| ||||||||||||
Njspotlight.com ‘New Jersey Finishes Just Out of the Money in Race to the Top’ Only three points kept NJ out of the winner’s circle, but a close review of its application reveals many categories where it came up short...
Star Ledger ‘N.J. 'Race to the Top' application wrong-year error is revealed in federal documents’
Asbury Park Press ‘NJ doesn't make federal
school grant winner list’
Njspotlight.com ‘New Jersey Finishes Just Out of the Money in Race to the Top’
Only three points kept NJ out of the winner’s circle, but a close review of its application reveals many categories where it came up short
So close.
New Jersey has for a second time failed to win federal Race to the Top money, but this time it was just three out of 500 points separating the state from the list of 10 winners, including neighboring New York and Maryland.
Related Links
And maybe most wrenching, a close look at the evaluation of New Jersey’s application showed some notable shortcomings -- not just in the big proposals like merit pay and charter schools but in some of the technical details as well.
As in the first round of the competition for more than $4 billion in funding, New Jersey’s weakest showing was in the student data systems that track test scores and other achievement information. The state earned only two-thirds of the available points in this category.
And when talking about a three-point margin, the difference may have even come down to something the state’s team failed to include in the application altogether.
Analyzing the Evaluations
According to evaluations obtained by NJ Spotlight, New Jersey may have been penalized nearly five points for not including required funding information from 2008 and 2009 as part of a section that rates whether the state had consistently financed its public schools.
There is no guarantee that New Jersey would have gotten all five points, given the state’s cuts in school aid since then. But Gov. Chris Christie’s spokeswoman Maria Comella nevertheless called that omission an “oversight” and conceded it could have made a significant difference.
Comella also pointed out it was a lengthy and complex application with a host of points awarded and taken away. “It’s a 1,000-page application, there’s a lot in there,” she said.
She and state Education Commissioner Bret Schundler, who led the state’s team, said the state’s failure to win the proposed $399 million grant for New Jersey would not stall Christie’s reform agenda for the public schools.
“While I am disappointed that New Jersey, having been chosen as a finalist, was not ultimately selected as a recipient at the end of this highly competitive process, our commitment to bold, meaningful reform remains firm,” Schundler said in a statement.
Comella said a package of bills connected to the proposal would be coming this fall. She did not detail them, but the proposal had called for a change in how schools evaluate and pay teachers (including the use of test scores), reforms in how tenure is granted and retained, and an expansion of charter schools.
What Cost NJ the Race?
The Race to the Top application has consumed much of the state’s education establishment – especially in Trenton – for the last three months, and the details of how New Jersey lost for a second time are sure to draw some debate for the next few months.
Much has centered around the support – or lack thereof – from the state’s dominant teachers union, the New Jersey Education Association.
After opposing the bid in the first round, the union initially reached a compromise with Schundler for the second application. But on the last weekend before the application had to be filed, Christie backed out of the deal, saying that Schundler had reached the agreement without his consent. He added that he would stand by bolder plans for revamping tenure and imposing merit pay on schools, proposals that the NJEA had rejected.
The NJEA yesterday blamed Christie for the application’s rejection, saying he hurt the bid by rejecting the union’s support. Comella pointed out that several states winning the grants had included both the bolder proposals and their unions’ support.
Others wondered how much the drama eventually hurt the state’s chances.
“There will be plenty of time for Monday morning quarterbacking once the full set of ratings is released and we can see exactly where this proposal fell short,” said state Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester). “Until that time, however, it’s going to be hard not to wonder if the alleged lack of communication between the Governor and Commissioner Schundler has had expensive consequences.”
A Conspicuous Lack of Enthusiasm
A review of the application’s evaluations indicated a more complicated picture. The lack of union support clearly hurt but so did the shortage of support from school districts as well. Less than 60 percent of districts said they would explicitly enact the proposed reforms.
As one reviewer wrote: “This lack of greater involvement will challenge NJ’s efforts to meet its goals.”
Even where the state was praised for its proposals for evaluating teachers and schools, that lack of buy-in appeared to hurt the state’s overall standing. “With over 40 percent of the [local districts] not participating, the potential for statewide impact may be limited,” a reviewer wrote.
Still other issues also appeared to impede the state’s application, most notably the readiness of the state’s student data collection system. While the system is being put in place and credited for making big strides in the last year, the slow progress on the data system as a whole has long been a trouble spot for the state, and was its lowest point total in the first round as well.
This time, reviewers said the state still failed to show its system would be ready to be used for developing how teachers are evaluated and trained. One reviewer specifically cited how the state is still two years from even having a full system in place for helping teachers improve themselves.
“The professional development plan, as described, is minimal and lacks detail” the reviewer wrote. “Without a fully functional instructional improvement system ready until 2012, it will be very difficult to tell if the training is useful and is fostering improvement during the life of the grant.”
Some advocates said with the rejection, they hope the state doesn’t slow down in developing the data systems, which will be critical in much of its reforms going forward.
“When looking at our greatest weaknesses within the reviewers’ point allocations, it’s clear our Achilles heel remains our inadequate data systems,” said Kathleen Nugent, state director of Democrats for Education Reform, which has closely tracked the application.
“While they’re not sexy, they’re absolutely foundational to tracking student progress, giving educators tools to improve and hold teachers and principals accountable, and measuring the overall success of our education system,” she said.
Star Ledger ‘N.J. 'Race to the Top' application wrong-year error is revealed in federal documents’
Published: Wednesday, August 25, 2010, 8:44 AM Updated: Wednesday, August 25, 2010, 8:44 AM
Lisa Fleisher/Statehouse Bureau
TRENTON — New Jersey fell three points short of being one of the 10 finalists selected for hundreds of millions in federal education funding through the Obama administration's Race to the Top education grant program.
While the state scored high and low on a wide range of topics — including 10 points lost for lack of data systems to improve education — one 5-point answer was answered in error.
The state received nearly full points for its answer on the identical question on the application submitted for the first round of funding by the Corzine administration.
Here's a look at the question and answer, as well as the comments from reviewer's grading sheets, obtained Tuesday by The Star-Ledger and expected to be released today by the U.S. Department of Education.
The question answered in error is on PDF page 260 (see application), and the problematic answer is on PDF page 261. They read:
Q: The extent to which— (i) The percentage of the total revenues available to the State (as defined in this notice) that were used to support elementary, secondary, and public higher education for FY 2009 was greater than or equal to the percentage of the total revenues available to the State (as defined in this notice) that were used to support elementary, secondary, and public higher education for FY 2008
A: (i) EDUCATION SPENDING AS A PERCENTAGE OF STATE SPENDING
In fiscal year 2011, despite huge budget strains, the Governor is proposing an increase in state revenue-based support for education by 2.2% ($238 million). As proposed, preschool-12 education spending as a percentage of the state budget will be 35.4%. Federal ARRA funding will not be available to school districts in FY 2011, but the Governor and the executive team remain committed to funding education even as state revenue-based support for most other areas of state spending has been cut. This demonstrates that, despite severe fiscal challenges, the leadership in the state of New Jersey remains committed to education.
READ THE APPLICATION:
• Gov. Chris Christie's summary Race to the Top application, submitted June 1
• An appendix to the application, which is more than 1,000 pages (88mb)
New Jersey received 0.2 of a possible 5 points for the answer in the second round. The Race to the Top applications were graded by five reviewers and averaged for a final score.
Four of the five reviewers gave New Jersey 0 points on the question for failing to provide the correct years. The state missed the cutoff for funding by 3 points.
The full scoresheets and grades, obtained Tuesday by The Star-Ledger, are expected to be released today. Here are the reviewers grades and comments for the flubbed question:
Reviewer 1 - 1 of 5
The proposal asks the state to compare education spending in 2008 and 2009 which NJ doesn't do. NJ proposes a 2.2 percent increase for education spending in 2011.
Reviewer 2 - 0 of 5
New Jersey did not supply the 2008-2009 data as required and therefore forfeits the points. The 2011 appropriation request does not meet this requirement.
Reviewer 3 - 0 of 5
Evidence provided for FY2011 indicates that state support for education, as a proportion of overall state funding, will increase. However, the state did not provide information about funding levels for FY2008 and FY2009, as required in the application criterion. Therefore this response earns no points for this criterion.
Reviewer 4 - 0 of 5
New Jersey reported that the 2011 budget proportion of state expenditures devoted to education in New Jersey will increase by 2.2% but the application called for addressing changes from 2008 to 2009 so zero points were awarded for F(2)(i).
Reviewer 5 - 0 of 5
The Governor states that despite enormous budget challenges, New Jersey increased the funds to public schools in 2010. The narrative states that the State is proposing an increase of 2.2% for 2011, but the evidence asked for was the actual increase for 2008-2009. The percentage of the state budget proposed for education funding certainly seems adequate, but how this percentage compares with that of previous years was not included. Because the evidence required was not presented, no points are awarded.
The same question appeared on the first-round application, submitted by the Corzine administration on the deadline on Jan. 19, which was, coincidentally, the day of Christie's inauguration. New Jersey did not make the list of 16 finalists that time around, when two winners were announced in March.
Here was the answer on that application:
(i) EDUCATION SPENDING AS A PERCENTAGE OF STATE SPENDING New Jersey increased its percentage of spending on education from 36.9% in 2008 to 39.6% in 2009. Nominal education appropriations decreased by 4.7%, from $12.0B to $11.5B, a decline that was smaller than the 11.3% decline in total State appropriations from $32.6B to $28.9B.
The answer was part of a joint question that received 9.6 out of 10 points in the first round. The same joint scoring in the second round received 3.4 out of 10 points, including 0.2 points out of 5 for the question listed above. The scores were not broken out as fully in the first round as the second.
Christie spokesman Maria Comella noted that the state’s first-round application was not selected as a finalist. This time, it was one of 16 finalists.
"This was a strong, comprehensive package of reforms that received praise from the fedearal Department of Education," she said of the latest application. "There were a lot of good, strong applications from competitive states."
Related topics: chris-christie, njea
Asbury Park Press ‘NJ doesn't make federal
school grant winner list’
By RAJU CHEBIUM • Gannett Washington Bureau •
August 24, 2010
WASHINGTON — New Jersey narrowly missed out on
roughly $400 million of education grant money on
Tuesday.
Nine states and the District of Columbia will share
nearly $3.4 billion under the Race to the Top
program, the U.S. Department of Education said.
New Jersey was ranked No. 11.
The Garden State's application earned 437.8 points
from an independent panel of reviewers, just three
points behind the 10th-place finisher Ohio.
Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts,
New York, North Carolina and Rhode Island also
were declared winners of the second and final
round of funding for Race to the Top. They were
chosen out of 19 finalists.
Delaware and Tennessee won the first round earlier
this year.
New Jersey Education Commissioner Bret Schundler
said he's disappointed but is committed to
improving the state's K-12 system.
"This fall we must act swiftly to . . . to transform
schools in our state that are failing, improve the
quality of education for every New Jersey child and
challenge the status quo wherever it is necessary,"
Schundler said in a statement.
U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan said he
wished he had more money to distribute because
many of the 19 second-round finalists submitted
stellar applications.
"There are many great applications we would have
liked to fund," Duncan told reporters during a
conference call.
Massachusetts had the highest score — 471 — of all
10 winning jurisdictions Tuesday. New York and
Florida each received $700 million, the largest
shares of the nearly $3.4 billion.
New Jersey improved its score by 34.4 points
between its first and second applications, federal
data shows.
The Obama administration is asking for $1.35
billion to continue Race to the Top next year, but
it's unclear if Congress will go along, given the
country's economic problems.
Race to the Top was part of the economic stimulus
package President Barack Obama signed into law in
February 2009. It was meant to promote reform
efforts in K-12 systems nationwide.
Forty-six states and the District of Columbia have
come up with reform plans to win Race to the Top
funds.
New Jersey pledged to reform the way teacher tenure
is awarded, provide bonuses to effective teachers
and principals and create a new data system to track
how students are doing in school.
The state's application sparked controversy from the
start.
Gov. Chris Christie overruled Schundler and
submitted an application that failed to win support
from the powerful New Jersey Education Association.
Support from education groups like teachers unions
was one factor Race to the Top reviewers took into
account, though such endorsements weren't
required.
Separately, New Jersey is getting $268 million to
retain some 3,900 teachers who were let go or were
in jeopardy of being laid off before the start of the
new school year. That money comes from a $26
billion federal aid package Obama signed into law
earlier this month that isn't connected to Race to the
Top.
ON THE WEB: Race to the Top grant program:
www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html
Gannett Trenton Bureau reporter Mike Symons
contributed to this report.
