial that will be featured on YouTube and on a new Web site promoting a contest the department will run called "I Am What I Learn." (The filming of this was a low-budget operation—no teleprompters. Picture Duncan's assistant Liz Utrup standing on a chair, holding print-outs of the script, in 40-plus-point-size, taped to a big flip chart.)

The month-long contest, which starts the day of Obama's speech and ends Oct. 8, invites students to submit videos of up to two minutes long on YouTube that will highlight their personal stories about how they will improve their educations this school year and the "role it will play to fulfilling their dreams," according to the department. A few celebrity judges (to be named later) will narrow the entries down to 20, and then the public will vote for the winner of the $1,000 prize.

This notion of personal responsibility in education reform hasn't been raised just by Obama and Duncan. It was raised, albeit in a less-than-tactful way, by an Atlanta-area teachers' union leader in an Aug. 31 piece in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Metro Association of Classroom Educators Chairman John Trotter was quoted as saying, in reference to proposed regulations by the Education Department for turning around the nation's worst schools that call for firing staff: “He [Duncan] wants to replace everyone ... except the ones who matter, the children ... The problem starts with the students. What is Duncan going to do with some so-called students who act like miscreants each day?”

Those statements lit up the blogsphere and Twitter feeds.

But Duncan, who would surely quibble with most of what Trotter had to say, also acknowledged when I asked him about this today, that "unquestionably, without a doubt" students bear responsibility, too, for the state of the nation's most struggling schools. And that broader message of personal responsibility is what you'll hear from him and Obama next week.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 9:00 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

By guest blogger Erik Robelen:

As school districts, charter operators, and other nonprofits anxiously await further details from the Education Department on the $650 million Investing in Innovation Fund, Congress appears disinclined to pony up much, if any, extra money down the road to keep the program going.

President Obama had asked for an additional $100 million in fiscal 2010 to extend the program, first created under the federal economic-stimulus law earlier this year. The House responded by offering up all of $3 million in the budget bill for the Education Department it passed in late July. And that was pretty generous compared with the Senate Appropriations Committee, which did not provide one dime of new money for the program in the budget bill it passed days later.

Department officials provided some early clues to the direction of what they’re now calling the “i3” program during a symposium last month. But a variety of people I’ve spoken with say there are still far more questions than answers about the program. Detailed guidance is expected in coming weeks.

As part of the department’s fiscal 2010 budget request, it said the $100 million in new money would support “(1) the evaluation of promising new initiatives and approaches to determine if they are suitable for scaling up; (2) expanding the implementation of effective practices across districts and states; (3) supporting the development of 'model districts' that use multiple evidence-based strategies to increase student achievement; and (4) leveraging partnerships with the private sector and the philanthropic community to develop, scale up, document, and disseminate best practices for improving student achievement.”

Meanwhile, Congress seems more amenable to making legislative changes the administration has sought for the i3 program. Both the House budget bill for the Education Department and the version passed by the Senate Appropriations Committee include that language.

(To view the language directly, go here. Click on the third version of H.R. 3293. Scroll down to the "General Provisions" link, the last one, under "Title III, Department of Education." Then scroll down to Section 307.)

I'm still waiting for comments from the Education Department, but one change appears to offer more wiggle room regarding which districts or schools would be eligible to apply for the grants. Essentially, it provides some extra flexibility on the academic-performance requirements for those wishing to apply. My colleague Michele McNeil has previously reported that the department is seeking this change to avoid disqualifying many districts.

There are a couple of other changes, too, including one that says the organization that acts as the “fiscal agent” for a grant under the program “may make subgrants to one or more of the other entities in the partnership.”

Education policy veteran Christopher T. Cross, a former assistant secretary of education under President George H.W. Bush, tells me this language is pretty important, and he suggests it’s a good idea.

“It extends the capability of the department so that they’re not having to manage everything that is done with the money, so that they can, for example, make bets on people who they would have confidence in [who] could then make successful bets,” Mr. Cross.

What do you think of the amending language? Let us know, by posting your comments below.

Also, as Michele previously reported, the Education Department is apparently concerned that the annual appropriations process—which can drag on for months—may not be the best vehicle for quickly amending the stimulus law. It’s apparently hoping to attach the amendment to some other legislation. No word yet on how that’s going.

Posted by Erik Robelen at 3:58 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

from former guest blogger Lesli A. Maxwell, now resident blogger at District Dossier.

Remember a few weeks back when we told you that Jerry Brown, California's attorney general, would likely have to offer his legal opinion on whether the state's law restricts using student data to evaluate teachers -- criticized repeatedly by Education Secretary Arne Duncan -- would render the Golden State ineligible for Race to the Top Fund grants?

Well, Brown, a likely front-runner in the Democratic primary for governor next year, decided to wade into the whole matter by submitting some very interesting, highly critical comments on the proposed RttT rules. (Hat tip to Anthony Cody, an Oakland science teacher who blogs over at Teacher Magazine).

For some reason, though, Brown doesn't directly address whether he thinks California should be considered eligible. He, instead lays out, sometimes dramatically, seven quibbles, many of them philosophical, and not so subtly suggests to Duncan that "a little humility would be in order" since no less than "the impressionable minds of the children of America" are at stake.

Brown also calls the philosophy behind Duncan's RttT rules "command and control," and tells the secretary that he senses in the draft rules a "technocratic bias and an uncritical faith in the power of social science."

Wowzers! No telling if Brown's comments will sway the brain trust in Duncan's shop to rewrite any rules, but they sure make for some fun reading.

Funny how just a few weeks ago, Brown's staff didn't know anything about RttT and whether the AG would be asked to review the state's firewall law when I called them to inquire. No doubt that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's convening of a special session over this whole issue got Brown's attention.

photo credit: http://www.californiagovernors.ca.gov

Posted by at 1:44 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

I'm sure your Friday was spent sifting through the hundreds of comments submitted for the Race to the Top program. Now that you've digested those, check out these good reads:

*Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican from Minnesota who knows his stuff when it comes to education, is being talked up as a 2012 presidential candidate. (Nope, it's not too early to be talking about that.)

*The recession is forcing some teacher furloughs, despite the $100 billion in stimulus aid for schools.

*Politico has more whether Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., will decide to step into the chairmanship of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.

*Over at the National Journal's Education Experts blog, some big names are debating school turnarounds.

*Mike Petrilli of Flypaper Fame, and Tom Loveless of the Brookings Institution take a look at the impact of the No Child Left Behind law on gifted kids. Eduwonk has more.

*Speaking of NCLB, over at The School Law Blog, Mark Walshtakes a look at all of the state court rulings over the last few months that have dealt with NCLB.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 11:56 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend