Friday, March 5, 2010

Education Finalists Picked


From the Wall Street Journal Online:

The Obama administration picked 15 states and the District of Columbia as finalists in a heated competition for extra federal education funds to shake up underperforming schools.

The states that made the cut in the $4.35 billion Race to the Top competition were Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina and Tennessee.
...

Not allowing student test scores to be tied to teacher evaluations "seemed like a clear no-no under the rules" of the competition, said Joe Williams, executive director of Democrats for Education Reform, a group that favors charter schools and stronger teacher evaluation systems. He said the state legislature now had a short window to enact legislation that would correct New York's shortcomings.

Joel Klein, chancellor of the New York City school system, the largest in the country, failed to win the legislative changes he sought in January, but cheered the announcement nonetheless. "We're within striking distance,'' he said. He wants the legislature to immediately move to lift the charter cap and change state laws regarding teacher evaluations, firings and seniority. "That's the way to win this,'' he said. "We know that these things are hurting us.''

California, which faces a $20 billion state budget crisis, failed to make the finalist list. The state had hoped to qualify for as much as $700 million at a time when many local school districts are slashing their budgets. California had also tried hard to qualify by doing things such as ramming a bill through the legislature over union objections that allowed teachers' pay to be linked to students' test scores.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Some pretty good company (Massachusetts)--apparently good state school systems can have underperforming schools and populations at risk.

I hope the party out of power will stop using the reputation of our school system (in general) as a flogging weapon in demonzing the party in power.
The state suffers.

Anonymous said...

Speaking of Mass.
(State makes Boston move on bad schools)

http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2010/03/05/dramatic_shake_up_planned_at_12_boston_public_schools/

Note:
The Boston Schools fall under the Mayor's jurisdiction. Shoud we be happy or disappointed that our CEO doesn't push our schools?

Anonymous said...

Arne is full of it. Obama is ill-advised on this one.

Public school should quit competing with private schools. It's not a fair match because the rules are different.

Cerebration said...

For a copy of the Powerpoint presentation used by representatives from the US Dept of Education at a recent meeting at Agnes Scott College, go to this link at Community Radar and download the file -

Thanks Kim!

Cerebration said...

I figured I would copy and paste the qualifications for receiving a School Improvement Grant (SIG) from the PPT:

What Schools Qualify for the SIG monies?

TIER ONE

Any Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that—

Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of or the five lowest-achieving such schools (whichever number of schools is greater); or

Is a high school that has had a graduation rate that is below 60 percent over a number of years.

TIER TWO

Any secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I, Part A funds that—

Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of secondary schools or the five lowest-achieving secondary schools in the State that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds; or

Is a high school that has had a graduation rate as that is below 60 percent over a number of years;

TIER THREE

Any Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that is not a Tier I school.

A State Education Agency May Also Add Other Schools That…

TIER ONE

Title I eligible elementary schools that are no higher achieving than the highest-achieving school that is as a “persistently lowest-achieving school” in Tier I and that are:

in the bottom 20% of all schools in the State based on proficiency rates; or

have not made AYP for two consecutive years.

TIER TWO

Title I eligible secondary schools that are (1) no higher achieving than the highest-achieving school that is “persistently lowest-achieving school” in Tier II or (2) high schools that have had a graduation rate below 60 percent over a number of years and that are:

in the bottom 20% of all schools in the State based on proficiency rates; or

have not made AYP for two consecutive years.

TIER THREE

Tier III: Title I eligible schools that do not meet the requirements to be in Tier I or Tier II and that are:

in the bottom 20% of all schools in the State based on proficiency rates; or

have not made AYP for two years.

RE-CAP

There are Three Tiers of Schools with Tier One Being a Priority The State May Add More if it Chooses To

Download the entire PPT at the link Kim has provided (in my comment above).