I have been accused of being too negative on the ‘Race to the Top’ competition by many, in and out of the education reform world. (I prefer the term cynical - even skeptical or experienced would do.) But recent soul-searching in the aftermath of Monday’s announcement that Delaware and Tennessee would be the inaugural winners in phase one has forced me to re-evaluate my thinking. When the news first broke Monday morning, I was a bit taken aback. But then, I figured “why not?”

Even if they’re not welcoming to charter schools, at least they have them, right? Moratoriums, caps and restricted enrollment must just be their way of maintaining quality standards.

And while Tennessee has only raised 8th grade proficiency on NAEP reading tests by 2 points in 11 years and Delaware 8th graders have remained stagnate since 2003, both have signed on for common standards. That should fix that issue lickety split.

And in re-reviewing both of their applications, I put myself in the place of a true DoED evaluator - alone, in a dark room, on my 4th application, deadline approaching - and I found that I truly appreciated the lack of detail in the teacher evaluation sections of each app. I was free to believe exactly what was written, and only what was written. I wasn’t hampered by knowledge of teachers union contracts, work rules, etc. And besides, with all those union locals signing on to the state proposals, I too was convinced that buy-in - not game changing reforms - would be the tipping point.

So there you have it. Just as Diane Ravitch has been accused of late, I am admitting to a 180-degree turn with respect to ‘Race to the Top’. As one can’t help but hit a few lawyers on a DC street if one throws a handful of pennies, one can’t help but buy a few decent reforms if one spends a couple hundred million dollars, can they?

Right?

(Happy April Fools.)

(Originally posted to the National Journal’s Education Experts blog)

‘Race to the Top’ meaningful? Serious education reform? To the contrary, the choice of Delaware and Tennessee to be the first demonstration of the Obama Administration’s commitment to breaking the status quo is not a choice at all, but an echo of the establishment’s stranglehold on our leadership in Washington today. That establishment goes far beyond the unions. It includes the chiefs, the principals groups, the administrators associations, school boards, the before school groups, the after schools, the publishers, et al — all groups who have praised the recent policy prescriptions led by Arne Duncan. Why? Why would the Blob back real reform? Maybe because it’s not real reform…

Read the entire post HERE.

“Buried within a 263-page application for $409 million in federal grant money, Ohio education officials detail how they want to spend $600,000 for two cultural anthropologists, $400,000 for a video, $320,000 for a communications plan and another $160,000 for ‘creative messaging,’ according to this morning’s Dayton, Ohio news.  This set State Senator Jon Husted, a former education chair and current candidate for Secretary of State off the deep end. He called it an example of why people lose faith in government, and was “embarrassed” by some of the things the state is seeking to fund.

That’s not the worst of it. These abuses of money are obvious, but what about the policies that sound like they are addressing the Administration’s mandate to reform education but are actually carefully crafted to dodge the issue?

Take Tennessee, a state rumored to be a finalist today, whose Governor was lauded for signing into law a bill that requires at least 35% of teacher evaluations be pegged to student growth.  Their ‘Race to the Top’ application appears to imply that a greater amount of student growth counts towards teacher evaluation than is actually the case. The application says, “objective student achievement data will comprise 50% of the evaluation”, but does not make clear that student growth is still only 35% of that process, not 50%. The rest of how they will determine teacher performance is left up to multiple measures, classroom observation and other assessment tools to be decided. Cagey, no?

How about the competition’s push for charter schools? Delaware’s movement toward charter schools was halted by a series of self-imposed moratoriums (not mentioned in their application), they approved zero charters for this current school year and their approval of three new charter schools to open in 2010-2011 is hardly bold. And yet their application states “Delaware is among the most welcoming states for charter schools.”

Reviewers, however, are not permitted to use their knowledge of a state’s policies and environment to judge the applications.  It’s what’s on paper that requires their focus, not what they know (or can easily find out).

These are just a few of the examples that have many wondering how we can give credit to an otherwise well -intentioned program, one that may actually end up rewarding states for creative writing over good policy. Today we will know more when EdSec Duncan announces the finalists. Whether it will mean the race is won, or just starting again, remains to be seen.