澳门跑狗论坛

Includes updates and/or revisions.

With the second-round deadline for federal Race to the Top Fund grants less than six weeks away, states are rushing to raise the stakes on their education reform plans as they fight over the remaining $3.4 billion in prize money.

But in doing so, states from Massachusetts to Colorado are tangling with their teachers鈥� unions as they test how far they can go to meet federal officials鈥� demands that they be aggressive, yet inclusive, in devising a road map to dramatically improve student achievement.

鈥淥n one hand, the federal government is saying, 鈥楤e bold,鈥� which implies significant challenge to the status quo, which then tends to be disruptive and generate resistance,鈥� said S. Paul Reville, the education secretary in Massachusetts, where the American Federation of Teachers affiliate has revoked its support of the state鈥檚 second-round application over teacher issues. 鈥淵et at the same time, the federal government is asking us to get full [district and union] support,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 the dynamic tension.鈥�

In Florida, legislation that would have revamped teacher evaluations, potentially positioning the state for a better Race to the Top score, sparked an outcry from teachers; Republican Gov. Charlie Crist ended up vetoing the legislation.

In Maine, the National Education Association affiliate is urging local union leaders not to support the state鈥檚 application after lawmakers passed legislation allowing schools to use student achievement as a factor in teacher and principal evaluations.

And in Louisiana, pending legislation to link at least half a teacher鈥檚 evaluation to student test scores鈥攁 priority under the Race to the Top鈥攈as come under intense fire from the Louisiana Association of Educators, an NEA affiliate, which has turned to automated phone calls and newspaper ads to rally opposition.

Not securing district and union support has its dangers, since nearly 20 percent of the Race to the Top鈥檚 hinges on such support. Still, relying too much on buy-in also has its dangers, said Timothy Daly, the president of the New Teacher Project, a New York City-based nonprofit group that helps urban districts train and hire teachers.

鈥淚t鈥檚 leading states to make bad decisions, to water down the content and get everyone to sign on,鈥� he said. 鈥淎nd many states will end up sorry.鈥�

Some Holdouts

Not everyone is strategizing for round two of this $4 billion competition, which last month saw two winners鈥擠elaware and Tennessee鈥攃apture $600 million in the first round, out of 41 applicants. ("$3.4 Billion Remains in Race to Top Fund,鈥� April 7, 2010.) The funding comes from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the economic-stimulus package passed last year by Congress. Round-two applications are due June 1, with the money to be awarded by September.

Kansas, which ranked 29th out of 41 first-round applicants, has already bowed out of the competition. And, in a sign that they will not compete in round two, Alaska and Texas鈥攏either of which applied the first time鈥攚ere among the seven states that did not attend, either by conference call or in person, an optional April 21 technical-assistance planning session the U.S. Department of Education held in Minneapolis for prospective round-two applicants.

Indiana appears out of the competition, too, amid an increasingly bitter feud between state Superintendent Tony Bennett, an elected Republican, and the state鈥檚 largest teachers鈥� union. After the Indiana State Teachers Association turned down an invitation to meet formally to plot out a Race to the Top strategy, Mr. Bennett announced this week that Indiana would not apply in round two鈥攂ecause of the union鈥檚 lack of cooperation.

鈥淲ithout support from the union that represents more than 90 percent of Indiana鈥檚 school districts, our application will not be competitively positioned,鈥� Mr. Bennett said in a statement.

The Indiana teachers鈥� association said it wanted 鈥渕eaningful work sessions,鈥� and not a 鈥渕edia event arranged for the purpose of strong-arming ISTA into agreeing to an unequivocal sign-off鈥� of the state鈥檚 application, according to an April 21 letter by Nate Schellenberger, the president of the NEA affiliate.

Yet some observers worry that all the attention to union buy-in may be skewing the focus of the Race to the Top competition. Such buy-in does make up a sizable chunk of points, but 48 percent of points are attached to the quality of a state鈥檚 plan in four key areas: standards and assessments, data systems, teacher and principal effectiveness, and turning around the lowest-achieving schools.

鈥淭here鈥檚 a myth being perpetuated that buy-in is the decisive factor, but there are states showing they can have statewide impact without everyone saying they鈥檙e happy,鈥� said Charles Barone, the director of federal policy for Democrats for Education Reform, a New York City-based political action committee that鈥檚 been tracking and critiquing the Race to the Top competition. 鈥淚t shouldn鈥檛 be a popularity contest.鈥�

Although the signature of a local district superintendent is required to demonstrate that a school district is participating in the state鈥檚 plan, a union鈥檚 sign-on is optional. It does offer further evidence of district support, however, and helps boost scores.

In choosing Delaware and Tennessee as round-one winners, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan pointed to considerable district and union buy-in鈥攅nough to mean each state鈥檚 plan would reach 100 percent of the student population鈥攁s being instrumental. (In a tie between two states, the state with the best score on the district-buy-in portion of the application wins.) But Mr. Duncan also highlighted other features in those states鈥� applications, in each of the four key reform areas.

鈥楪o Back and Try鈥�

The runners-up, meanwhile, show that buy-in isn鈥檛 the determining factor. Georgia placed third with only 12.7 percent of its districts participating (and no unions, because it鈥檚 a 鈥渞ight to work鈥� state), and Florida came in fourth with just 8 percent of the unions from participating school districts signing on.

While buy-in may not be the major determinant in scoring, it鈥檚 crucial in a practical sense, said Diane Donohue, the president of the Delaware State Education Association, which played a big role in that state鈥檚 successful Race to the Top application.

鈥淲ithout the very people who have to do that work, it鈥檚 going to be very hard to do [any] reform effort,鈥� Ms. Donohue told prospective applicants at the Education Department鈥檚 applicants鈥� meeting in Minneapolis. 鈥淕o back and try to have those conversations and get those people on board.鈥�

In Rhode Island, Commissioner of Education Deborah A. Gist is trying to do that, since just 5 percent of unions from participating districts were on board in round one. The state is holding a series of public hearings to get more feedback and consensus.

鈥淕aining support from all districts and unions will surely help us in our Race to the Top,鈥� Ms. Gist said in a statement.

And in New York, the chancellor of the state board of regents, Merryl Tisch, has said her state won鈥檛 compete if unions and state lawmakers don鈥檛 agree on changes to improve the state鈥檚 charter school sector and teacher-evaluation system, local media reports said.

Other states are charging ahead in round two in the face of union opposition.

In Colorado, a bill pending in the legislature that would change how teachers are evaluated, more strongly tying those decisions to student performance, is being opposed by the Colorado Education Association, an NEA affiliate.

The legislation is prompting the CEA to withdraw support for the state鈥檚 round-two application鈥攁 sharp contrast to the ultra-collaborative approach Colorado鈥檚 education community took in round one. (鈥淪printing To Secure Top Prize,鈥� Nov. 11, 2009.)

鈥淲e understand the financial constraints the districts are under, and $175 million is still a huge boost for us,鈥� said Linda Barker, the director of teaching and learning for the CEA, referring to the potential award money if Colorado wins a grant. 鈥淭he money is important, but at what cost?鈥�

The union is opposed to the changed course for improving teacher quality鈥攁nd a faster timeline鈥攁nd still supports the round-one initiative to put that work in the hands of a governor鈥檚 council. But state officials believe that Colorado needs a law on the books, and not just a council, to make a stronger second run at the Race to the Top.

鈥淭he primary purpose of the legislation is it鈥檚 good policy,鈥� said Nina Lopez, the director of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for the Colorado education department. Despite the state-union tension over that legislation, she said, there is still 鈥渇undamental agreement around 90 percent of what we鈥檙e doing, so there鈥檚 no intention of not moving forward.鈥�

In Massachusetts, the aft affiliate backed the round-one application but is changing course for round two. Aft Massachusetts President Thomas J. Gosnell said that the mass firing of staff members at low-performing Central Falls HighSchool in neighboring Rhode Island was among the reasons.

鈥淚f this can happen in Rhode Island, this can happen here,鈥� said Mr. Gosnell, who said Massachusetts education leaders supported the Central Falls action.

However, Mr. Reville, the Massachusetts education secretary, writes in an upcoming commentary in the New England Journal of Higher Education that he would never support the 鈥渨holesale, undifferentiated firing of an entire faculty,鈥� but that restructuring and staff changes certainly will be made in the lowest-performing schools.

In addition, Mr. Gosnell said, there鈥檚 reluctance to support round two since the union was pressured to support passage of a new charter-school-expansion law enacted to help Massachusetts win a Race to the Top grant, only to see the state end up losing in round one.

But Mr. Reville, the education secretary, said Massachusetts isn鈥檛 going to back down from a 鈥渟ound set of strategies鈥� that has produced strong student achievement that places the state at the top of national rankings.

鈥淲e鈥檙e seeking the advice and the suggestions of everyone in the field,鈥� Mr. Reville said. 鈥淏ut we鈥檙e not going to get into a negotiation.鈥�