Federal Education Initiatives: Racing to the Bottom & Leaving Child Behind?

2010: Obama’s “Race to the Top” Initiative
…allocated $4.35 billion in federal grants to K-12 public school systems. This program is a test model for reform to Bush’s 2001, No Child Left Behind legislation. Race to the Top is the largest ever federal competitive investment in school reform. States were judged on how well they responded to these four central areas:
 
Adopting internationally benchmarked standards and assessments that prepare students for success in college and the workplace;
Recruiting, developing, retaining, and rewarding effective teachers and principals, especially where they are needed most;
Building data systems that measure student success and inform teachers and principals about how they can improve instruction; and
Turning around our lowest-achieving schools.
 
For information on Race to the Top:
PROFILE 
FACTSHEET
 
2001: Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” Act  
…was an education bill signed into law by President Bush in 2002. It was legislated initially for five years and has been put on hold while Obama’s administration test rides, Race to the Top. Similarly to Race to the Top’s four areas, No Child Left Behind has four pillars consisting of Stronger Accountability for Results, More Freedom for States and Communities, Proven Education Methods and More Choices for Parents. 
 
For more information on No Child Left Behind:
OVERVIEW 
FOUR PILLARS 
 
Comparison of Race to the Top & No Child Left Behind
Some of the glaring differences are in the intricacies and enforcement of each of the programs. Race to the Top is a grant program, which provides incentives for schools to change, while No Child Left Behind’s legislation mandates it by law.
 
For the entire list of differences:
COMPARISONS 
 
Criticisms of Race to the Top
When No Child Left Behind started, it seemed among one of the most ambitious things they tried to do, “…closing gaps between all students…and testing students to see if they are learning…” through standardized testing which is at the heart of how the legislation measures accountability. Inevitably it failed the kids that needed the most specialized attention because they were shut out of a system where standardized tests are inherently biased and flawed. The law exasperated a fundamental issue in the equity of education afforded to each child, thus calling into question the quality of the education from child to child.  http://education-portal.com/articles/Bush's_No_Child_Left_Behind_Law_Leaves_Certain_Children_Behind.html
 
It seems that Race to the top has not addressed any of these problems other than to change the framework in which states compete for funding through initiatives instead of mandates. Regardless, it seems to me that the carrot of federal funding is dangled in the same way in front of school districts that are in dire need, and otherwise have no other options than to comply.
 
Race to the Top seemingly skirts around No Child Left Behind’s biggest criticism that its federal inception into state and local school districts is unconstitutional. Race to the Top’s state autonomy and flexibility is overall an illusion. And even though Race to the Top does not mandate, it seems that after states have received grants they are encouraged or prompted to adopt common standards for K-12. Teachers’ unions responded in a letter, “We have been down that road before with the failures of the No Child Left Behind, and we cannot support yet another layer of federal mandates that have little or not research base of success and that usurp state and local governments’ responsibilities for public education.” 
 
No Child Left Behind placed all the pressure in standardized testing of students in order to receive state funding for education through Title I grants – which only created a deficit in the quality of education because successful test taking skills were emphasized than actual retention of subject matter. We all know how it felt to cram for a midterm and then forget all the things we learned shortly after the test was over. It also further divides students determined through test achievement with the bottom 20% of students losing ground and test scores getting worse, with the middle showing test score improvement and the top 10% of students showing no improvement at all.  
 
With Race to the Top, they’re now going to distribute the pressure and gauge the quality of teachers through student test scores. It’s logical to think what happened statistically with students’ successes in testing, will also happen to teachers and create overall fatigue, compromising teaching practices. It won’t benefit the quality of their teaching in any way other than making them good educators on test taking.
 
Marginalizing education through a sort of one-size fits all is the wrong way to determine which states get what funding and puts all the emphasize in meeting requirements, i.e. standardized testing to achieve accountability. It only exasperates the problems our school systems already have.