K–12 | Daily Report

Well, as of yesterday, the final bell rung on California's foray into Race to the Top. And the results were sobering: After two stabs at hundreds of millions in federal dollars, there's no cash to show for it.

The winners were Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island and the District of Columbia. California hoped to gain up to $700 million.

Now larger questions loom. What does the twice-abysmal performance say about the current state of California education? Will the results spur California education leaders to do a major self-reflection or a systemwide reassessment? Or will the state chug along on the same course at the same pace, as if Race to the Top never happened?

Official comments about what worked and what didn't in California's application will be accessible sometime today. The judges passed over California in round one after questioning the state's effort to build a high-quality data-tracking system. The reviewers also consistently gave low points for California's lack of buy-in from the teachers unions.

Maryland's challenges echoed California's. Maryland also lost points in round one because of weak assessments and standards. It also hadn't implemented all of the data tracking the judges wanted.

So what happened to enable Maryland to win $250 million? What changes did they make that California didn't or couldn't?

An excerpt from Maryland's press release yesterday could offer a clue. It says:

Twenty-two of Maryland's 24 school systems joined in the application process, along with the Baltimore Teachers Union, the [Prince George's County Educators' Association] and scores of other state education and business groups.

Meanwhile here, as late as May, key union leaders knew nothing of the state's efforts in round two. Remember this from the San Francisco Chronicle:

The United Educators of San Francisco, the district's teachers union, signed on for round one of California's Race to the Top application, but there were no guarantees for round two, said union President Dennis Kelly.

Tensions in the negotiations over a contract to help close a budget shortfall have damaged bonds between the district and the union. And Kelly hadn't even heard that Carlos Garcia [San Francisco Unified's Superintendent] was part of the round-two team.

"Nobody's talked to me about it at all," he said.

Federal reviewers saw a divide between the state and its teachers in round one. And if one wonders how well the state bridged the divide with its teachers, just read this paragraph from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in the cover letter to California's June 1 application.

While some of our local teachers unions have backed this application, others have not and the California Teachers Association actively worked to prevent union support for application. I urge you not to penalize states like California that have submitted a detailed plan meeting all the goals of Race to the Top but have not gotten the unanimous support of teachers unions.

To do this would not only put at grave risk the ultimate goals embodied in Race to the Top, but it would send a message to some unions that their obstructionist tactics can work. We have a plan to fairly work through collective bargaining on teacher evaluations that are tied to student growth models, but we will never see the opportunity to implement it if the scoring penalizes the lack of union signatures.

Sounds like a winning application to you?

Jack O'Connell, the outgoing state superintendent of public instruction, expressed optimism despite the setback.

“I am deeply disappointed that our application was not chosen as a winner in the Race to the Top competition. However, the loss of the funding may slow, but not defeat, our efforts to improve student achievement in California,” O'Connell said. “We remain fully committed to continue seeking the strategies and resources demanded to accelerate our efforts to close the achievement gap among different groups of students by creating fundamental and far-reaching reforms."