Search

In an environment of tight resources, tough academic challenges, and increasingly stiff competition from new education providers, smart leadership may matter more than ever for the success of America's school districts. Against this backdrop, "Education Week" introduces the first of what will be an annual "Leaders To Learn From" report--a way to recognize forward-thinking education leaders and share their ideas. This 2013 report profiles 16 district-level leaders--superintendents, assistant superintendents, and others, including a union president--who seized on creative but practical approaches and put them to work in their school districts.

Back in 2008, it wasn't clear just where candidate Barack Obama's heart lay when it came to the big issues facing schools. Although Mr. Obama had been a community organizer, a law professor, and a state legislator, the junior U.S. senator from Illinois didn't have a long record on K-12 issues, and he rarely spoke about them in his presidential campaign. His advisers included voices from all parts of a Democratic Party bitterly divided on such issues as teacher quality and the role of high-stakes tests. Some moments hinted at what was to come--such as his expression of support for performance pay for teachers, which was met with boos from the National Education Association. But no one knew for sure just how ambitious Mr. Obama intended to be on K-12 policy if elected. Now, as President Obama prepares to face the electorate again, there's little question of where he stands on some of the most hotly debated issues--and little doubt that, if re-elected, he plans to stick with his education redesign agenda. Fueled by economic-stimulus money and his own executive authority, Mr. Obama's initiatives--including No Child Left Behind Act waivers and the launch of grant competitions such as Race to the Top--have pressed states and districts to: (1) Hold individual teachers more accountable for the performance of their students on standardized tests; (2) Remove restrictions on the growth of charter schools; (3) Take aggressive action to turn around their lowest-performing schools; and (4) Adopt common academic standards intended to prepare students for college and the workforce, bolstered by federal aid to help states develop common assessments. It's a record of action that, while divisive, rivals that of President George W. Bush in securing passage of the No Child Left Behind law in 2001. Mr. Obama has forged his own path when it comes to the federal role in education, using funding and competitive pressure to prod states and school districts into embracing the administration's vision for education policy.

As the governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007, Mitt Romney championed aggressive education policies later embraced by the Obama administration and by other states. But for most of his second run at the Republican presidential nomination, voters have heard little about his education record in Massachusetts or initiatives that Mr. Romney was largely unable to sell to that state's Democratic-controlled legislature. Instead, in a high-profile May 23 speech on education, Mr. Romney spoke at length about school choice, pushing a bold--but administratively tricky--plan to let disadvantaged students and those in special education take their federal aid to any campus, including a private school. Mr. Romney, who secured enough delegates to clinch the 2012 GOP nomination, is pushing hard to distinguish his education policies from those President Barack Obama espouses. The former business executive has floated market-based proposals that appeal to a conservative electorate, and leveled criticism of teachers' union influence on school policy--and with the Obama administration. At the same time, Mr. Romney continues to share some administration policy priorities, particularly Mr. Obama's fondness for charter schools and insistence on tying teacher evaluation in part to students' outcomes on standardized tests, both of which have rattled union leaders. Mr. Romney's decade-long evolution on education issues also has seen him move away from some of the most extreme positions taken by some in his party, including abolition of the U.S. Department of Education and repeal of the No Child Left Behind Act, which he nonetheless would like to overhaul. The policy overlap between Mr. Romney and the man he is seeking to replace comes as no surprise to William H. Guenther, the president of MassInsight, a nonpartisan research organization in Boston that advised Mr. Romney on K-12 issues during his tenure as governor. He places Mr. Romney among a set of "liberal and conservative education reformers" focused on a combination of "excellent goals and no excuses."

The federal program providing billions of dollars to help states and districts close or remake some of their worst-performing schools remains a work in progress after two years, with more than 1,200 turnaround efforts under way but still no definitive verdict on its effectiveness. The School Improvement Grant (SIG) program, supercharged by a windfall of $3 billion under the federal economic-stimulus package in 2009, has jump-started aggressive moves by states and districts. To get their share of the SIG money, they had to quickly identify some of their most academically troubled schools, craft new teacher-evaluation systems, and carve out more time for instruction, among other steps. Some schools and districts spent millions of dollars on outside experts and consultants. Others went through the politically ticklish process of replacing teachers and principals, while combating community skepticism and meeting the demands of district and state overseers. It's not at all clear if the federal prescription can cure the most ailing schools and lead to long-term improvements, but preliminary student-achievement data for the program offer some promise. The U.S. Department of Education looked at about 700 of the schools in their second year of the program and found that a quarter of them posted double-digit gains in math during the 2010-2011 school year. Another 20 percent showed similar progress in reading. But a report last week by the Government Accountability Office, Congress' investigative arm, found that a number of states renewed grants for schools that did not meet annual goals and said states need more Education Department guidance in making those decisions.

Now that Republicans have taken control of the U.S. House of Representatives and bolstered their minority in the U.S. Senate, it remains to be seen if education is one area of federal policy that can avoid the partisan stalemate that many observers predict will paralyze Washington for the next two years. Republicans and Democrats famously came together to pass the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001. That law, the latest version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), placed new accountability demands on schools and authorized more federal spending on education. Its renewal has been pending since 2007. In his postelection news conference, President Barack Obama cited education as one of a handful of areas for possible cooperation. But longtime Capitol Hill insiders are divided on whether the new Congress can replicate the spirit of bipartisanship on ESEA reauthorization and other K-12 priorities. News articles that say education is an issue that can easily garner bipartisan support "are almost always written by people who don't get involved in the details of education." Many of the issues at the forefront of the discussion have never been vetted by Congress. Others stress that education policy doesn't always divide along party lines. A strengthened Republican presence in Congress is likely, meanwhile, to have its own ideas for rewriting the ESEA. Those are almost certain to include a move toward less federal involvement in education policy--nearly every Republican campaigned on greater local control in education. Some successful candidates backed by the fiscally conservative tea-party movement have even gone a step farther, calling for completely eliminating the U.S. Department of Education. They include Republican Rand Paul, who won an open Senate seat from Kentucky. It's unclear what impact the new swath of tea-party-backed members will have on the debate, and whether those members will seek or be able to find common ground with teachers' unions, which typically line up with Democrats, but also have concerns about certain federal mandates in education.

By explicitly naming education as one of three top priority areas in his first joint congressional address and in his first federal budget proposal, President Barack Obama is putting considerable political weight--and even more money--behind the agenda he laid out during his campaign. Certain themes he struck in the February 24 address--accountability, reform initiatives, high school graduation, and workforce and college readiness--are echoed in the initial outlines of his fiscal 2010 budget plan, in the economic-stimulus package that includes $115 billion in education aid, and in recent statements by U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. But big questions remain. Among them: whether increases in short-term stimulus funding will continue in future years, and what kinds of changes might be demanded of high schools to meet the ambitious goal of having the highest college-graduation rate in the world by 2020. The president's fiscal 2010 budget proposal, unveiled two days later, buttresses that theme, seeking to boost college-completion rates for low-income students, moving to reshape the college-loan world, and stressing a renewed interest in common, national academic standards.

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan says he is eager to use a proposed $15 billion federal incentive-grant fund in part to reward states, districts, and even nonprofit organizations that have set high standards for the students they serve. Duncan's comments came in an interview in which he named as priorities reauthorization of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB); expansion of prekindergarten programs; and improvements in teacher quality, recruitment, and retention. The education incentive-grant money would be available to Duncan under both versions of the economic-stimulus package working its way through Congress. While language in the House and Senate bills outlines how the incentive fund should be used, both bills appear to give some latitude to the secretary of education in allocating the money. The $15 billion fund is a relatively small slice of the more than $120 billion slated for education programs under the stimulus legislation, but it presents an unusual opportunity for the new secretary.

This article reports that education will be on the ballot November 4, even if the subject hasn't been on voters' minds much during the 2008 campaign season. The results of the elections are likely to have a significant impact on the way schools are financed, governed, and held accountable for the academic performance of their students. At the polls, voters will be choosing the next president and members of Congress, who will decide the future of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. They will elect governors in 11 states, state legislators in 44 states, and local officials in hundreds of cities, towns, counties, and school districts across the country. They will also weigh a host of education policy issues, including school financing and charter schools, through dozens of state and local ballot measures. But candidates aren't always giving clear indications of what they would do to improve the quality of American schools. On the biggest item of education business the next president is expected to face, the already-overdue NCLB reauthorization, the two major-party candidates have not been specific about such key questions as how they might change the law's accountability measures, improve the quality of its assessments, or finance it.

President Barack Obama's latest budget proposal envisions a sweeping, multi-billion-dollar expansion of prekindergarten programs and doubles down on the administration's strategy of using competitive grants to drive big change in states and districts--all as school districts try to cope with the largest cuts to federal education spending in recent history. The president's fiscal 2014 budget, unveiled April 10, seeks to put an end to the cuts--known as sequestration--through a mix of tax changes and trims to entitlement programs, such as Social Security. But his initial proposals have drawn fire from both liberals and conservatives, dimming the chances for his preschool initiative and grant proposals in areas such as high school improvement and school turnarounds. Overall, the Education Department would see a significant funding boost, to $71.2 billion, in a $3.8 trillion federal budget for the fiscal year that starts Oct. 1.

President Barack Obama used his first State of the Union address since winning re-election to put education at the center of his broader strategy to bolster the nation's economic prospects. He is proposing to dramatically expand preschool access for low- and middle-income children and to create a new competitive program aimed at helping high school students prepare for the careers of the future. But the administration has yet to spell out the details--including additional funding, if any--of those proposals, particularly the preschool expansion. Big questions loom, including how the administration plans to entice states to participate in what's being billed as a new federal-state preschool partnership, and how the White House would seek to pay for the plan and get it through a Congress that is trying to head off cuts to existing programs, not create new ones.

After more than a year of heated campaigning, President Barack Obama remains in the White House, Democrats continue to control the U.S. Senate, and Republicans are still in charge of the House of Representatives--leaving unchanged a political landscape that has paralyzed congressional action on education policy and led the president to flex his muscles on K-12 issues. Education advocates and state policymakers said last week they hope Washington can get beyond its differences and give states and districts assurances on such crucial matters as the future of K-12 funding and renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. "The lack of consensus coming out of Washington on [the ESEA and] budget issues is creating quite a bit of uncertainty at the state level," said Ronald Tomalis, the secretary of education in Pennsylvania. Even before the newly re-elected president is inaugurated in January, Mr. Obama and the still-divided Congress face an important test: They must work together to craft a deal to reduce the budget deficit--or, if they fail, face automatic cuts in a broad array of federal programs, including many in the U.S. Department of Education.

Ask Antonio White what he thinks of Race to the Top--President Barack Obama's signature K-12 initiative--and the Florida teacher will tell you the competitive-grant program is a "difficult pill to swallow." Merit pay for teachers based partly on student test scores is "a joke," he says. He's also not a fan of expanding charter schools, or of U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. Still, Mr. White, like thousands of educators around the country, has spent months making calls and knocking on doors, trying to persuade voters to support a president with whom he has sharp disagreements on a host of issues central to his profession. Though policy differences may have dampened enthusiasm for some, many teachers back President Obama for re-election.

Though education has played second fiddle so far to other domestic issues in the race for the Republican presidential nomination, the narrowing field includes GOP candidates with compatible views on scaling back the federal role in K-12, but big contrasts in policy specifics and experience. President Barack Obama, meanwhile, is expected to put a strong emphasis on his own K-12 agenda and achievements--including such signature programs as the Race to the Top and a waiver plan for unpopular provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act--as his re-election effort gains steam. This article takes a look at the education records of the GOP candidates which illustrates some common themes, along with differences in style and policy nuance.

The author reports on a measure to renew the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which faces steep political hurdles. Leaders of the Senate education committee still aim to push a bipartisan revision of the much-criticized No Child Left Behind Act through Congress by year's end, in time to stave off the Obama administration's move to offer states waivers of parts of the nearly decade-old law. That appears to be a tall order, given the short and crowded legislative calendar, polarized political climate, and lack of consensus within the K-12 community on issues--such as accountability and teacher quality--at the heart of the law, the current version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The next stop for the bill, sponsored by U.S. Senators Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, and Michael B. Enzi, R-Wyo., is a hearing Nov. 8 before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Despite a 15-7 committee vote Oct. 20 approving the bill, the measure to reauthorize the ESEA faces a range of opposition, much of it centering on changes to accountability provisions involving specific subgroups of students, including minorities, English-language learners, and students with disabilities.

The author reports on House and Senate bills that take different stances toward funding formula-grant programs and Obama administration initiatives. Key education programs, including Title I grants for disadvantaged students and aid for special education, would get flat funding for the 2012 fiscal year under a measure approved Sept. 21 by the Democratic-controlled Senate Appropriations Committee. But the administration's prized Race to the Top program, its Investing in Innovation Fund, and the School Improvement Grant program would be extended. By contrast, the funding proposal before the Republican-controlled House Appropriations Committee would include big boosts for special education and Title I. But the bill would also scrap funding for 31 education programs--including the Race to the Top, i3, and the Promise Neighborhoods initiative, prominent parts of the administration's education redesign agenda. Education analysts see some political posturing behind the proposal in the House. But U.S. Rep. Dennis Rehberg, the author of the House legislation, said that the proposal is about "investing in people and helping create the jobs they need to take care of their loved ones." He said the aim of the bill is to fund "things like education to empower innovation" while "freeing [people] from stifling government regulations."

The Obama administration will waive cornerstone requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act, including the 2014 deadline for all students to be proficient in math and reading/language arts, and will give states the freedom to set their own student-achievement goals and design their own interventions for failing schools. In exchange for that flexibility, the administration will require states to adopt standards for college and career readiness, focus improvement efforts on 15 percent of the most troubled schools, and create guidelines for teacher evaluations based in part on student performance. With reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act stalled in Congress, President Barack Obama unveiled details of the long-awaited NCLB waiver plan at a White House event on Sept. 23. No Child Left Behind is the current version of the ESEA, which dates to 1965.

State lawmakers voted in 2009 to completely revamp Kentucky's education accountability system. That means new academic standards, new assessments, and a new baseline for student achievement--a tall order for a school that's already under enormous pressure to demonstrate gains. This article reports on how a Kentucky high school takes stock after the first phase of its efforts under a federal School Improvement Grant. The school, now called the Academy @ Shawnee, is on the right track toward its goals under the $3.5 billion federal School Improvement Grant program. Shawnee enters the uncertainty of its School Improvement Grant's second year with plenty of company. It is one of 10 turnaround schools in Kentucky and among at least 730 SIG schools nationwide, part of a federal effort intended to improve the nation's lowest-performing schools that was supercharged by funding from the economic-stimulus legislation passed in 2009.

Civil rights, business, and education advocates are warning that Congress and the Obama administration may be willing to defang a key portion of the No Child Left Behind Act in their quest to make the law more flexible, shortchanging racial minorities and other historically overlooked student subgroups in the process. Their concern comes amid debate about whether the law can be revised to give greater leeway to schools and districts in boosting achievement for minority and special education students, English-language learners, and other subgroups. Subgroup accountability is one feature of the widely criticized NCLB law that has drawn praise from across the policy and political spectrum for shining a spotlight on students whose performance was often largely ignored in the past. But advocates worry that the administration's recent rhetoric and year-old blueprint for retooling the NCLB law, the current version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, opens the door to less accountability for states and districts where those students aren't measuring up. They also worry that a push in Congress to reduce the federal role in education threatens to ratchet down the pressure on states and districts to make such students a priority.

More than a dozen education programs--including high-profile efforts focused on literacy, teaching, and learning--face the prospect of a permanent federal funding loss after they were chopped from a stopgap spending measure signed into law by President Barack Obama last week. The temporary spending law, intended to keep the government running until March 18 while Democrats and Republicans try to hash out a deal for the rest of the fiscal year, finances most federal programs at fiscal year 2010 levels. But education programs such as Even Start, Striving Readers, and the privately organized Teach For America, ended up taking dramatic hits after Republican leaders insisted on cuts even in the temporary spending bill. The measure slashes nearly $750 million from the U.S Department of Education's most recent overall discretionary budget of $46.6 billion, excluding Pell Grant funding. Literacy programs bore the brunt. The funding for Striving Readers, which was financed at $250 million, was eliminated. The Even Start family-literacy effort lost its $67 million appropriation. The $88 million Smaller Learning Communities program, which gave grants to districts to create more-personalized learning environments, was also scrapped. Technically, the cuts are only in place for the two-week time period covered under the bill. But their restoration is considered extremely unlikely, given the aggressive push by lawmakers in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives to slim down the federal government. And those cuts could just be the beginning, as Congress works to hammer out an agreement for the remainder of fiscal year 2011, which began on Oct. 1. The House has approved a bill that would cut $5 billion out of the Education Department's current-year budget, including a cut of nearly $700 million to Title I grants to districts, as well as a cut to Pell Grants for low- and moderate-income college students, and money to turn around the nation's lowest-performing schools. The U.S. Senate has yet to take up the measure. Education advocates are already worried about what this first round of cuts signals for the future of education spending. But budget hawks say that increased spending doesn't necessarily translate into better student outcomes--and that there is plenty of waste left in the department's coffers.

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives appear determined to make deep cuts to education and related programs in the temporary spending bill that would keep the federal government operating for the rest of the fiscal year, even as President Barack Obama seeks a modest funding boost next year. That sets up a fiscal face-off in the Democratic-controlled Senate. And, should a bill with severe cuts make it through that chamber, the president has pledged to veto it. The current temporary measure expires March 4, and failure to reach agreement on a new one could mean the first federal government shutdown in more than a decade. The cuts in the federal government's current-year funding headed for a vote today clash sharply with President Obama's vision and threaten a showdown near-term. The measure lurching through the House last week included a more than 16 percent cut to the Education Department's discretionary budget for the current fiscal year, including scrapping more than a dozen K-12 programs and slicing others once considered untouchable, such as Pell Grants to help low-and moderate-income students pay for college. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan told reporters in a Feb. 14 telephone briefing that he's ready to work with lawmakers from all parts of the political spectrum. But he added that the proposed cuts to the current budget would hobble the nation's future economic progress.

The test scores aren't in yet, but by almost every other measure that matters--school climate, instructional strategies, staff satisfaction--the former Shawnee High School isn't the same place it was just a year ago. More than half the teachers are new to the persistently low-performing school. Those who remain say they no longer feel that their own classes are the only ones that push students. The school has stepped up its focus on using data to pinpoint students' weak points and to adjust instruction. It even has a new name: the Academy @ Shawnee. Three turnaround specialists sent in by the Kentucky Department of Education to oversee Shawnee's transformation--part of a nationwide, federally financed school turnaround effort--are confident the school will meet the goal set by the state: raise test scores by 10 percentage points this school year. Formative assessments, whose student-performance results are collected regularly and scrutinized daily by Shawnee's teachers and the state education department team, appear to show that the school is on track to meet, and maybe exceed, the state's expectations, becoming an early success story for the $3.5 billion federal School Improvement Grant, or SIG, program. The author reports on the challenge for the school to sustain momentum gained through the federally funded school improvement program.

The author reports on the federal budget proposal for fiscal year 2012 in which President Barack Obama singled out education as an area crucial to the country's economic future. He called for bolstering programs he deems critical to his vision for a renewed Elementary and Secondary Education Act and proposed new ones in research, early-childhood education, teaching, and efforts to close achievement gaps. But the proposal faces steep hurdles in Congress--it came just three days after Republican leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives released a plan that would slice nearly $5 billion from the budget now funding the department. The Obama administration's proposed $48.8 billion in discretionary Education Department spending for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 excludes money for Pell Grant college aid and represents a 4.3 percent increase over fiscal 2010. Lawmakers are still working on the fiscal 2011 spending plan. Key precollegiate programs and areas would be slated for modest increases: Title I, which has a wide sweep and helps educate disadvantaged students, would get $14.8 billion, up $300 million from current funding; and aid to special education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act would rise to $11.7 billion, up $200 million. The proposal also reprises the administration's ambitious reorganization plan that would consolidate and regroup a wide range of programs under headings focused on particular areas, such as teaching and learning.

A prominent and sustained White House push for renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) is viewed as crucial to prospects for the 9-year-old law's reauthorization by a now-divided Congress. The law's current version, the No Child Left Behind Act, was President George W. Bush's signature domestic achievement when it was passed in late 2001 with big, bipartisan majorities. Now it is considered outdated by practitioners and policymakers from all parts of the political spectrum. Last March, the Obama administration released a blueprint for overhauling the ESEA, and even proposed $1 billion extra for K-12 education if Congress approved the proposal. But while lawmakers in both the House of Representatives and the Senate met regularly last year to discuss a renewal, neither chamber introduced a reauthorization bill. With Republicans now in control of the House, and Democrats divided on what changes should be made to the law, the importance of a full-court press by the White House may be even greater. President Barack Obama briefly called for an ESEA renewal in his State of the Union Address last year, but did not make it a focal point of the speech. On the day the blueprint was released, he made a bid for overhauling the law in his weekly radio address, but the ESEA never became a regular part of his stump speech. Although most education advocates think a high-profile pitch from the White House would provide momentum for the ESEA this year, any legislation to reauthorize the law faces a bumpy road, in no small part because of divisions within each party on the best direction to take on federal K-12 policy. And it is unclear to what extent Republican leaders--who share common ground with the administration on issues such as teacher quality--will want to work with Mr. Obama on education. The ESEA blueprint the Obama administration rolled out last year sought to tie teacher evaluation in part to student test scores, and to give states more control over how to help schools improve student progress, while adhering to a stringent set of strategies for the schools that are struggling most. It also called for states to get students ready for college or a career, as distinguished from just bringing them to proficiency on tests. Even without a revision of the ESEA, the administration has been able to push much of its K-12 agenda through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the federal economic-stimulus program, which provided some $100 billion for education. In particular, the $4 billion Race to the Top competition spurred states to embrace more uniform, rigorous standards and revise their charter school laws, as well as revisit teacher tenure and evaluation.

School districts and educators chafing under the mandates of the No Child Left Behind Act are hoping to prod the U.S. Department of Education into giving them a reprieve from the provisions they see as most onerous, as the prospects for an overhaul of the law by Congress anytime soon remain cloudy. The Obama administration and congressional leaders from both parties have long said the law, the current version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), is inflexible and intrusive. School advocates argue that cash-strapped districts shouldn't expend resources on requirements that will likely be scrapped in the rewrite of the ESEA, which has been pending since 2007. Now, organizations such as the American Association of School Administrators and the National School Boards Association are gearing up for a renewed push for regulatory relief, including items that have long been on their wish lists. But others say that a package of regulatory fixes--even in areas that the administration and Congress agree need to be addressed--could slow the momentum for a comprehensive, bipartisan reauthorization of the ESEA. Indeed, the Education Department says the push for regulatory changes underscores the need for a comprehensive renewal of the law. If U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan did decide to offer some form of regulatory change, it wouldn't be the first time the department used that process to tweak the No Child Left Behind law. His predecessor, Secretary Margaret Spellings--one of the architects of the law while she was a top White House aide under President George W. Bush--ushered in a series of fixes, including permitting states to meet achievement targets through so-called growth models, which measure individual student progress over time, as opposed to status models, which compare different cohorts of students with one another.

The author reports on the push to renew the Elementary and Secondary Education Act which faces steep policy and political hurdles. Although the legislative machinery seems to be clanking along, with an Obama administration blueprint for renewal on the table and House and Senate education panels holding hearings on a variety of issues related to the law, the political prospects for the renewal are much more dicey. A crowded calendar and policy puzzles cloud the prospects of Congress completing the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act this year. Officially, the Obama administration is aiming to pass a bill this year, even though no formal piece of legislation has yet been introduced. The administration has put muscle--and even money--behind renewing the law this year. However, Congress has a full plate of other priorities, including overhauling the nation's financial regulatory structure, and possibly considering energy and immigration legislation, not to mention the usual spending bills and the nomination of Elena Kagan, the U.S. solicitor general, to the U.S. Supreme Court. A rancorous debate over the health-care overhaul sucked up much of the political oxygen on Capitol Hill, leaving lawmakers with little appetite to delve into another tricky domestic-policy issue.

As policymakers and education advocates await details on how the Obama administration plans to move forward with its recently unveiled blueprint for reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the chances of an ESEA renewal this year remain tough to gauge. Although the principles underlying the blueprint have drawn praise in many quarters, influential members of Congress have qualms about specific points--and the plan faces outright opposition from both national teachers' unions: the 3.2 million-member National Education Association and the 1.4 million-member American Federation of Teachers. Now the process of turning that 41-page blueprint into legislation is in the hands of education leaders on Capitol Hill. The blueprint aims to retain the NCLB's emphasis on assessments and accountability, while encouraging tougher academic standards and giving states and districts more leeway in targeting interventions to the schools that are struggling the most. It would include financial rewards and new funding flexibility for high-achieving districts and states. Key members of Congress gave the draft a generally favorable review, while pressing for specifics on issues such as teacher quality and rural schools.

President Barack Obama's proposed $49.7 billion budget for the U.S. Department of Education is more than just a spending blueprint: Department officials portray it as a fundamental reimagining of the agency's structure and management. Under the fiscal 2011 proposal unveiled last week, a roster of 38 relatively small, targeted grant programs would be regrouped into broader, more flexible funding streams--many of them competitive--aimed at furthering the administration's education redesign goals. The 11 new funding streams would be centered around such themes as increasing teacher and leader effectiveness, improving curriculum standards, and bolstering readiness for college. But it's unclear whether federal lawmakers will go along with a plan calling for programs to be consolidated--or, some fear, eliminated--within a new funding stream. What's more, major formula programs--Title I grants to districts and funding for students in special education are prominent examples--would remain stagnant or receive only small increases under the proposal, while there would be a $3 billion boost in competitive funding across the budget. Such a shift is in keeping with an approach Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has pushed consistently in his first year as secretary, and which is expected to be embodied in the Obama administration's reauthorization proposal for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. But even advocates for programs that would get a boost, such as charter schools, are wary of the consolidation plan, since it would make funding tougher to predict. Programs aimed at furthering the four education redesign objectives spelled out in the recovery act--improving teacher quality, bolstering state data systems, revamping standards and assessment, and turning around low-performing schools--would get most of the increased funding.

The Obama administration's proposal to revamp the signature yardstick used to measure schools' progress under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) is being seen as a bold step toward revising a key feature of the law, even as questions loom about how a new system would work. Under the plan, adequate yearly progress (AYP)--the accountability vehicle at the heart of the current version of the law, the 8-year-old No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act--would be replaced with a new metric that would measure student progress toward readiness for college or a career. Though many details remain up in the air, some education advocates say the administration proposal outlined in its fiscal 2011 budget request last week is a good first step. But some practitioners in the field already are voicing qualms about the feasibility of the proposal. Congressional reaction to the proposals has been muted so far, with education leaders in both houses still studying the proposals. The plan leaves quite a lot for lawmakers and the administration to discuss. The proposal also isn't specific on what sanctions would apply under the revised law for schools that are missing the law's achievement targets for one or two particular subgroups of students. Under the plan outlined in the budget proposal, states would be asked to adopt standards that build toward college and career readiness, and implement assessments that were aligned with those standards. That step would address a perennial criticism of the NCLB law: that it inadvertently encourages states to lower their standards to meet the current targets.

The national teachers' unions are nervously eyeing a provision in a Senate version of the health-care overhaul now working its way through Congress that they say could ultimately squeeze medical benefits for educators. The language would tax insurance companies and plan administrators that offer what the measure defines as high-cost health coverage--often referred to as "Cadillac" or "gold-plated" plans--to help pay for the broader effort to expand access to health insurance while better controlling costs. But many officials in organized labor, including teacher representatives, argue that a tax imposed on companies would likely be passed along to workers in the form of higher premiums or less comprehensive benefits. That would be unfair, they say, to workers who have given up higher pay in exchange for strong health benefits--a good description of a lot of their members. If the Senate Finance Committee provision becomes law and leads to scaled-back health-care coverage for many employees, that could make it harder for school districts to attract and retain teachers, particularly in hard-to-staff subjects, union officials and policy analysts say. Supporters of the proposed tax say that if employers chose to scale back plans because of it, they might shift the money into salaries. But opponents argue that significantly higher salaries for public-sector employees, including teachers, are not likely in the foreseeable future, given the budget fallout from the recession. Still, some economists, in addition to suggesting that a reduction in benefits could bring a shift to salaries, see such a tax as part of a push to bring equity and fairness to health-care financing.

If the competition for a slice of $4 billion in federal Race to the Top Fund money were a school class, Colorado would be one of the kids sitting up front, furiously taking notes, and leaping up to answer every one of the teacher's questions. Officials here began plotting their strategy for receiving one of the coveted grants nearly as soon as the Race to the Top program was created in February as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the $787 billion economic-stimulus package. Colorado is hardly the only state pulling out all the stops for the Race to the Top, a $4.35 billion grant program created under the recovery act to reward states for making progress on a series of "assurances" oriented to education redesign. (The U.S. Department of Education is earmarking $350 million of that fund to help states develop assessments as part of a nationwide push for common academic standards.) But Colorado has gone further, setting up four committees, each concentrating on one of the assurances specified in the stimulus law. They focus on low-performing schools, teacher and principal quality and distribution, state data systems, and standards and assessments. Colorado would hope to use Race to the Top funding in part to carry out laws passed in recent years that appear to be in line with some of the policies U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is trying to advance through the program. If Colorado is tapped for a federal award, the state may create a computer-based test that could include a formative component to help teachers get a "real-time picture" of their students' progress toward meeting the new standards. And the state may use some of the grant to improve its data-collection system.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is clear: States are on the hook for advancing education improvement goals spelled out in the law as a condition for receiving up to $100 billion in economic-stimulus aid to education. But school districts are the ones that must decide how to spend most of that aid--including hefty, one-time increases for Title I and special education funding--and tensions already are starting to emerge. Take the Phillipsburg, N.J., school district, for example. The 3,500-student system had hoped to use roughly $150,000 in special education stimulus funds for technology to better track students' records, including individualized education programs, and to keep better tabs on students' nutritional choices in the school lunch program, among other uses. But the state, which had final approval over the use of that money, rejected the district's proposal because it didn't seem clear that all of the proposal would benefit special education students, said Beth Auerswald, a spokeswoman for the New Jersey Department of Education. Phillipsburg is permitted to reapply for the special education funding later in the year. But William A. Bauer, the district's business manager, said he could have used clearer guidance from the state about what it was looking for.

The eagerly awaited federal guidelines on some $100 billion in stimulus funding for public education aim to pump money out quickly, while giving the U.S. Department of Education leverage to demand improvements from states and districts. But those same states and districts are also warned not to expect the hefty sums for K-12 programs in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to become part of a new baseline for federal aid. This article reports that the guidelines advise recipients to use the extra money coming over the next two years for short-term expenditures that could have longer-term benefits for student learning. And as state and local officials gird for the challenge of managing the stimulus money, they are being told to keep careful track of every dollar in order to meet rigorous transparency and accountability requirements. The first batch of education stimulus money will be made available swiftly, federal officials say, and with relatively few strings attached. But the Education Department is asking states to submit much more detailed information on how they plan to improve student learning before they can tap a sizable portion of their second round of funding. And, to tap a portion of special education aid and Title I funding for disadvantaged students, states must explain how they will comply with transparency and accounting requirements. The biggest single restriction in the guidelines issued March 7 involves the $53.6 billion State Fiscal Stabilization Fund, the bulk of which is aimed at steadying faltering state budgets in fiscal years 2009 and 2010.

By explicitly naming education as one of three top priority areas in his first joint congressional address and in his first federal budget proposal, President Barack Obama is putting considerable political weight--and even more money--behind the agenda he laid out during his campaign. Certain themes he struck in the Feb. 24 address--accountability, reform initiatives, high school graduation, and workforce and college readiness--are echoed in the initial outlines of his fiscal 2010 budget plan, in the economic-stimulus package that includes $115 billion in education aid, and in recent statements by U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. But big questions remain. Among them: whether increases in short-term stimulus funding will continue in future years, and what kinds of changes might be demanded of high schools if the nation is to meet the ambitious goal of having the highest college-graduation rate in the world by 2020. The president's fiscal 2010 budget proposal, unveiled two days later, buttresses that theme, seeking to boost college-completion rates for low-income students, moving to reshape the college-loan world, and stressing a renewed interest in common, national academic standards.

The sheer scale of the new education aid envisioned under the economic-stimulus package now pending in Congress is forcing educators and state officials to consider how they would absorb that funding and how it could transform--or distort--school programs at the local level. Officials from governors' mansions on down are generally pleased at the prospect of billions of extra dollars for K-12 programs, early education, school construction, and other priorities. The size of that bonanza remained in flux this week, as a bipartisan group of lawmakers seeking a palatable package focused on proposed increases in direct aid to states, Title I funding for disadvantaged students, special education, Head Start, and a discretionary fund set aside for the U.S. secretary of education. Even if the proposed hikes are significantly scaled back, however, conservative estimates still put the potential increases at more than the U.S. Department of Education's current $59.2 billion discretionary budget. The debates in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives over the broad funding levels and specific components of such a plan highlight fundamental issues involving management and accountability; "maintenance of effort" by the states in paying for education; and the question of whether the increased federal spending can, or should, be sustained. Supporters of the package argued that legislation needs to be crafted and approved quickly to help school districts avert severe cuts in staff and programs.

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan says he is eager to use a proposed $15 billion federal incentive-grant fund in part to reward states, districts, and even nonprofit organizations that have set high standards for the students they serve. "With this fund, we really have a chance to drive dramatic changes, to take to scale what works, invest in what works," Duncan said in an interview last week, his first full week at the helm of the Department of Education. He said he would aim to "reward those states that are pushing very, very hard to get dramatically better."

It has become a familiar sight for education policy mavens this election season: panel discussions, in Washington and elsewhere, hashing out the presumptive presidential nominees' differences on performance pay for teachers, private school vouchers, and other reliable topics of debate. But the candidates themselves have not appeared at these events--it has been their surrogates, experts who are helping to craft education plans for Senator John McCain or Senator Barack Obama. Such advisers, whether paid staff members or volunteers, help send signals on the policy directions their candidates would pursue if elected to the White House. And successful candidates often tap campaign aides to serve in their administrations. This article reports on the roles of advisers in campaigns, especially in an environment where neither candidate is going to have a lot of time or a lot of interest in getting into the details on education. While advisers can make recommendations, a co-director of Education Sector, a Washington research organization, warns that it is ultimately senior campaign officials--and the candidate--who develop proposals.

This article highlights the contrasting views between presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama on school choice and teacher issues. Senator McCain, R-Arizona, has pledged to direct federal money to alternative teacher-certification programs, give parents more direct access to supplemental educational services, and expand private school choice, specifically through online education and by expanding the federally funded voucher experiment in Washington. Senator Obama, D-Illinois, has called for spending $18 billion more annually on education. He wants to expand teacher-residency programs, which help bolster field experiences for prospective educators while allowing them to earn certification from a university program. He has been also opposed to allowing public money to go to private school vouchers. Neither candidate has offered detailed ideas for a renewal of the No Child Left Behind Act. Reauthorization of the bipartisan law, which holds schools accountable for meeting annual student-achievement targets, has stalled in Congress and will likely be a major piece of unfinished business awaiting the next president.