Get instant email alerts from EdWeek's blogs. Learn more.

« Early Learning Challenge is NOT About Pre-K | Main | Another Side of Globalization and Education »

Now, About this RTT for Districts Thing....

In a recent Ed Week interview, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan signals that he'd like to use the bulk of $550 million in new federal RTT funds to fund an RTT competition for school districts--something the Congressional appropriation language gives him the authority to do.

This makes some sense, given that some districts that are leading the way on education reform suffer the bad luck of being located in states that either didn't participate in RTT, or just kinda suck on education reform. On the other hand, the idea raises a whole host of questions and implications, including:

    • Who would be eligible? Would a district RTT competition be limited to districts in states that did not win RTT grants? Or to those in, in Duncan's words "states that are less functional"? (And how exactly is that quantified?) Would only districts larger than a certain size be eligible? Would there be a minimum required percentage of low-income or otherwise at-risk students?

    •Do D.C. and Hawai'i get another bite at the apple? Hawai'i, one of the original RTT winners, is also the only U.S. state to have only a single school district. Does this mean Hawai'i would be eligible to compete in a district competition as well? The state has performed so poorly in its implementation of the grant that the Department of Education has threatened to revoke the grant. Similarly, the District of Columbia is, in a grave injustice, not a state, but it is treated like one in federal education policy and was permitted to compete in RTT as a state--and also won a grant in 2010. Would D.C., or the District of Columbia Public Schools, be eligible to compete in RTT as well?

    •What about charters and CMOs? The original RTT included provisions to promote charter schools--although not as much as many people thought. But would an "RTT for districts" actually shortchange charters? In some states, charter schools are part of school districts, but in others they are their own LEAs--would charters that are their own LEAs be eligible for to compete for RTT for districts? Related, some CMOs now operate networks of charter schools that are in effect a type of non-geographic school district. A few CMOs are larger than many districts. And some high-performing CMOs are at the forefront on key reforms. Should these CMOs be allowed to compete in an RTT for districts (and do the LEA statuses of their schools matter here)?

The idea of an RTT for districts lays bare some underlying issues with the broader concept of how we think about school districts. A "school district" can mean multiple things: It can mean the particular geographic area that falls within the geographic boundaries of a school district, it can mean a local unit of government established in state law, or it can mean a "local educational agency" (LEA) and the schools that LEA operates. "School districts" typically do not appear in federal education law, but rather "local educational agencies" (which in many states include traditional school districts, charter schools, and some other types of local educational authorities, such as those that run special purpose schools). All of this is complicated by the fact, in our federalist system, "school districts" are the pure creatures of state law--and yet they are a key vehicle for most federal education policies and programs. And the evolution towards increased public education choice and portfolio district models further complicate things.

My other concern here is around wasted energy and the difficulties of running an effective competition. Recall that nearly 1,700 applicants (many of them districts) applied for the i3 competition in 2010, despite very long odds (ultimately, there were 49 winners); and 35 states competed for RTT ELC, including many that were clear long shots. You want people to have good judgment, but when there are money and bragging rights on the table, it can be very politically difficult for district leaders who are eligible to say they won't compete. The last thing we need is for thousands of school districts to apply for an RTT grant, diverting district level capacity and talent--already in short supply--into developing applications for a competition few districts are likely to win, and making it very difficult to run an effective competition. Obviously, the parameters of who can compete matter here. It might also make sense for the Department to design some sort of "pre-qualification" process, in which interested districts could submit a short, streamlined application based primarily on empirical data and yes/no questions about their policies, and, based on that, some subset would be invited to apply for the full competition.

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login | Register
Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.

Advertisement

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

Tags

AFT
Alex Grodd
Ana Menezes
Andrew Kelly
appropriations
ARRA
Aspire Public Schools
authorizing
Better Lesson
Bill Ferguson
certification
charter schools
child care
children's literature
choice
civil rights
CLASS
Core Knowledge
curriculum
D.C.
democracy
early childhood
Early Learning Challenge Grant
economics
elections
English language learners
entrepreneurship
equity
Evan Stone
fathers
finance
fix poverty first
Hailly Korman
harlem children's zone
HEA
Head Start
head start
health care
Higher Education
home-based child care
homeschooling
housing
How we think and talk about pre-k evidence
i3
IDEA
income inequality
instruction
international
Jason Chaffetz
Jen Medbery
just for fun
Justin Cohen
Kaya Henderson
Kenya
kindergarten
KIPP
Kirabo Jackson
Kwame Brown
land use
LearnBoost
libertarians
LIFO
literacy
Los Angeles
Louise Stoney
Mark Zuckerberg
Maryland
Massachusetts
Memphis
Michelle Rhee
Michigan
Mickey Muldoon
Neerav Kingsland
New Jersey
New Orleans
NewtownReaction
Next Gen leaders
Next Gen Leaders
nonsense
NSVF Summit
NYT
organizing
parent engagement
parenting
parking
pell grants
politics
poverty
PreK-3rd
presidents
principals
productivity
QRIS
Race to the Top
Rafael Corrales
redshirting
regulation
religion
rick hess
Roxanna Elden
RTT
san francisco
school choice
social services
SOTU
special education
Stephanie Wilson
stimulus
story
Sydney Morris
tax credits
Teacher Prep
teachers
technology
Title I
unions
urban issues
Vincent Gray
vouchers
Waiting for Superman
Washington
West Virginia
zoning