November 2009 Archives

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan paid a visit to Education Week today, and spent an hour fielding questions from reporters about everything from No Child Left Behind Act reauthorization to the possibility of a second economic-stimulus package.

Duncan, who was accompanied by assistant secretary for planning, evaluation, and policy development Carmel Martin, laid out his clearest vision yet for NCLB reauthorization.

First, he made it clear that he envisions a significant new emphasis on incentives for high-performing schools, districts, and states, noting that there are "50 ways to fail" under NCLB, but nothing in it for schools that succeed.

Second, the competition that has spurred education reform movements in states hoping to nail down some of the Race to the Top Fund stimulus money (think removal of data firewalls and charter school caps) would be embedded in a reauthorized Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Not all of the federal funding would be awarded through competition, but a lot of it would, he said. Look for more on ESEA reauthorization from my colleague Alyson Klein at edweek.org later today.

In the interview, Duncan also placed a good deal of focus on Race to the Top. He wanted to make clear (perhaps he's been reading these two recent pieces in the Wall Street Journal) that he is truly serious that there will be a high bar to win a piece of this $4 billion education reform competition. He said he finds it interesting that there are folks out there who assume he will water down the competition because of political or state pressure. "I can't be more clear or explicit" about the high bar that will be set for these awards, he said. And, he also seemed to want to make clear that there will be plenty of losers in the first round of competition, leaving a lot of money up for grabs in the second round.

Duncan seems to be taking a hard look at $3 billion in Title II funding, which is given out via formula grants to states for teacher quality. Title II is of particular interest to Teacher Beat's Stephen Sawchuk. He'll have more on this tomorrow, but Duncan did say that if there is "anybody who thinks we're getting great value [for this money], I'd like to see that analysis."

Reporters did manage to get some push-back from Duncan on a couple of questions. First, Duncan took issue with my colleague Lesli Maxwell's question about turnarounds, in which she asked about charter schools being given a "major role" in that effort. Not a major role, he insisted, but "a role." Yet in June, he did indeed call on charter schools to play a key role in turning around low-performing schools. Now, in his remarks today and in subtle changes to Race to the Top, he wants people to know charters are just one strategy, and not the administration's silver-bullet reform idea. (By the way, Duncan says that the focus for turnarounds needs to be on quality over quantity, so that his original goal of turning around 5,000 schools in five years, or 1,000 in the first year, may be almost "impossible to do well.")

He also took issue with my colleague Debbie Viadero's question about whether there's enough scientifically based evidence to back up the administration's reform strategies (such as charters and teacher performance pay). "I would challenge your assumption," he told her. It's not just her assumption, though, as a lot of folks are wondering where the evidence is.

"I think there's a lot of scientific evidence that the status quo doesn't work," he said.

As for a second stimulus, don't start counting the money yet. Duncan said he could provide "no guarantee whatsoever."

Photo: U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan fields a question during an interview on Nov. 30 at Education Week in Bethesda, Md. Carmel Martin, assistant secretary for planning, evaluation, and policy development is at left. Charlie Borst/Education Week

Posted by Michele McNeil at 4:50 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is giving planning grants of up to $100,000 each to nine school districts and charter groups to help them win Investing in Innovation, or i3, grants from the U.S. Department of Education.

This should come as no surprise given that Gates has already ponied up some bucks to help 15 states win Race to the Top grants. If you'll remember, Gates got some heat for hand-picking these states to help, and so the philanthropy expanded its technical assistance to the rest of the states as well. The deadline to apply for that money was last week, and all I could find out is that "a lot" have applied.

This time, for i3, the chosen school district winners are: Philadelphia, New Haven, Conn., New Orleans, Minneapolis, Houston, and El Dorado County, Calif. In some cases, the grants are going directly to the district, or in other cases, the money is being awarded to the city, or one of the district's philanthropic or nonprofit partners.

Also winning a grant is the Central Texas Education Stimulus Collaborative, which represents Austin and eight other school districts in the region, or about 200,000 students collectively. (In learning about this Texas collaborative, which brings together philanthropy and school districts, it seems like just the kind of thing the education department is looking for.)

The other winners are a group of five Los Angeles charter management organizations that make up the College-Ready Promise initiative, which also won a major teacher-reform grant from Gates, and two New York City charter organizations, the New York City Charter School Center and New Visions for Public Schools.

In making these funding choices, Gates is making clear what its view of innovation is: that charters and districts will work more collaboratively together on education reform. Officially, Chris Williams, a foundation spokesman, said these nine cities all have strong charter school sectors, with at least one high-quality charter management organization. And more broadly, Williams said, "We sought places where districts and charters were breaking through old barriers to transfer knowledge and information across organizational lines."

Posted by Michele McNeil at 2:21 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

When your government-funded program is on the chopping block, a rather damning Inspector General audit will do little to bolster your case for continued funding.

Such is the case for the Center for Civic Education and its two grant programs, We the People and the Cooperative Civic Education and Economic Education Exchange Program. Both seek to foster civic education in K-12 schools. Both programs are also part of a laundry list of cuts the Obama administration has proposed. The savings, according to the Obama folks, would be $33.5 million.

The center is a California-based nonprofit corporation that gets about 82 percent of its revenue from the U.S. Department of Education.

Auditors from the Education Department's Office of Inspector General reviewed about $7.4 million of $23 million in grants that the Center for Civic Education charged in a one-year period to the federal grant programs, including We the People. Of that $7.4 million, auditors found $1.2 million of the spending was not allowed under federal regulations, and another $4.7 million couldn't be supported by proper documentation. That's a whopping 80 percent of charges that were either unallowable, or unsupported.

The problems are extensive; in fact, the audit (including the center's responses), is 120 pages.

Among the things auditors flagged: the center used grant funds to pay settlements to former employees to avoid lawsuits alleging some type of harassment of discrimination; the center spent $3,566 on an airline ticket to India for the executive director's spouse, who did not work for the center; and center employees spent hundreds of additional dollars on hotel rooms and meals above the standard government allowance. The auditors also found that the center didn't have basic controls in place to make sure money was spent, and accounted for, appropriately.

The audit also reveals the challenges auditors faced as they sought answers. For example, the center required its legal counsel to be present during all interviews that auditors had with employees. Moreover, the center's chief fiscal officer sent an email (a copy is in the audit report, on page 72 of the document) to employees instructing them on how to explain how they filled out their time sheets, in anticipation of auditors' questions. Employees' time sheets were another source of concern for auditors.

In a detailed letter of response, Center for Civic Education Executive Director Charles N. Quigley stressed that although the OIG found "some minor, unallowable costs", the center "performed precisely the work it promised to do, performed that work very well, and effectively and conscientiously served the purpose of each of ED's grants." In fact, the center found the audit "unduly harsh, unfair, and at times misleading."

Posted by Michele McNeil at 1:19 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

English-language learners, students in special education, and homeless students took center stage in the U.S. Department of Education's second "stakeholders" forum, held here in Washington today. These events are intended to help lay the groundwork for reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

This one attracted a much smaller and more subdued crowd than the first stakeholders' forum here, which featured a big speech on reauthorization from Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. Still, there was some interesting discussion on how the new, yet-to-be-named version of the law might do a better job measuring the achievement of these special populations than does its current version, the No Child Left Behind Act.

The event kicked off with a panel of witnesses, including Kris Gutierrez, a professor at the University of Colorado in Boulder, who studies English-language learners. She suggested that schools track what happens to ELLs after they leave the classroom. And she said those students need to be assessed for continued progress.

Patricia Popp, a representative from the Virginia Education Program for Homeless Children and Youth, noted that support staff for homeless kids often are the first folks laid off during an economic downturn. She suggested that Congress make sure it provides adequate funding for homeless kids through the federal McKinney-Vento program, which finances support services for that population.

During the question period, Jane West, a lobbyist at the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education in Washington, noted that both the ESEA and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act are up for reauthorization at the same time. She suggested that, rather than aligning the two laws, Congress consider actually merging them. One of the panelists, Dr. Judith Moening, who directs special education for the North East Independent School District outside San Antonio, Texas, seconded that motion.

And Deborah Ziegler, a lobbyist for the Council for Exceptional Children, which advocates for students in special education, said she hoped that special education teachers would be eligible for alternative pay, something the administration has been pushing hard through the stimulus program's Race to the Top Fund and other initiatives and is expected to champion in reauthorization.

On the big question ... still no on-the-record clues about the timing of ESEA reauthorization.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 4:41 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Read deep into the final regulations for Race to the Top, and you'll see an outline of how the Education Department plans to judge states' applications.

There's the 500-point grading scale, of course.

But for the finalists, there's one last step: Fly to Washington, bring your five best people, and give us one last sales pitch.

Kinda like the Olympics! Remember when Chicago brought in the Obamas, and even Oprah, to make the case to the Olympic Committee in Copenhagen? Course, it didn't turn out as Chicago had hoped.

For Race to the Top, it's an interesting twist on the judging process that's akin to the college interview. You've done the application, gotten those high SAT scores and grades, but now it's time to see what you're really made of.

What's also interesting is the department says, in the regulations, that it will put videos of the oral arguments online, or at least make a transcript available.

The regulations also specifically ban consultants from the group of five people that can make the pitch. Certainly, though, governors and chief state school officers will likely make the trip. But will states also bring any Oprah-like celebrities? We'll have to stay tuned.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 9:39 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Media reports about inaccurate estimates of just how many jobs have been saved or created under the federal economic stimulus law came back to bite Obama administration officials testifying before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee this morning.

The hearing, which continues this afternoon, has been very partisan, with Republicans questioning the administration's estimate of 640,000 jobs created or saved under the stimulus program, and Democrats saying that, without the stimulus, the economy would be in even worse shape than it is now.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the top GOP member of the committee, went so far as to call the administration's estimates "propaganda."

Deputy Secretary of Education Anthony Wilder Miller, the department's money and management guru, is among the administration folks testifying before the committee. He told lawmakers that the agency was able to get almost $67 billion out the door relatively quickly, in part because it already had systems in place for much of that money, including funds allocated through formulas for special education and the Title I program, which serves disadvantaged students.

Miller said the department has done significant outreach to grant recipients and held biweekly webinars explaining the stimulus reporting requirements. And he said the department will put together a document detailing what it's learned so far in implementing the stimulus.

But Republicans questioned the 300,000 education jobs reported created or saved so far. Issa said many of those jobs were "simply transfers to pay for teachers," and that states spent the money elsewhere. He also implied that the public sector isn't the greatest place for job creation. "School teachers are important, federal workers are important, but that's really where this has gone," he said, rather than the private sector. And Rep. Michael R. Turner, R-Ohio, noted that states and districts are going to face a funding cliff as soon as the stimulus money runs out.

For their part, Democrats have largely defended the stimulus law and its impact, while making it clear that it's important for taxpayers and Congress to get accurate jobs data. But not all Democrats are without criticism of how the program has gone. Earlier this week, Rep. David R. Obey, D-Wisc., the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, lambasted the Obama administration for fuzzy stimulus math.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 12:42 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Education Secretary Arne Duncan, whose education experience is firmly planted in urban ground, is continuing to reach out to rural folks to figure out how the reforms he's pushing will play out in the farther reaches of the country.

Nine rural superintendents, from Michigan, Texas, West Virginia, California, Mississippi, Kansas, South Dakota, Wyoming, and Arizona, gave him an earful during a more than hour-long chat with him yesterday.

The Rural Nine, first and foremost, said they were thrilled to get to hear straight from department officials about plans for turnaround schools and for reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. And, they were pleased they got to help educate Duncan on how schools work, and how reform might play out, in rural America.

As I talked with a few of them after their meetings, it was clear that one of their key messages was this: The four turnaround models the department is pushing won't work for many rural school districts. Even the most flexible one, the transformation model, would be impossible for some that face tremendous recruiting challenges, since it calls for replacing the principal of a failing school.

"There's just no way we can bring in a new principal," said Beatriz Ramirez, who is both the superintendent and the principal of Raisin City School District in California, a K-8 one-school district serving 280 students in rural Fresno County. Instead, she said the focus for turnarounds in rural districts can be on professional development and using technology to bridge divides.

Tupelo Public School District Superintendent Randy R. Shaver said that, at a minimum, the department needs to focus on using incentives to recruit principals to underserved areas, including his district in rural Mississippi.

The Rural Nine also said they made clear that Duncan's preference for awarding federal funding through competitive grants, over formulas, will put rural schools at a disadvantage.

"Many of us are the superintendents and also have other jobs too," said Lyn Guy, the superintendent of Monroe County Schools in West Virginia, noting that many rural superintendents also are principals, or business officials. "We have our hands full."

The $650 million Investing in Innovation, or i3, grants for school districts really aren't even on the superintendents' radar screens--even though there's a specific competitive preference for projects that address the needs of rural schools.

Mark Bielang, the superintendent of the Paw Paw Public Schools, in southwestern Michigan, added: "Many of us simply do not have the capacity to spend all of this time applying for grants."

Posted by Michele McNeil at 4:16 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Rep. David R. Obey, the Democratic chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and a major architect of the stimulus law, ranted and raved yesterday in this statement about inaccurate reporting on Recovery.gov.

"Credibility counts in government and stupid mistakes like this undermine it," Obey said. "Whether the numbers are good news or bad news, I want the honest numbers and I want them now."

Obey may have been thinking about reports like this recent ABC news account, which found that the Obama administration scaled back their estimate - by 60,000 - of how many jobs were created under the stimulus because apparently some of the numbers weren't realistic.

Media reports like that are likely to make it that much tougher to show that the stimulus is accomplishing its goals, including in the area of education redesign. And they could also hurt Democrats in swing districts who voted in favor of the stimulus, which got virtually no Republican support. That may be why Obey, who is often considered a partisan Democrat, used such harsh rhetoric in taking the Obama administration to task.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 12:09 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Thelma Melendez, the U.S. Department of Education's assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education, hasn't made any headlines since taking this key K-12 job in the Obama Administration.

And in a 40-minute interview I had with her late last week, she wouldn't reveal much insight into how she might influence the department's policy, or what role she'll have in the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind.

Instead, she told me why she lets others do the talking--at least for now.

As the former superintendent of California's Pomona Unified School District, she said, "If I said something I was accountable for it."

Now, however, she said she feels a bit like a vice principal--who has to represent and answer to a principal (or Secretary Arne Duncan) and a superintendent (President Obama). "I feel a deep sense of responsibility that what I say needs to be in line with what needs to be said."

What Melendez did talk about in the interview is her background, and what she's doing to adjust to her new job. She's in charge of 200 staff, billions of dollars in federal funding, and will eventually assume responsibility for the programmatic parts of Race to the Top. She's reading, traveling, and attending meetings (and has been so busy that she, who hails from southern California, hadn't, as of last week, had time to find a winter coat.) She's called and picked the brains of several of her predecessors, looking for insight.

It was a long road from California to Washington. During the interview, she retraced her steps, from her struggles to learn to read as an English-language learner to the low expectations that confronted her when she wanted to attend college. After getting her education degree, she rose through the ranks from teacher to principal to superintendent. These experiences mean she can relate to a lot of the education world out there.

It will be interesting to see just how important she becomes in the administration's strategy to reauthorize ESEA. She is not part of the close-knit Capitol Hill club, nor did she work with Duncan in Chicago, as many in the department did. Certainly, she is articulate and passionate about helping all students, and about those in her past who made a difference. If she can inject that passion as she talks about policy, and get the rank-and-file educators to relate to her, then she'll be a real asset during reauthorization.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:17 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

In Baltimore today, former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich, the ultra-liberal Rev. Al Sharpton, and the Obama Administration's Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, continued their education reform road show. They visited three of the city's schools--a KIPP school, a regular old public school, and a neighborhood charter school--all serving mostly disadvantaged students, but all with state proficiency rates of more than 80 percent.

Most interesting, it seemed to me, is that the still-influential Gingrich pledged that his support of education reform will not end when the road show is over.

Speaking at the Hampstead Hill Academy, a neighborhood charter school, he said he will work with the Obama Administration to help reauthorize No Child Left Behind. Work on that is supposed to begin in earnest early next year.

Gingrich, who is publicly pondering a run for president in 2012, could be an important power-broker as the Obama Administration looks for bi-partisan support for its education reform agenda (which pretty much looks like Race to the Top.)

But is Gingrich optimistic that NCLB can be reauthorized next year, and what will it take to bring his Republican colleagues in Congress along for the ride? I asked him this during today's press conference at the end of their school visits.

He wouldn't address the timing, but did acknowledge: "I think it's going to be difficult because of the bitterness in the House." That reflects the deep partisan divides that have gripped the House as it considers sweeping legislation, like health care.

Nonetheless, he pledged to do whatever he could to help find common ground in the House and Senate. And he added that his impression from President Obama is that the issue of education--more than any other, including health care--is one in which the administration would like to move forward in a bi-partisan way.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 3:55 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

If you haven't read Michele's thoughtful story on the final Race to the Top rules, you should do so immediately. She mentions that the Education Department has set "non-binding" spending levels for how big each winning state's grant might be. The levels are based on the number of school-age children in the state. For instance, just four states, California, Florida, New York, and Texas, are eligible for the biggest grants, ranging from $350 million to $750 million each.

Not surprisingly, it sounds like some states are less than thrilled about the size of their possible awards.

Take Colorado, for instance. The state would only be eligible for up to $175 million if the department, indeed, uses these ranges. Colorado is likely to submit a grant proposal much larger than that, according to this Denver Post story, and let the department decide whether to scale it back. And it sounds like Colorado officials are holding out hope that they may get more money if a few of the bigger states aren't picked. Since the amounts are non-binding they may have a shot. On the other hand, I'm sure the department floated those numbers for a reason.

When I was out in Colorado reporting this story, some folks mentioned they thought they'd be eligible for more money, around the $350 million level. The state has been pouring enormous energy into its application, and I have to wonder if its process might have been have different if officials had known they may only be eligible for half of what they were expecting.

Indiana officials also seem pretty ticked off. Tony Bennett, the superintendent for public instruction in Indiana, put out a statement yesterday that made it clear he thinks there may be better ways to figure out who gets how much.

"I am disappointed in the USDOE's choice to set target amounts for specific states, capping the funding for states regardless of their approach and commitment to reform. It's my belief that America's students would benefit more from Race to the Top if the quality, aggressiveness, and comprehensiveness of states' reform plans determine the funding amount," Bennett wrote.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:12 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

A sampling of reaction from around the blogsphere on today's release of final Race to the Top regulations:

Eduflack guesses that 4 or 5 states will win grants in Round 1 (heavily weighted toward the Gates states), with a dozen or so in Round 2.

Over at Flypaper, the very quotable Andy Smarick points out the absence of any mention of union contracts in the final regs, and laments the reform bar is now a little bit lower than it was in the first draft.

Neal McClusky at Cato@Liberty opines that these regs don't actually do anything.

The always fiesty Jeanne Allen of the Center on Education Reform has perhaps one of my favorite Race to the Top tweets: @JeanneAllen Feeling dumped by Arne, who prefers the popular girl to the 1 with brains. RTT guidelines-u look & sound good = you win

And last but not least, edweek.org's finest weigh in.

District Dossier's Lesli Maxwell raises the issue that even though California is home to hundreds of districts, just getting six of the biggest on board could be huge.

Teacher Beat's Stephen Sawchuk points out how important definitions will be. Just how much is a "significant part" of something?

Sean Cavanagh over at Curriculum Matters duly notes that big coalitions of states will mean more when it comes to common standards than having a small coalition of states band together.

Catherine Gewertz at High School Connections connects the dots between Race to the Top and high school reform.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 6:41 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

With the Race to the Top final rules set to come out today, the major media outlets (from the Wall Street Journal to The Washington Post) all covered the news with different flair.

What's interesting in the New York Times' piece by Sam Dillon is that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is the lead quote:

"Even after all the comments, the rules are as comprehensive and demanding as before, they haven't changed," said Rahm Emanuel, Mr. Obama's chief of staff, in an interview. "We're seeking reforms, so we haven't backed off anything."

The fact that the White House chief of staff (surely a busy guy) is talking about the release of final regulations to a competitive grant program shows just how important Race to the Top is to the Obama administration. If you'll remember, President Obama appeared in July at the kick-off of the competition, when the proposed regulations were announced. And he appeared in Wisconsin last week to further drum up excitement in it. What's more, the President, himself, approved the data-firewall absolute, which potentially made big, Democratic states such as California and New York ineligible.

So, will Obama have a say in—or at least have to approve—who wins?

Race to the Top Director Joanne Weiss told me the scores from each application will be ranked in order, and funded in that order until the money runs out. Of course, she said, Education Secretary Arne Duncan will have the final say, but will have to make a strong case if he deviates from the rankings. (The winning and losing applications, and the scores, will be made public.)

So, when I had Duncan on the phone yesterday as I was reporting my story, I asked him if he would have to run the winners past Obama.

There were a couple beats of dead silence on the phone line.

Then a simple "No."

Posted by Michele McNeil at 9:36 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The U.S. Department of Education will unveil final rules for the $4 billion competition tomorrow, but until then, get the skinny at edweek.org.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 9:30 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Two big-name Obama administration officials, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and Melody Barnes, a top White House education adviser, will be speaking at the Harlem Children's Zone conference in New York.

The speeches will almost certainly showcase the Obama administration's budget proposal to create a Promise Neighborhoods program, which would dole out grants to community organizations to replicate the highly regarded Children's Zone. (You can read all about the Harlem's Children's Zone in this story).

The proposal seems like a nod to folks who argue that wrap-around social services, such as health care, pre-kindergarten programs, college counseling, and parent outreach, are an essential part of boosting student achievement. The administration's participation in the event, and its budget proposal, would be a sign that President Barack Obama and Duncan agree. (A recent study seems to suggest very promising findings for the program.)

But I think it's pretty interesting that while the administration clearly supports programs like the Harlem Children's Zone, that's not where it's investing the big bucks. Obama slated the Promise Neighborhood Program for just $10 million in his fiscal year 2010 budget proposal.

By contrast, the Teacher Incentive Fund, which allocates grants to districts to create or bolster performance-pay programs, was slated for $517 million, a whopping $420 million increase over fiscal 2009. And that was on top of $200 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

So, purely on the dollars, it looks like the administration has a lot more faith in merit-pay programs (which some education organizations don't love) than it does in wrap-around social services (which ed orgs often push for) when it comes to what will boost student achievement.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 1:50 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The U.S. Department of Education today specified the kind of data and information that states will need to submit if they want to get a piece of the second—and final—round of State Fiscal Stabilization Fund money. Back in April, the department alerted governors that this guidance would be coming.

States will need to meet a total of 35 reporting requirements, including 32 "indicators" and three that will require some kind of a description. Eight of the criteria can be addressed using already existing data. And 14 of the indicators require a "yes" or "no" response.

The criteria address each of the four assurances that Congress wanted to states to work on as a condition of getting stimulus funding, including teacher quality and distribution, standards and assessments, state data systems, and turning around low-performing schools.

The turnaround section has the most requirements—13—and all but one of them are looking for new information. That seems to fit with the stepped-up federal role in helping states and districts figure out how to turn around low-performing that were a hallmark of the guidance on the School Improvement grants, slated to go out this fiscal year.

On the turnaround front, the department wants to get growth-related data, including the average statewide school gain for all kids and the average statewide school gain for the subgroups measured under the No Child Left Behind Act (such as English-Language Learners and students in special education).

And, building on the emphasis of high school reform, the department wants to know from states seeking SFSF just how many secondary schools are eligible for—but don't get—Title I money, and have persistently low student achievement. The department also is asking for a lot of charter data from those states, including the number of charters they have operating and the number and identity of charters that have closed in the last five years.

Not surprisingly, given all the emphasis on teacher quality, the department is also asking for a lot of information on teachers and teacher evaluation, including whether teacher evaluation systems take into account student achievement outcomes or student growth data. The feds also want to know about the systems used to evaluate and promote principals, and determine their compensation.

And, if a district's teachers receive performance ratings through an evaluation system, the department is interested in whether the number and percentage of teachers rated at each performance rating or level is publicly reported for each school in the district.

The department is also asking for:

*Four-year graduation rate data, broken up by subgroup.

*Number and percentage of high school grads that enroll in an institution of higher education within 16 months of receiving their diploma.

*Whether the states share with math and reading teachers just how much of an impact they've had on their students' assessment scores.

A full list of the requirements (called the Notice of Final Requirements) is available now for viewing in the Federal Register. The final application will go live on the department's Web site Thursday, and it will include a timeline for when the money will become available. But if you want to take a look at an advance draft of that application, it's already up on the department's Web site.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 4:21 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

From guest blogger Debbie Viadero

Word slipped out at today's meeting of the National Board for Education Sciences that the final regulations for the Race to the Top program, which are due to be published any day now, will include a big focus on science, technology, engineering, and math or STEM subjects.

That could be a change from the draft guidelines for the $4 billion grant program, which were released in July and indicated states would be given extra points (or a "competitive preference") for addressing STEM. The question is whether the new regulations would elevate STEM even further. A previous post in this space discussed, in fact, how important STEM is to President Obama.

The talk of the emphasis on science and math came in a question innocently posed by the newest member of the the Institute of Education Sciences board, which was created in 2001 to advise the department's primary research arm. A department official lent credence to the notion, saying "I don't think that's been announced yet." No further details were shared.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 3:45 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Rick Hess, over at the American Enterprise Institute's Blog, asks an excellent question:

"Why Is the Secretary of Education Lobbying on the Healthcare Bill?"

Posted by Michele McNeil at 12:51 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The Louisiana School Boards Associations thinks it would be fiscally irresponsible for the state to go after a slice of the $4 billion in Race to the Top program grants, according to this Associated Press Story.

The boards are worried that the program will eventually amount to an unfunded mandate, in which districts will be expected to keep up with the new activities financed by the grant even after the infusion of federal cash goes away in two years. (One superintendent I talked to in Colorado for this story had similar concerns).

It's hard to say whether the school boards' concerns are going to undermine the state's bid for Race to the Top. Supposedly, states will be judged on the extent to which they have buy-in from key stakeholders, so this might be a black mark for Louisiana. Of course, who is to say that school boards across the country won't have similar concerns?

Before this happened, Louisiana looked like it had a good shot at a Race to the Top grant. The state is one of the lucky 15 states to get a grant free and clear from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to help with their application. (Gates is now extending the offer to all states, but those not originally chosen have to apply). And the New Teacher Project rated Louisiana one of the two most competitive states in the country in the Race to the Top contest, in part because of its record of using student achievement data to drive policy decisions. (Florida is the other state the organization considered most competitive).

Posted by Alyson Klein at 11:50 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

President Obama continues to try to drum up interest and excitement in Race to the Top, using a speech in Wisconsin today to urge the state's lawmakers to remove its student-teacher data firewall and highlight progress other states have made in gearing up for this national reform competition.

Readers of EdWeek or this blog won't see anything really new in his speech. But it was significant that he spent a large chunk of the speech trying to educate people about those four "assurances" in the stimulus law, which are clearly becoming the education reform vision of the Obama administration. The four assurances are improving standards and assessments, teacher quality, data collection, and turning around low-performing schools.

During the speech, Obama seemed to borrow a line from former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who was in town last week, calling education a new "national mission."

(He also went off script and talked about sixth-grade daughter Malia's grade on a recent science test: a 73. Malia was probably thrilled to have her grade broadcast across the country. He used this to illustrate how his daughter decided to change her study habits so she could learn better. "Part of our job as parents is not to just tell our kids what to do but instilling in them a sense that they want to do it for themselves," he said.)

Although no one, including Obama, is saying when the final Race to the Top regulations will be out, he did declare today that "now the race starts." UPDATE: Obama continued his Race to the Top theme today, even championing the program in his congratulatory call to Virginia's new Gov.-elect Bob McDonnell, a Republican who won in a landslide.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan attended today's Wisconsin speech, hitching a ride on Air Force One, and even getting his own press gaggle. Read the Q-and-A Duncan had with the traveling White House press corps here. (I didn't see anything earth-shattering in this. Note that he says Race to the Top final regulations will be out "soon." And if you read to the end, you'll see that Duncan does have a sense of humor.)

Photo: President Barack Obama walks with Education Secretary Arne Duncan down the steps of Air Force One upon their arrival at Dane County Regional Airport, in Madison, Wis., on Nov. 4. Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP

Posted by Michele McNeil at 5:18 PM | Permalink | 1 Comment | Recommend

The U.S. Department of Education has taken its Elementary and Secondary Education Act reauthorization tour all the way across the street: to the National Museum of the American Indian, literally across Independence Avenue from department headquarters in Washington.

An event today gave tribal leaders, in town anyway for a White House conference on Native American issues, a chance to share their ideas for renewing ESEA, of which the No Child Left Behind Act is the current version.

As you probably remember, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said recently that the NCLB "Listening and Learning Tour" has reached a new phase. Instead of just touring the country, Ed Department officials are reaching out to specific stakeholders to find out what they think needs to be in the new version of the law. Two assistant secretaries, Carmel Martin (planning, evaluation, and policy development) and Thelma Melendez (elementary and secondary education), spoke at the event, but they kept their comments brief and mostly listened.

The Native American tribal leaders brought up some of the criticisms that often get tossed around about the NCLB law: too much testing, not enough time for kids to be creative. But they also had some other concerns, including the need for teachers who are either Native American themselves or trained to work with this special population. And they said Native American kids need to be schooled in their own culture, heritage and language, not just in reading and math.

The need to ramp up social services as part of school improvement often comes up in conversations about NCLB, but it was particularly important here. Drug and alcohol problems are rampant on many reservations, some tribal leaders said, and many parents don't have the time to become involved in their children's education. That's why early childhood education, enrichment, parent involvement, and after-school programs are particularly important for Native American kids.

Some tribes said they were interested in applying for a slice of $4 billion in grants from the Race to the Top Fund, which was created under the economic-stimulus program to reward states that make progress on teacher distribution, academic standards, data systems, and other areas. Right now, those grants are only slated to go to states. It isn't clear yet whether tribes, whose schools are sometimes operated by the U.S. Department of the Interior and are regarded as separate nations, would be able to apply for a grant on their own.

Posted by Alyson Klein at 4:36 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

By guest blogger Erik Robelen:

We've got a more complete picture this morning from yesterday's elections, especially concerning ballot measures of interest to the education community. For starters, those looking to protect, and perhaps increase, contributions to school coffers got some good news in Maine, Ohio, and Washington state.

Voters in Maine rejected a version of the so-called Taxpayer Bill of Rights that was designed to constrain the growth of state and local spending. And in Washington state, a similar measure appeared headed to defeat, according to the Seattle Times. Opponents, including teachers' unions, argued that the TABOR initiatives would lead to cuts in public aid to education and other vital government services.

In Ohio, voters approved a measure that clears the way for the operation of gambling casinos for the first time, with a portion of the tax revenues set aside for school districts statewide.

Meanwhile, Mainers rejected an effort to repeal a 2007 law mandating the consolidation of many small, rural school districts. And, as I reported recently, education became a factor in the heated dispute over the state's same-sex marriage law, which voters have opted to repeal. Critics of the law had put out television ads suggesting it would lead to the widespread teaching of gay marriage in schools, an effect the law's supporters strongly disputed.

Meanwhile, political analysts were mulling the significance of the Republican victories in the governor's races in Virginia and New Jersey. And The New York Times had an interesting analysis of the relatively narrow victory margin for New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. The piece suggests that the mayor, who has authority over the city school system, will see his political influence diminish in his third term. It will certainly be interesting to see what that might mean for his education agenda.

In a high-profile special election in New York state, Democrat Bill Owens, with some help from the state teachers' union, defeated Conservative Party candidate Douglas Hoffman to join the U.S. Congress. The New York State United Teachers had initially backed Dierdre Scozzafava, a moderate Republican, but switched its support to Mr. Owens after she bowed out of the race days before the election. Leading national conservatives, including former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, had recently campaigned on behalf of Hoffman in the race.

In his victory speech last night, Owens emphasized several issues—improving the economy and creating good jobs, protecting dairy farmers, health-care reform, and protecting a local Army base—but notably absent was education. His Web site makes no mention of K-12 education that I could find, though he does call for job training and vowed that in Congress he would seek "increased funding for higher education." It's funny, though. I thought it had become boiler plate for pretty much all candidates, especially Democrats, to have "education" as one of their basic issues, but Owens bundled this under the category "jobs" on his Web site.

Posted by Erik Robelen at 9:59 AM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

By guest blogger Erik Robelen:

Two big-city mayors with control of their school systems won re-election tonight, as voters in New York City handed Michael R. Bloomberg, an Independent, a third term in office and Bostonians gave Democrat Thomas M. Menino a fifth term. Education figured prominently in both campaigns.

In New Jersey, meanwhile, where incumbent Gov. Jon S. Corzine, a Democrat, was running in part on his education record, voters instead opted for a change. They handed the keys to the governor's mansion over to Republican Christopher J. Christie, a former U.S. attorney whose education agenda emphasized school choice.

School matters were largely overshadowed by other issues, especially taxes and transportation, in the closely watched Virginia governor's race, in which Republican Robert F. McDonnell won handily. And yet, while leading Republicans and some pundits suggest the GOP victory in Virginia is a repudiation of President Barack Obama's political agenda, it's worth noting that some core elements of McDonnell's education platform bear a striking resemblance to top Obama priorities. Both have emphasized calls for teacher performance pay and expanding the charter schools sector.

At press time, there was no final word yet on several ballot measures in various states with implications for schools: a Maine measure to repeal a 2007 law on school district consolidation; initiatives in both Maine and Washington state that would rein in state and local spending; and an Ohio plan that would allow casino gambling, with a portion of the tax revenue reserved for school districts. Also in Maine, voters were deciding whether to repeal the state's new law allowing same-sex marriages, which some had suggested could lead to the teaching of gay marriage in schools.

The Associated Press also reported that Detroit voters approved a bond referendum to fund an ambitious $500 million building plan for the city's public schools.

I wrote an election preview recently for Education Week that takes a closer look at how education was shaping up in the 2009 campaigns.

The performance of New York City's public schools was a central issue in the mayoral contest between Bloomberg and Thompson, the city's comptroller and the former president of the city board of education.

Bloomberg pledged in his campaign to double the number of charter schools in the city and to spend an additional $50 million over the next four years to help reach his goal of graduating 120,000 New Yorkers from community colleges by 2020.

Education also played a key role in the Boston mayoral contest, with city councilman Michael F. Flaherty Jr. attacking Mayor Menino's stewardship of the city school system and the city's lack of progress in stemming the high school dropout rate.

Menino, a Democrat who for years had opposed charter schools, shifted his stance earlier this year, saying he now supports converting some of Boston's low-performing schools into charters.

Even though education didn't draw nearly as much attention in the Virginia governor's race, McDonnell, the winner, has outlined ideas for more charter schools and performance pay, as well as other items.

His campaign Web site says: "Bob will be focused on supporting parents and students, equipping principals with the tools they need, rewarding excellent teachers and principals with performance pay, improving financial accountability, getting more resources into the classroom, and making charter schools more accessible for Virginia's children."

In a high-profile congressional election in upstate New York, education has played little if any discernible role, though the New York State United Teachers, which apparently has some 25,000 members in that district, ended up shifting its support to Democrat Bill Owens after Republican Dede Scozzafava dropped out just days before the election.

I scanned the Web sites of both Owens and his remaining opponent, Conservative Party candidate Douglas Hoffman, but could find no mention of plans for K-12 education. The closest I could come up with for Hoffman--who has drawn support from leading national conservatives, including former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin--was a rather Reaganesque item on the Conservative Party of New York State's Web site suggesting the U.S. Department of Education should be eliminated.

Under a section titled "national issues," the education statement says: "Attempts to nationalize our nation's educational system are setting a dangerous precedent and should come to an end. ... The first step in reducing Washington's role in education should be the abolition of the federal Department of Education."

Posted by Erik Robelen at 11:30 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

Barack Obama will stop in Wisconsin tomorrow--one year and one day after being elected to the presidency--in advance of a key vote expected Thursday in the state legislature that could put Wisconsin in a better position to compete for the Race to the Top Fund.

Obama will cheer on the legislature as it considers a proposal to lift the ban on using student test scores for teacher evaluations, which would lift the so-called "data firewall" that stands between any state and being eligible for a slice of $4 billion in Race to the Top grants.

In a conference call today, White House Domestic Policy Council Director Melody Barnes said the Obama Administration is taking direct credit for spurring education-reform moves in several states--including similar data firewall actions in California and Indiana, and efforts to improve the charter school climates in Illinois, Louisiana, Tennessee, Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, Ohio and Rhode Island.

Obama is expected to praise states for taking these steps, and encourage Wisconsin to follow along. Barnes did not mention anything about legislation in the Wisconsin legislature to allow the mayor of Milwaukee to take over the city's schools. That's something Obama's Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, champions.

If you'll remember from the draft regulations on Race to the Top, while not having a data firewall is a must for Race to the Top, a state's charter school environment is just part of the larger overall criteria by which states will be judged.

However, any of this could change as the U.S. Department of Education continues to make changes after receiving a slew of comments.

Barnes wouldn't even give us a hint as to what changes are coming for Race to the Top. And as to when we might see final regulations, applications, and how the criteria will be weighted, she said the administration isn't at a "final, final" place yet.

So stay tuned here for final, final regulations.

Posted by Michele McNeil at 5:39 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

From guest blogger Catherine Gewertz:

About a month ago, the U.S. Department of Education's inspector general's office issued a memorandum that used Pennsylvania, Connecticut, and Massachusetts as examples of how states may be violating the spirit—if not the letter—of the law on using State Fiscal Stabilization Fund money. The states cried foul, noting that their plans for spending the money had been duly approved by the department, and that they had done nothing wrong. (See our story.)

Massachusetts Secretary of Education Paul Reville wrote to the Ed Department, expressing concern that the memo seemed to suggest that his state had violated the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act's maintenance-of-effort provision. He also said he was concerned that it could harm the state's chances of getting money from the stimulus program's Race to the Top Fund.

Deputy Secretary Anthony W. Miller wrote back to Reville this week, saying that the department knows of no evidence, and "does not claim," that Massachusetts violated the ARRA. He also said that while federal officials "might consider" a state's reduction in education funding when considering its Race to the Top application, its chances of getting that money wouldn't necessarily be affected. Besides, he said, it doesn't seem that Massachusetts reduced the proportion of total state revenue it spends on education from one year to the next.

"Although we have taken steps to discourage States from reducing education funding, we fully recognize that SFSF funds are intended to help stabilize State and local budgets in order to minimize and avoid reductions in education and other essential services and that, under the current economic climate, States are forced to make difficult budgetary decisions and choices on the extent of State support for education and other vital public services," Miller wrote.

(Hey, that sounds a lot like what the three states said when they were named in the IG's memo.)

Posted by Michele McNeil at 2:54 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend

The U.S. Department of Education released its own report today further breaking down the jobs data from the economic-stimulus package. The White House then hosted a conference call with Education Secretary Arne Duncan to further trumpet the estimated 640,239 jobs that have been saved, 325,000 of which were education jobs.

What's telling is that in the Department's own report, they relied on media reports and accounts from the Council of the Great City Schools to illustrate examples of how federal stimulus money is being spent. And that's because, despite the Obama administration's efforts to make economic-stimulus spending as transparent as possible, the first quarterly stimulus reports filed by states and other stimulus recipients don't go into very much detail about how the money was actually spent.

Part of the problem is a one-size-fits-all approach to reporting, and a need to make sure the reporting isn't overly burdensome. States and recipients fill in the same blanks on a form whether they're reporting on road projects, or school spending. So the level of specificity varies widely in these first reports.

For example, on the vague end of the spectrum is Alaska. The state reported that 91 jobs have been created so far from the education portion of the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund. They describe those jobs as "teaching and support staff." On the more specific end is Delaware, which reported 205 jobs saved or created, broken down as follows: 7 administrative, 4 guidance, 4 secretaries, 29 paraprofessionals, 3 substitutes, 2 technical support, 1 nurse and 155 teachers.

One additional flaw of the data is we don't know if these are new hires, jobs that were saved, or a combination of both (and if so, then what the mixture is). Also, some of this information can only be gleaned by wading through highly technical Excel spreadsheets from the Recovery.gov "download center." Much of the reporting consisted of filling in blanks with various codes and ID numbers.

Also, it's important to note that when you hear about "education" jobs, they aren't necessarily K-12 teachers. California, for example, reported that education stimulus funds saved about 62,000 education jobs in the state. The State Fiscal Stabilization Fund paid for 53,390.5 of those education-related jobs. But of those SFSF jobs, only about 18,000 are for K-12 education, the state reported, with the rest for higher education.

What's more, what's good news now may be bad news later. If roughly 325,000 education jobs have been saved by stimulus money, what happens when that funding goes away? Will roughly 300,000 education jobs be in danger of being cut? I asked Duncan that during a media call today, and he refused to be Dr. Doom.

"I don't think this is a prediction of where we are going to be," he said. "We simply don't know where we're going to be."

Posted by Michele McNeil at 2:58 PM | Permalink | Leave a comment | Recommend