<$BlogRSDUrl$>
Kindling Flames
The Blog of GWU Education Policy Students

Thoughts on the Stimulus Money...

Thursday, April 09, 2009

Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, approximately $100 billion has been made available for education in the next two years. Given my rudimentary understanding, it appears there are two main streams of this money: the State Stabilization Fund (which totals approximately $48.3 billion and which is meant to fill holes in state budgets that popped up due to the economic crisis) and increased funding to existing federal programs designed to promote educational equity (an additional $10 billion for Title 1 and an additional $11.3 billion for IDEA, with another billion going to the preschool and infants programs). There is an additional $5 billion to be spent at the Secretary's discretion on innovative programs—his “Race to the Top” funds. The rest of the funding is divided among other programs, some very controversial. If you are interested in a brief summary of the available funding, Jack Jennings at the Center on Education Policy has written an excellent one.

This money represents unprecedented federal spending in education, and the Obama administration is really pushing states, districts, and schools to use the money smartly, to reform education and improve achievement. See this Education Week article (published on-line April 7, 2009) as an example.

But a couple of things from the Ed Week article strike me as a little odd. First, one of the U.S. Department of Education suggestions for spending the IDEA funding is to “hire transition coaches to help graduating high school seniors find employment or get postsecondary training.” One of their suggestions for spending Title 1 money is to “create summer programs for algebra.” Both are fabulous ideas that could have an enormous impact on achievement. BUT…this funding is only guaranteed for TWO YEARS. Those are both long-term ways to raise achievement. What happens to these coaches and these summer programs in two years when the money is gone? Would they lay off the coaches and close down the programs? What does the DOE suggest…or are they even thinking about that issue?

In addition, the DOE suggests the following uses for the stabilization funds:
• Create new, fair, reliable teacher-evaluation systems based on objective measures of student progress and multiple classroom observations.
• Train educators to use data to improve instruction.
• Purchase instructional software, digital whiteboards, and other interactive technologies and train teachers in how to use them.

BUT near as I can tell, those funds are meant to prevent layoffs and to bring state spending up to previous levels (any leftover money (not guaranteed) flows to districts through Title 1 formulas). Unless such priorities were already included in state budgets, how is the state stabilization fund to cover that? Should states layoff teachers for the sake of new technology?

Another concern I had with the Ed Week article was Secretary Duncan’s quote, referring to the application for the competitive Race to the Top grants: “The first question, … I promise you, will be what did you do with the stabilization money to drive reform and improve achievement. It there isn’t a good answer to that, they might as well just tear up the form.”

A noble sentiment, to be sure. BUT, again…the stabilization money is meant to fill holes and prevent lay-offs. It isn’t necessarily new money. How innovative can states be if they are using the money as intended to prevent layoffs and class size increases, and repair buildings with asbestos falling from ceilings? (Note: I recognize that some states with less severe budget constraints may have additional money remaining once they have met their shortfall—those states may be able to use stabilization money more towards reform rather than simply stabilization…but those might also be the same ones that need the innovation funds the least).

This money is a great thing for education. I am just a little concern that expectations are a little too high for what states can do with this money in this time frame.

Labels:

8:33 PM :: ::

0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home
from: :: permalink