The White House released today the list of 19 finalists -- 18 states plus D.C. -- for $3.4 billion in Race to the Top funds. Thirty-five states applied, and many have already adopted the national learning benchmarks in an attempt to get a leg up on the competition, as The New York Times reported a few weeks ago. The question of what will happen in states that have adopted the benchmarks but lose out in the competition is the important one. They may be slow in implementing them without the promise of funds.
As Dana Goldstein wrote in the Prospect last year, trying to spur innovation doesn't work the same ways in the social policy sector as it does in manufacturing and other industries, and trying to force states to compete by innovating doesn't ensure money will go to the states that need it most. One of the finalists, Massachusetts, already has standards that some think surpass the national standards, according to the Times story. Students in Massachusetts, then, were already getting one of the best educations in the country. Of the states that have the 10 worst outcomes for children based on Annie E. Casey Foundation report metrics that include educational outcomes, only four -- Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, and Louisiana -- are among the finalists. This makes some sense, since the states with the worst systems in place might be least likely to build a successful application. But a race to the top that is meant to improve the education outcomes for children should really start at the bottom.
-- Monica Potts
