Should a state be penalized for having higher standards than the rest of the country

[Mass]

Some may remember that Senator Kerry fought so that states like VT and MA, who had already reached the healthcare standards that the healthcare bill was proposing, would not be penalized financially for that.

Once again, the same question exists, in K-12 education this time. Here is an excerpt from a letter from the MA delegation, to understand the problem.

http://www.facebook.com/notes/john-kerry/kerry-mass-delegation-mass-should-not-be-penalized-for-being-a-leader-in-educati/434687885878

...
The Race to the Top competition challenges states to positively reform their education systems rewarding them from an overall budget of $4.35 billion in critically needed education money. Race to the Top awards go to States that are leading the way with ambitious yet achievable plans for implementing coherent, compelling, and comprehensive education reform. Race to the Top winners help trail-blaze effective reforms and provide examples for states and local school districts throughout the country to follow.

Massachusetts has the highest educational standards in the country and had a strong application for Phase 1 of this funding, moving onto the second round of consideration. Despite those high standards the state’s Phase 1 application was docked 15 points because of the its refusal to accept anything lower than the high standards that have been set for our students here in Massachusetts and ultimately did not receive funding in the first round. The Commonwealth has now applied for consideration for Phase 2 funding.

...

Here is the original article in the Globe
http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/mcas/articles/2010/05/20/education_officials_may_scrap_mcas_test/

Beyond the education issue, that is if interest for me at a time when our school district, like many others throughout the country is financially stressed and is already cutting on its program (and it is supposedly one of the best in the state and the country), the question that concerns me is whether we can expect our state to be penalized because we have accepted a lot of these charges before it was imposed by law. It is a difficult question because obviously, there are states that need help to develop more efficient school curricula, but at the same time, the fact MA (or any other state) would be penalized for being ahead is a sure way to hurt Dems in the state (Given that GOPers dont want to do anything, they would not be hurt anyway). I wonder if you have opinions on this.

[karynnj]

1. This seems a race to the middle, not the top

No child left behind had similar problems for extremely well preforming schools. In my county several schools ended up on the not preforming list because they weren't showing improvement or they did not have their special ed kids preforming at the required level. This happened because they took on the task of accepting lower preforming kids - as they should.

NJ is one of the states that competes with MA - usually coming in a few points behind in every subject. NJ is strongest in writing - and there has been a more than a decade concerted effort on that.

[beachmom]

2. Do you have a link handy where you get this comparison between states?

Once in a while something will come by showing Georgia to be ranked very low (47?) but I haven't seen anything lately. A lot of websites that will do comparisons are for subscribers only.

I guess I have always felt when it comes down to it it's not the state but the individual school that matters. I went to school in CT, but my high school, for example, wasn't that great, and maybe a school down here in Georgia was better, even if overall CT has better schools.

Just wondering . . .

[Mass]

4. The goal of the reform offered is to get schools to accept national standards rather than

the states ones that are extremely different among states (all you have to do is to take the graduating exams of different states and see what is asked).


The point of the letter is that, during the first phase, MA was penalized because they did not propose a plan that followed national standards (why should they if MA standard are better). They were not cheated, because the contest made it clear that this was one of the criteria, but it makes little sense at all because basically, it asks MA (and other states, I am sure) to lower their standards.

I agree that in a state, there are variations, but, with NCLB, there are state standards and they are very different from state to state, so it would make sense to create a national standard, but what is not clear is why they don't try to take the best in each state standard rather than something written purely in DC (and this was what worried people from the beginning with these Core Standards ).

[beachmom]

6. Well, agreed. MA shouldn't lower its standards, but

it should also understand that it will be a long transition before the deep south is going to be able to catch up (if ever).

[karynnj]

5. Here's one

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/

Click on a subject, then click on "particular state" and then on "state level results". For writing click on summary. (I looked at math, reading, and writing. The science one is not a cool map like the others. (If you click on a state, the colors change to represent how they are relative to the clicked state. (clicking on MA will make the MA people proud.)

My daughter who attended college at Holy Cross in MA once speaking with a NJ friend she met there who is now an English and Art teacher in MA, found that of all the kids they knew the NJ and MA kids had it far easier writing the various papers they had. This seemed true of both kids who went to suburban public schools and private schools.

I agree about it mattering which school, you can see that in the state when they publish the SAT averages by schools or the pass rates on NJ's required tests.

[beachmom]

3. Why did they not get funding?

Is it that a state education system has to prove that it has improved? I guess I am missing something because the BG article didn't spell out exactly why MA lost out on the funds.

Just as an aside: I hate "teach to the test". Or at least "teach to a multiple guess test". These tests occur a good month or more before school is out, and it feels like that test is the whole point of school. After that, the kids don't learn a whole lot. Also, I am seeing more and more parents treating these tests (ours in elementary school is called the CRCT) like they are the SATs!! They are making their kids do all these extra practice tests outside of school. I am just against that. The tests are stupid and have little to do with learning and creativity. I just want my kids to do their homework and engage in pleasure reading. Reading is key to lifelong learning.

Here is an article on GA and the Race to the Top:

http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/06/01/georgia-back-in-the-race-for-race-to-the-top-millions-three-more-districts-on-board/?cxntfid=blogs_get_schooled_blog

Only two states won: Tennesse and Delaware, so it's not like Mass. was singled out.

Again, I am puzzled by how you win the money. It's too much in education biz jargon.

From the Governor's statement:

The Race to the Top fund is a $4 billion grant opportunity provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) to support new approaches to improve schools. The fund is available in the form of competitive grants to encourage and reward states that are creating conditions for education innovation and reform, specifically implementing ambitious plans in four education reform areas:

Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to succeed in college and the workplace and to compete in the global economy;

Building data systems that measure student growth and success, and inform teachers and principals about how they can improve instruction;

Recruiting, preparing, rewarding, and retaining effective teachers and principals, especially where they are needed most;

and Turning around our lowest-achieving schools.

Double Edit: Governor Perdue who is all gung ho to get this money was adamantly opposed to the stimulus. Just sayin'.