The Department of Education announced today that there are 16 semi-finalists, out of 41 states (including the District of Columbia) that applied for a chance at the $4 billion in competitive funds known as Race to the Top (RTTT). These 16 states (Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Tennessee) are to bring a five-person team to present their case in person to reviewers in two weeks. Andy Smarick, Liam Goldrick, and Rick Hess all seem to think that 16 semi-finalists is too high. Smarick, calling it a “major disappointment,” says he was quietly hoping for just three.
To me, three would be way too low, 25 or 30 would be too high, and 16 seems about right. We want this program to be aspirational, and for a carrot to function properly it has to be placed just beyond the grasp of the horse. If a minuscule number of states were accepted in this, the first round, states would have little hope of attaining something in the second. It also makes sense to reward progress, since RTTT has already caused a substantial number of changes in state laws. In a perfect world, the first round of RTTT funding would reward a small number of proactive states that seek funds to implement real reforms, in turn encouraging peer states to do similar things in the second round.
Now, it’s fair to criticize the applications themselves (New York, for example, made the list even though it was unable to improve its charter law), but the number of semi-finalists strikes an appropriate balance between tough and fair. Presumably the number will be whittled down further after the in-person presentations as well, so relax guys, and have some porridge.
Click Image To Enlarge
5/11/2012 | Kevin Carey talks to Salon about the government's role in rising student debt.
5/8/2012 | Kevin Carey discusses the problem of rising tuition and student loan interest rates with The Nation. 
5/4/2012 | Stephen Burd talks to Education Week about student loan debt and help from Congress.
{ 1 comment }
Actually, Chad, as one of the three bears — baby bear, most likely, given the company — I prefer oatmeal.
I do agree with you in that the real issue is which states and how many states receive funding in Phase One. The number of semifinalists isn’t all that relevant, although I think 16 was a surprise to pretty much everyone.
Something this is interesting to think about, however, is whether any states apart of this group of 16 have any chance at the money in Phase Two. Barring major revisions to their applications, will rejected states be able to rise above Phase One semifinalists given a new set of reviewers? How many actually will make dramatic changes to their applications between now and June 1? Will we see language from successful applications sneaking into Phase Two applications?
Comments on this entry are closed.