This week President Obama announced he “will seek an additional $1.35 billion in next year’s budget to expand the Race to the Top competition.” As states rush to submit their 1st round Race to the Top applications, let us pause for a moment and reflect on some lessons learned from this first round. 1) Competition may encourage innovation; the Department of Education established the four categories states would have to innovate within, (standards and assessments, data systems to support instruction, great teachers and leaders, and turning around the lowest achieving schools), however the strategic and implementation plans and supports were up to the states to develop. I believe new partnerships, legislation, and actual plans developed may have some of the innovative ideas Secretary Duncan was thinking of.  

2) More money may not produce better student outcomes; without a plan that is. And this plan should include some indicators of success as interim benchmarks to gauge progress or some outcomes framework that can link activities to intended student outcomes. Otherwise, more money is helpful but not enough. Districts may end up funding programs and initiatives that are well intentioned but may not be strategically aligned with actually moving the needle on student outcomes. Discussion about outcomes and performance measures must be part of the initial planning conversations and not an afterthought. States that included outcomes in their initial Race to the Top discussions have a better chance of demonstrating the return on investment Race to the Top funds will produce, (both fiscally and outcomes focused). 

And if not, round two and possibly round three states, I encourage you to have some indicators of success identified. Likewise, Secretary Duncan, I encourage you to expect states to have identified how more Race to the Top funds will be tracked against proposed plans and really demonstrate the kind of innovative change you’re seeking.