Race to the Top?

Educators are rushing to cash in on the latest government initiative to reform education: Race to the Top.

Race to the Top? The first thing that comes to mind is a scene from It's a Mad, Mad, Mad World (the original Spencer Tracy version, thank you very much). No particular part of the film jumps to mind, just any of the various near collisions, disasters, and pitfalls as the competitors "race" for the hidden prize.

The "mission" of the initiative is noble enough:

1. Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to succeed in college and the workplace and to compete in the global economy;
2. Building data systems that measure student growth and success, and inform teachers and principals about how they can improve instruction;
3. Recruiting, developing, rewarding, and retaining effective teachers and principals, especially where they are needed most; and
4. Turning around our lowest-achieving schools.

But the part that screams out to me is found in number 3-- Recruiting, developing, rewarding, and retaining effective teachers and principals....

Rewarding?

Could it mean Merit Pay?

I think it might, which raises a number of issues in my mind. Who establishes the criteria? Who judges it? Will teacher rewards be based off student performance on state tests? Etc, etc., etc.

The answers could be scary. But it appears the movement is afoot.

This past fall, New Haven teachers ratified a contract with elements of merit pay hidden inside, including other hints of linking bonus pay to student achievement. While some have stated that the system of rewarding teachers will not pit teacher against teacher, but rather reward all teachers based on student performance, it still leaves me with an unsettled feeling.

The awarding of merit pay resting on the backs of student test scores sends a strange message to both teachers and students. Many in the educational trenches contend that there already exists too much pressure with these high-stakes tests, couple that with tying it to teachers' paychecks and it may have crossed the line.

The notion that we have created a nation of test takers is not new. We measure, quantify, and study data during professional days. And for what? Most data collected in a contrived classroom setting is not valid and quite often the PowerPoint presentations thrust before staff compares the proverbial apples and oranges. "Look at this year's sophomore scores against last year's." Different test. Different batch of students.

It's time someone with courage changed a school mission statement to match what is really going on... data, funding, high-stakes testing.

No more archaic messages of "instilling a love for learning, appreciating a work of literature, or creating anything on your own."

The message is clear from on high.

There obviously isn't time.

There are no resources.

And most importantly, it's simply not on the test.