One of the most striking aspects of the proposed Race to the Top application released last week (see my previous commentary) is its treatment of the "teacher data firewall" issue. Out of the myriad education reform ideas packed into the application, only one was given status as an absolute eligibility requirement: States that don't permit schools to use student achievement data when making teacher tenure or evaluation decisions need not apply.
It's not apparent why this is more important to the Obama Administration than, say, lifting charter school caps, or embracing merit pay. But two things are clear. First, it pokes the teachers unions straight in the eye, as I told the Times and Ed Week. And second, it pokes California straight in the eye, as it is the only state that is indisputably disqualified as a result of this provision (well, maybe Wisconsin too). (Whether New York slides through remains somewhat murky.)
California Governor Arnold??Schwarzenegger??has promised to change California's laws to bring it into compliance, though California teachers unions aren't happy about that.
But here's my question, again: Why did this issue rise to the level of an eligibility requirement? And why pick on California?
I have two theories. (Actually, I have one theory, and a friend of mine has another.) My theory: George Miller, the chairman of the House Education and Labor committee, is having fun yanking California's chain, and the CTA/NEA's chain as well. Miller, a liberal from the Bay Area, has a long history of driving his own state's officials bonkers, especially around teacher issues. He's also probably still mad at the NEA for making such a stink about merit pay when Miller's NCLB reauthorization bill was floated back in 2007. (Miller thought he had a deal with the NEA and got quite angry when Reg Weaver blasted away at the bill anyway.)
There's no way that the Administration published the Race to the Top application without running it by Miller; I wouldn't be surprised if his office pushed the Department to be as tough on California over the firewall issue as possible. At the least, he signed off on it. And he doesn't regret it; he said in a statement to the??LA Times: " "I hope states that don't presently meet the eligibility will decide to take the steps necessary to meet it. It's the right policy to take our education system to the next level."
My friend's theory is that Russlynn Ali, the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights and former head of Education-Trust West, pushed for the provision. That makes sense too, since this was an issue that drove her crazy as a California-based advocate. Perhaps she and Miller teamed up on this one; it would have hardly been the first time they collaborated in such a manner.
Here's what's interesting: Most members of Congress try to bring home the pork to their home states and districts. (That's one issue that's surfaced around healthcare reform--how to keep Congress away from Medicare reimbursement rate decisions.) But here's George Miller, proud California citizen, doing what he can to keep the Golden State from winning the Race to the Top. (Or, more fairly, trying to browbeat??it into changing its laws in order to qualify.) Someone should ask a political scientist to make sense of that.
