I think this WSJ editorial is wrong – Obama and Duncan are being VERY strong – but it’s good that folks are keeping the heat on:

 

• NOVEMBER 26, 2009, 7:34 P.M. ET
• WSJ editorial
• http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703499404574560440837012398.html

School Reform Retreat?

Duncan eases the rules for states to get 'Race to the Top' cash.

The Obama Administration's education rhetoric, with its emphasis on charter schools and evaluating teachers based on student performance, has won plaudits from school reformers—and from us. But this month the Department of Education laid out in detail the eligibility requirements for states seeking federal grant money, and it looks like the praise may have been premature.

In the spring, when the White House announced its $4.35 billion "Race to the Top" initiative to improve K-12 schooling, President Obama said, "Any state that makes it unlawful to link student progress to teacher evaluations will have to change its ways to compete for a grant." Education Secretary Arne Duncan told reporters, "states that don't have charter school laws, or put artificial caps on the growth of charter schools, will jeopardize their application."

The Administration appears to be retreating on both requirements. The final Race to the Top regulations allow states to use "multiple measures," including peer reviews, to evaluate instructors. This means states that prohibit student test data from being used to measure a teacher's performance may be eligible for the federal funds, even though the President clearly said that they wouldn't be.

Nor are states any longer required to embrace charter schools to win a grant. In June, Mr. Duncan scolded by name some of the states, such as Maine and Tennessee, that don't allow charters or limit enrollment in these independent public schools. Under the final regulations, however, states that prohibit charters can still receive Race to the Top dollars so long as they have other kinds of "innovative public schools." That's an invitation for states to game the criteria by relabeling a few traditional public schools as innovative.

The requirement to eliminate caps on the number of charter schools has also been eliminated. If the caps are generous enough, Mr. Duncan now says, they might be okay—which also gives him political wiggle room to give a state a break. Charter caps are one of the ways that teachers unions limit competition and stymie reform.

It's no accident that these weakened requirements are the same ones that most upset the teachers unions. Dennis Van Roekel, who heads the National Education Association, has repeatedly expressed skepticism about using student test scores to help determine a teacher's effectiveness, and the NEA officially opposes any effort to "greatly expand" charter schools, a stated goal of Race to the Top. The open question was always whether the Obama Administration would be willing to cross this powerful political ally.

Mr. Duncan insists he isn't going soft. "I don't think there's anything that's watered down," he said in a conference call. "We think it's tough but fair." But even fellow liberals are unpersuaded. Amy Wilkins of Education Trust, a children's advocacy group, said that Race to the Top presents "a real opportunity for unfettered boldness" but that the final guidelines ultimately contain "no incentive for states to be particularly bold."

The Education Department will be accepting state applications until mid-January, and grants won't be awarded until next spring, so there's still time for the Administration to make Race to the Top more than a political slogan. As part of the stimulus package, states were already awarded some $100 billion in education funding based on population formulas with no meaningful reform required. Handing out $4.35 billion more for token reform would be another insult to taxpayers, and to the children trapped in failing schools.