The dust has settled, the charts have been reviewed, and the education community has started to respond to the Obama administration's FY 2010 detailed budget proposal. The initial muted response has evolved into audible criticism. While overall funding for education and other domestic priorities would increase by approximately 7 percent under the Obama proposal, the freeze on funding for longtime education investments and the shifting of dollars from formula to competitive grant status has caused angst and concern in school districts around the country. Whether or not a Democratically controlled Congress will heed these complaints or approve the spending plan the new president has requested remains to be seen.

There is plenty of good news in this budget proposal that has not been ignored. The president promised attention to early childhood education, troubled middle and high schools, failing elementary schools, teacher incentive programs and college access and persistence. He was true to his word. The budget provides funding for a new Title I early childhood program that would funnel resources to Pre-K as well as funding for Early Childhood Challenge Grants to support collaborative state efforts. The Teacher Incentive Fund would grow to $500 million, a five-fold increase over FY 2009. A new $50 million grant program coupled with a doubling of Striving Readers funding provides welcome new support for struggling middle and high schools. College access concerns are addressed by additional Pell Grant funding and attention to program completion through a new $500 competitive grant fund. The Title I School Improvement fund also receives a generous $1.5 billion increase, and an added emphasis on middle and high schools.

Turning to the "concern" side of the equation, some argue that funding for the School Improvement Fund is taken directly out of the Title I formula. Advocates for after-school programs and career and technical education had anticipated new investments and were disappointed to see funding held at the FY 2009 level. The budget does include $370 million for reading support, welcome news to literacy advocates, but a far cry from the $1 billion that was lost with the elimination of the Reading First Program. And IDEA, a program that has enjoyed steady growth over the past several years, is also frozen at the FY 2009 level, disappointing disability advocates. STEM education advocates were also surprised to see funding for the Math Science Partnership program frozen in light of the president's strongly worded support for science, technology, engineering and math education.

Perhaps some of this angst can be attributed to a growing awareness that the generous $100 billion windfall for education that was included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was just that - a windfall, rather than sustained new investments that will grow over time. And disappointing to some also is the knowledge that in this economic climate and with this president who believes education to be a key to economic recovery, there will always be winners and losers.

On May 11, the Brookings Institution hosted a discussion with Arne Duncan, secretary of education, about his vision for the distribution and use of innovation funding made available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Duncan's remarks were consistent with previous discussions outlining the goals he shares with President Obama and how he hopes awards made from the Race to the Top and What Works and Innovation Funds will help states and others implement this vision.

Duncan noted that the current economic crisis will force many governors to direct state stabilization funding from the Department of Education to prevent teacher job loss and offset crippling budget deficits. He is hopeful, however, that at least a portion of the $100 billion in ARRA education dollars will support innovation and the dissemination of successful practices that reward teacher and student achievement, help districts build quality data collection, elevate standards and assessment systems and invest in the low-performing schools. It is through the $5 billion in competitive awards - the $4.3 billion Race to the Top funds for states and the $650 million What Works Innovation Fund for states and nonprofit entities - that generates the most excitement for Duncan. The Obama budget released last week would provide an additional $100 million for the What Works and Innovation Fund, making it one of the few ARRA-created initiatives that could be sustained in future budget requests from the administration.

Responding to audience questions, panelists addressed issues related to how ARRA funding will support extending the school day, the expansion of Title I, early education and Pre-K programs, improving teacher quality and the value of technology in promoting and enabling school reform. Alan Berube, senior fellow and research director at the Brookings Institution, expressed concern that because ARRA essentially provides additional funding for existing formula and competitive grant programs, the money will "go down the same pipes" and will not be used for restructuring and reform. Isabel Sawhill, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, concurred, saying education's problems are difficult. Two years of additional resources can get things started, but it is unrealistic to expect measurable outcomes in such a short period of time, according to Sawhill.

Echoing Duncan's hopes, Mike Smith, senior advisor at the Department of Education, acknowledged the difficulty states face but urged states to use funding to improve "teaching" and not just "teachers." This can be accomplished, according to Smith, through better preparation and initiatives to improve school climate and supports, such as better curriculum and technology. Mike Casserly, executive director of the Council of Great City Schools, voiced concern that states would reduce their investment in education, instead relying on federal assistance - a shortsighted solution that would cause further harm to cash-strapped city schools. Unfortunately, according to Casserly, many districts have already determined that stimulus funding won't make it from state capitols to urban areas.

On May 12, the House Education and Labor Committee held a full committee hearing, "America's Competitiveness through High School Reform," to examine how addressing the high school dropout crisis and improving graduation rates can strengthen America's economic competitiveness. This hearing was the first on this topic in the 111th Congress, and a bipartisan panel of four members of Congress, as well as a panel of six experts on the topic, testified. Reps. Chaka Fattah (D-Pa.), Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), Mike Castle (R-Del.), and Phil Roe (R-Tenn.) all agreed that the nation faces a dropout crisis during a time when students need higher levels of education and workforce training to succeed in an increasingly global economy. George Miller (D-Calif.), committee chair, said startling statistics make it "increasingly clear that addressing this dropout crisis is one of the most important things we can do to turn our economy around for good." Specifically, only 70 percent of students graduate from high school with a regular high school diploma; for minority students, the statistics are even worse. Approximately 10 percent of high schools in this country produce close to half of these dropouts, and these so-called "dropout factories" disproportionately affect minority students, producing 69 percent of all African-American and 63 percent of all Hispanic students who drop out. In addition, business leaders complain that those who do graduate from high school are not ready for the workplace, and colleges say high school graduates are unprepared for the rigors of college.

Additional testimony was heard from Bob Balfanz, Ph.D., from The Johns Hopkins University; Michael Wotorson, executive director of the Campaign for High School Equity; Marguerite Kondracke, president and CEO of America's Promise; Scott Gordon, CEO of the Mastery Charter Schools in Philadelphia; Vicki Phillips, director of education for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; and Bob Wise, president of the Alliance for Excellent Education. All agreed that current federal investment in our nation's secondary schools is minimal and that a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act must include measures to drive high school reform, including greater accountability so we know where the problems are and how to drive resources and supports to these schools. In addition, high, common standards that are tied to college- and work-readiness and are internationally benchmarked and consistent graduation rate calculations with meaningful growth targets and goals are critical for reform. Federal investment in innovative programs and models that can be brought to scale, along with supporting states' and districts' efforts in creating systems of improvement and capacity are also necessary. Finally, it was noted that the needs of middle school students cannot be forgotten.

ED Meets with Stakeholders on EETT ARRA Spending: As the education community continues to discern how the Department of Education (ED) plans to distribute the funds meant for education in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), ED staff are meeting with stakeholders to hear concerns and advice. Recently, ED officials met with stakeholders to discuss the expected distribution of $650 million in Enhancing Education Through Technology (EETT) funds allocated by ARRA. To date, guidance from ED has suggested that these funds would be part of the ARRA funds distributed "in the fall," after the first disbursements of stabilization funds were sent to states and ED staff could turn to more detailed guidance on these and other planned program-specific disbursements. However, after listening to stakeholders, ED has reportedly decided to issue guidance for these funds shortly and award them to states in July, so states might, in turn, award the funds locally in time for the new school year. The State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA) has been working with ED on facilitating conversations with state leaders. In addition, it plans to compile and issue a report on the disbursement of these funds early in 2011 to inform further grant-making activities around ARRA EETT disbursements. State directors are also working among themselves to share grant applications and other practices.

NSBA and CPE Hold Briefing on Growth Models: On May 13, the National School Boards Association (NSBA) and the Center for Public Education (CPE) held a briefing on the use of growth models and whether schools should be given credit under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) for students who take longer than four years to graduate high school. Jim Hull from CPE stated that currently under NCLB schools are given credit for the percentage of students achieving the state's "proficient" level, regardless of how far students progressed to get to that level. He believes that policymakers are beginning to recognize that some students start from way behind and, thus, have much farther to go to reach proficiency. This has led policymakers to look at ways to measure academic growth via growth models. A growth model measures students' academic progress between two points in time. Reggie Felton from NSBA said students are tested on material described by state standards, and schools are held accountable for whether or not students meet those standards. Felton and Hull both argued that the use of growth models will shift accountability to include measures for how much progress students make, not just whether they meet state standards. Hull noted that some basic features should be in place to design and implement a valid and reliable measure of student growth. These features include: a statement of policy intent with a specific purpose; properly designed annual tests; data systems to collect, store and analyze the data; statistical expertise; professional development; transparency and communication; and funding. Hull also discussed late graduates, those students who take more than four years to graduate from high school. Under the accountability provisions in NCLB, students who don't graduate in four years count against schools' graduation rates. Many educators have complained that such an approach punishes schools that go the extra mile to keep students from dropping out or to lure back those who have left school. Hull Said CPE research shows late graduates do markedly better than GED recipients and dropouts. And, when the data are controlled to compare students of equivalent socioeconomic status and achievement level, late graduates come close to on-time graduates' achievement. Hull and Felton urged Congress to revise NCLB to encourage schools to keep all students in school until they graduate, regardless of whether or not it takes longer than the standard four years. More info.

Brookings Hosts Discussion of High Schools' Role in Encouraging Postsecondary Study: Last week, the Future of Children, a joint Brookings' Institution-Princeton University initiative, hosted an event to examine the role of high schools in preparing disadvantaged students for college. The event featured the release of a policy brief discussing the steps high schools should take to help low-income students prepare for post-secondary education. The policy brief is a companion to the spring 2009 issue of the efforts journal, "America's High Schools." The event featured remarks from Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), who recently came to the Senate from his position as superintendent of the Denver school system and brought with him his reputation as an education reformer. In addition, an impressive panel discussed high school reform strategies that should be examined locally and by federal lawmakers. The newly heightened policy prominence of high school reform, especially the challenges facing low-performing schools, has amplified debate about the role of high schools. Many of the speakers agreed that reform efforts should commit to investing in innovative interventions, that national minimum graduation requirements should be developed, that the goals of a high school education should be reexamined and that rigorous research on reform efforts is crucial. More info.

House Subcomittee Holds Hearing on Child Nutrition Programs: The Healthy Families and Communities Subcommittee held a hearing on May 14, "Improving Child Nutrition Programs to Reduce Childhood Obesity." Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), subcommittee chair, pointed to the rise in childhood obesity, diabetes and heart disease across the country. "The School Breakfast and Lunch programs can make a great impact because they may provide more than 50 percent of a student's food and nutrient intake on school days," she said. The subcommittee heard testimony from fellow Education and Labor Committee members Reps. Mike Castle (R-Del.) and Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), as well as a number of people who have employed innovative strategies to combat the obesity epidemic in schools. More info.

House Science and Technology Committee Holds Hearing on FY 2010 Budget: On May 14, the House Committee on Science and Technology held a hearing on the role of science in the new administration, reviewing the administration's proposed FY 2010 budget for federal research and development. Dr. John Holdren, director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and advisor to the president, provided testimony on the FY 2010 budget request, which he explained allocates $147.6 billion for research and development in federal agencies. The $147.6 billion included in the budget request is intended to support basic science research and development programs at the National Science Foundation, the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the Department of Energy's Office of Science, as well as clean energy, biomedical and health, and safety and security research and development. Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), committee chair, commended Holdren for taking a leadership role in developing new and aggressive policies supportive of research and development within federal agencies. He also reminded those present that the burden is not entirely on OSTP. "These enormous tasks we confront, such as strengthening STEM education and improving management of our water resources, require leadership and willingness to coordinate, cooperate and share information on the part of many federal agencies." More info.