- Posted by David on January 26, 2010
- Obama’s ‘Race to the Top’
Who’ll blink first: the unions, or the White House?
The Obama Administration unveiled its new “Race to the Top” initiative late last week, in which it will use the lure of $4.35 billion in federal cash to induce states to improve their K-12 schools. This is going to be interesting to watch, because if nothing else the public school establishment is no longer going to be able to say that lack of money is its big problem.
Four billion dollars is a lot of money, but it’s a tiny percentage of what the U.S. spends on education. The Department of Education estimates that the U.S. as a whole spent $667 billion on K-12 education in the 2008-09 school year alone, up from $553 billion in 2006-07. The stimulus bill from earlier this year includes some $100 billion more in federal education spending—an unprecedented amount. The tragedy is that nearly all of this $100 billion is being dispensed to the states by formula, which allows school districts to continue resisting reform while risking very little in overall federal funding.
All of this is on top of the education spending boom during the Bush years to pay for the 2001 No Child Left Behind law. Democrats liked to claim that law was “underfunded,” but the reality is that inflation-adjusted Education Department elementary and secondary spending under President Bush grew to $37.9 billion from $28.3 billion, or 34%. NCLB-specific funding rose by more than 40% between 2001 and 2008.
It’s also worth noting that the U.S. has been trying without much success to spend its way to education excellence for decades. Between 1970 and 2004, per-pupil outlays more than doubled in real terms, and the federal portion of that spending nearly tripled. Yet reading scores on national standardized tests have remained relatively flat. Black and Hispanic students are doing better, but they continue to lag far behind white students in both test scores and graduation rates.
So now comes “Race to the Top,” which the Obama Administration claims will reward only those states that raise their academic standards, improve teacher quality and expand the reach of charter schools. “This competition will not be based on politics, ideology or the preferences of a particular interest group,” said President Obama on Friday. “Instead, it will be based on a simple principle—whether a state is ready to do what works. We will use the best data available to determine whether a state can meet a few key benchmarks for reform, and states that outperform the rest will be rewarded with a grant.”
Sounds great, though this White House is, at the behest of the unions, also shuttering a popular school voucher program that its own evaluation shows is improving test scores for low-income minorities in Washington, D.C. The Administration can expect more such opposition to “Race to the Top.” School choice is anathema to the nation’s two largest teachers unions, the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, which also oppose paying teachers for performance rather than for seniority and credentials.
NEA President Dennis Van Roekel told the Washington Post last week that charter schools and merit pay raise difficult issues for his members, yet Education Secretary Arne Duncan has said states that block these reforms could jeopardize their grant eligibility. We’ll see who blinks first. The acid test is whether Messrs. Duncan and Obama are willing to withhold money from politically important states as the calendar marches toward 2012.
Race to the Top is bound to have some impact, and lawmakers in several states—including Tennessee, Rhode Island, Louisiana and Massachusetts—already have passed charter-friendly legislation in hopes of tapping the fund. But the exercise will fail if it is merely a one-off trade of cash for this or that new law. The key is whether the money can be used to promote enough school choice and other reforms that induce school districts to change how the other $800 billion or so is spent.
Charter schools and voucher programs regularly produce better educational outcomes with less money. But as long as most education spending goes to support the status quo, Race to the Top will be mostly a case of political show and tell.
Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit
- Posted by David on January 14, 2010
In the “Who Couldn’t Have Seen This One Coming Department”
School administrators across the state are crafting bleak budgets for the next school year and warning of steep cutbacks, including teacher layoffs, to cope with a probable sharp drop in funding from Beacon Hill and dwindling federal stimulus money.
Though schools grappled with thinned-down budgets last year, they got relief from a massive infusion of federal education dollars that is now all but spent, and officials are bracing for cuts that go deep into the classroom.
Arlington is weighing the elimination of 21 elementary school teaching positions. Needham, for the first time in recent memory, is also proposing that teaching positions be cut, despite growing enrollment. Hingham, facing a $3 million deficit, has similarly placed 33 teaching positions on the block. Brockton is looking at a staggering shortfall that could approach $20 million.
“We dodged a bullet last year,’’ said Glenn Koocher, executive director of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees. “Now, people have taken the panic buttons out and are keeping them close. There’s an unprecedented level of angst, and it’s evolving into anger.’’
Most school budgets remain in the blueprint stage, as educators wait for Governor Deval Patrick to unveil his spending plan later this month, an announcement that will begin the months-long budget process in earnest.
Some school leaders are reluctant to discuss potential layoffs, wary of harming teachers’ morale. But many said the emerging scope of the crisis makes staff reductions nearly inevitable, with the state reeling from anemic tax collections and residents reluctant to approve property tax increases.
“Over the last couple of years, schools have tried their best to avoid it,’’ said Thomas Scott, executive director of the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents. “They’ve virtually annihilated everything else: administrators, textbooks, supplies, infrastructure needs. But now there’s no place for them to go but into the marrow of the classroom.’’
While the economy is showing some signs of life, Massachusetts still faces a yawning budget deficit, with one budget watchdog group placing it at $3 billion.
Last year, the state aggressively tapped its savings and spent the bulk of the roughly $800 million in education funds from the federal stimulus package to minimize budget losses. This year, state leaders do not have that luxury.
“Every city and town is likely to face steep local aid cuts,’’ said Samuel R. Tyler, president of the Boston Municipal Research Bureau. “You just don’t know how steep.’’
In recent weeks, state officials have warned local school administrators to expect sharp cuts in local subsidies, although legislators will not determine the final total for several months. In poorer school systems that rely heavily on state assistance, the prospect is alarming.
“We’ve been told to prepare for cuts of 5 to 10 percent,’’ said Aldo Petronio, executive director of financial services for Brockton public schools. “That would be devastating.’’
Brockton, a city rocked by the housing crisis, starkly illustrates the potential affect of education cuts. Last year, the district received $126 million in state funds, which comprised more than 80 percent of its total budget, and another $6.5 million from the federal stimulus package. This year, a sizable chunk of that aid is in jeopardy and, with it, many jobs.
“You can do the math,’’ he said.
The depth of the financial woes sparked a legislative rush earlier this month, with lawmakers passing an education overhaul that will better position the state to qualify for about $250 million reserved for states that aggressively work to improve lackluster schools.
“Last year, the stimulus money provided a lot of cushion,’’ Scott said. “This year it’s not there, and people are bracing for the worst.’’
Legislative leaders have told educators to expect cuts in school assistance, which enjoys strong public support and is fiercely protected by advocates. But given the magnitude of the state’s financial hole, many assume that every budget item is on the table.
“Everyone’s bracing for a cut,’’ said Superintendent John Antonucci of Westwood, who will present a budget with no increase to the School Committee tomorrow. “That means we need to reduce in a lot of areas. That ‘do-more-with-less mentality,’ you can only do that for so long.’’
The budget calls for teachers to go without a cost-of-living salary increase for a second straight year, and many educators predict that financial constraints will make contract negotiations between administrators and teachers more contentious.
“We’re extremely concerned,’’ said Anne Wass, president of the Massachusetts Teachers Association. “Last year, I don’t think the layoffs were as bad as expected because of the stimulus money. Now, it looks like we’re going to be facing some incredibly lean years.’’
Several difficult budget cycles have left schools with virtually no financial margin, others said.
“At some point it all comes home to roost,’’ Scott said.