澳门跑狗论坛

The U.S. Department of Education鈥檚 proposed guidelines for awarding $4 billion in Race to the Top Fund money send a strong message that any state hoping to land a competitive grant should expect to allow student test scores to be used in decisions about teacher compensation and evaluation.

The draft plans outlined by department officials last month call for states to be judged on 19 education reform criteria, including how friendly they are to charter schools and whether they cut state K-12 funding this year.

In addition, the department is setting two absolute preconditions: States must have been approved by the Education Department as eligible to receive fiscal-stabilization funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (most already have been), and states must not have any laws in place barring the use of student-achievement data for evaluating teachers and principals.

States not meeting those two absolutes would be ineligible to compete for aid from the Race to the Top Fund, a comparatively small鈥攂ut highly coveted鈥攕lice of some $100 billion in federal economic-stimulus aid for education. That policy could eliminate California and New York, big states with powerful congressional delegations and lots of students, but with legal fire walls between student and teacher data.

Being able to link teacher and student data is 鈥渁bsolutely fundamental鈥攊t鈥檚 a building block,鈥� U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said in a recent interview. 鈥淲hen you鈥檙e reluctant or scared to make that link, you do a grave disservice to the teaching profession and to our nation鈥檚 children.鈥�

Timetable for Grants

So far, the criteria are just proposals鈥攂ut important enough to command President Barack Obama鈥檚 attention.

鈥淭his competition will not be based on politics or ideology or the preferences of a particular interest group. Instead, it will be based on a simple principle鈥攚hether a state is ready to do what works,鈥� Mr. Obama said in a July 24 speech at the Education Department, when the proposed criteria were announced. 鈥淣ot every state will win, and not every school district will be happy with the results.鈥�

The department is accepting comments until Aug. 28, and will make any changes before the rules and criteria become final in October.

States would have 60 days to apply for the first round of grants, with applications due in December. Awards would be made by the end of March. The second wave of grants would go out in September 2010, with applications due in late spring. A state that won a phase-one grant would not be eligible for a phase-two grant.

A state鈥檚 governor would have to officially apply for the money, but its state education chief and the president of its state education board would also be required to sign off. Federal officials would also want to see evidence of support for a state鈥檚 plan from key stakeholders, such as the state teachers鈥� union.

Massachusetts Commissioner of Education Mitchell Chester, whose state is often singled out by Obama administration officials for its education reform initiatives, said it will be a challenge to show the kind of support for a state鈥檚 plan that Secretary Duncan and his staff are proposing as a criteria.

Getting that much consensus in such a short period of time, Mr. Chester said, means states run the risk of having to 鈥渨ater down鈥� their proposals.

The Race to the Top Fund is just $4.35 billion of the $100 billion in education aid in the $787 billion recovery act passed by Congress in February鈥攚ith $350 million already committed to fund development of assessments as part of a national common-standards initiative.

But the fund is giving the education secretary important leverage. Mr. Duncan has made clear he intends to use the competitive grants to cajole states into making specific policy moves, such as lifting caps on the expansion of charter schools and tapping rainy-day funds rather than cutting state funding to K-12 schools. (鈥淩acing for an Early Edge,鈥� July 15, 2009.)

Based on 鈥楢ssurances鈥�

The list of proposed Race to the Top criteria is fairly predictable, revolving around the four 鈥渁ssurances鈥� that states were required to make to receive federal stimulus money. The assurances call for states to adopt internationally benchmarked standards; improve the recruitment, retention, and rewarding of educators; improve data collection; and turn around the lowest-performing schools.

States that have signed on to the common-standards movement being spearheaded by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers would be given preference under the Education Department鈥檚 draft. All but Alaska, Missouri, South Carolina, and Texas have done so. (鈥�46 States Agree to Common Academic Standards Effort,鈥� June 10, 2009.)

States that allow alternative-certification routes for teachers and principals also would be looked on favorably. States also would be judged on whether they used their share of the $39.5 billion State Fiscal Stabilization Fund on efforts to improve education, rather than just on plugging budget holes.

Although Mr. Duncan has hammered on states to remove charter school caps, states also would be judged on how equitably they fund charter schools compared with regular public schools, and on how much funding they provide for charter school facilities.

Secretary Duncan had also stressed his disapproval of states that have laws barring the use of student-achievement data in teacher-evaluation decisions, but the proposed criteria go further: Having such a law would automatically disqualify a state.

California prohibits its newly established teacher-identification database from being used for decisions about teacher pay, promotion, evaluation, or other employment matters. In New York, state legislators barred the use of student-achievement data in tenure decisions. That law is scheduled to sunset in 2010, according to the state department of education.

鈥淚 hope states that don鈥檛 presently meet the eligibility will decide to take the steps necessary to meet it. It鈥檚 the right policy to take our education system to the next level,鈥� said U.S. Rep. George Miller, a Democrat and the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, whose home state of California has such a law.

Teachers鈥� unions harbor concerns about the technical quality of the tests that would be used to judge their members鈥� performance, as well as the validity of many 鈥渧alue added鈥� methodologies, which seek to identify the impact of a given teacher on the achievement of his or her students.

The president of the 1.4 millionmember American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, has in the past said that student test score data should be used primarily for informative and instructional purposes. (鈥淕rowth Data for Teachers Under Review,鈥� Oct. 22, 2008.)

Education commentators, meanwhile, say that the proposed guidance sends a clear signal to the teachers鈥� unions.

鈥淭his is clearly poking the unions in the eye,鈥� said Michael J. Petrilli, the vice president for national programs and policy at the Washington-based Thomas B. Fordham Institute and a former Education Department official under President George W. Bush.

Questions Remain

Still unresolved is whether any of the remaining criteria would be given more weight than others, and if so, which ones.

And while states would be judged heavily on their plans for the Race to the Top money, it鈥檚 still unresolved how Education Department officials would balance a state鈥檚 proposed reform plan and the policies the state already has in place.

鈥淲e鈥檙e not just looking for a plan but a commitment, 鈥� what you are doing now,鈥� Mr. Duncan said. 鈥淭his is not about the hypothetical. You must demonstrate to us your plans, ideas, and capacity to deliver on this.鈥�

Staff Writer Stephen Sawchuk contributed to this story.