There has been much speculation about Obey's obviously divisive (and mathematically flawed) amendment to the federal Edujobs bill. The proposal, which includes $300 million in cuts from the Teacher Incentive Fund and the Charter Schools Program, and $500 million from Race to the Top, has been criticized as ?an opportunity to gut the administration's ambitious and successful education agenda.? It recently passed the US House of Representatives and awaits action by the Senate and a possible veto from Obama (I secretly want the bill to get that far to see if Obama really means what he says), and has given everybody something fresh to talk about related to Race to the Top.
We've speculated before that Ohio's RttT application isn't the winning-est among them, especially as its round two application didn't include substantive changes from the first round, in which the state ranked tenth. Half a million in cuts would shrink the pot and make the competition slightly more fierce, a possibility that Stafford calls a silver lining.
In terms of making Race to the Top bolder and more competitive (akin to Duncan's original vision), I agree. But for Ohio, a state facing a monumental budget cliff, calling that a silver lining is like suggesting to a friend who just broke both legs that it's a fortunate opportunity to catch up on her reading.
And as far as folks who argue that the possible cuts to RttT are overblown (yesterday Alexander Russo from This Week in Education tweeted ?Has anyone made the case that $800M for edujobs does anything more than hurt RTT's feelings? If so, I haven't come across it yet? ? I guess that depends totally on where you live. Here in the Buckeye State, a shrunken RttT cash pool truly threatens Ohio's chances of winning. The state won't just suffer from hurt feelings ? it may actually lose money!
This point was illustrated beautifully yesterday in a post by Politics K-12 blogger Michele McNeil. States should read this analysis ? which outlines how much each would win with both Edujobs and Race to the Top ? before jumping on either bandwagon.
According to this, Ohio would receive $366,857,335 under Edujobs, a full $33 million less than it asked for in its Race to the Top application. (Granted, some districts didn't sign onto RttT and would prefer Edujobs. Edujobs would go entirely to districts while RttT would be split between the state and districts. As Emmy pointed out, this means about $100 million more for districts under Edujobs. Further, Edujobs doesn't require districts to do anything differently or adopt any reforms, so maybe the $33 million isn't a big deal. In other words, Race to the Top is the parent who gives a [larger] allowance in exchange for doing chores, and Edujobs is the parent who just hands cash to the kids.)
At any rate, in terms of absolute numbers, Ohio will receive more under Race to the Top and should hope that no funds are cut from it since it's currently running at the middle of the pack.
Blanket support for the Obey proposal among Ohio leaders doesn't make sense, unless it's coupled with a na?ve belief that Ohio will also win RttT and get double the money.?While OEA is pumped for Edujobs and Gov. Strickland is writing a letter in support of it to President Obama (and despite their ideological preference for Edujobs and their likely disapproval for much of Obama's ed reform agenda)?? they should at least be aware that these two programs represent a potentially costly tradeoff for the Buckeye State.
- Jamie Davies O'Leary
