Where’s the Research in ‘Race to the Top’?

By Debra Viadero — September 03, 2009 1 min read

There goes that swinging pendulum: Much was made of the fact that the phrase “scientifically based research” appeared more than 100 times in the federal No Child Left Behind Act. But in the rules proposed last week for the U.S. Department of Education’s $4 billion Race to the Top competition, the terms don’t appear at all.

The omission hasn’t gone unnoticed by the research community. Both the 25,000-member American Educational Research Association and the Knowledge Alliance, which represents research organizations, federal laboratories, and technical assistance centers, submitted comments that make a case for adding a definition for scientifically based or scientifically valid research to the proposed regulations and for requiring grant applicants to rely more on research in crafting their reform plans.

The AERA, in particular, also urges federal policymakers to take the opportunity to address the fact that the research base on charter schools and on turning around persistently low-achieving schools is disappointingly weak.

But that group’s most controversial recommendation—one that is echoed by Helen Ladd and Dan Koretz, two researchers who also contributed comments—warns against basing evaluations of teachers and principals on student-achievement data alone. They write:

Neither research evidence related to growth models nor best practice related to assessment supports the proposed requirement that assessment of teachers and principals be based centrally on student achievement"

You can find a bit of counterpoint to that suggestion in this blog entry posted yesterday by Amber Winkler over at Flypaper. Check out the full text of the comments from AERA and the Knowledge Alliance, as well as those from the more than 1,130 other individual and groups who weighted in, at this link. To get the gist of what all those commenters had to say, I also recommend my colleague Michele McNeil’s story today in EdWeek.

A version of this news article first appeared in the Inside School Research blog.


Early Childhood Live Online Discussion The Impact of the Coronavirus on Early-Childhood Learning
Join Peter DeWitt and his guests on A Seat at the Table as they discuss the implications of coronavirus on early-childhood learning.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Recruitment & Retention Webinar
Recruiting and Retaining a More Diverse Teaching Workforce
We discuss the importance of workforce diversity and learn strategies to recruit and retain teachers from diverse backgrounds.
Content provided by EdWeek Top School Jobs
Student Well-Being Webinar Boosting Teacher and Student Motivation During the Pandemic: What It Takes
Join Alyson Klein and her expert guests for practical tips and discussion on how to keep students and teachers motivated as the pandemic drags on.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Michigan Data Coach- (MGLVA)
Michigan, United States
K12 Inc.
Program Manager, State Solution Delivery
Portland, OR, US
Northwest Evaluation Association
Director of Education
Lexington, Kentucky
Lexington Public Library
Great Oaks AmeriCorps Fellow August 2021 - June 2022
New York City, New York (US)
Great Oaks Charter Schools

Read Next

Education Briefly Stated Briefly Stated: February 3, 2021
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
8 min read
Education Briefly Stated Briefly Stated: January 20, 2021
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
9 min read
Education Briefly Stated Briefly Stated: January 13, 2021
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
8 min read
Education Obituary In Memory of Michele Molnar, EdWeek Market Brief Writer and Editor
EdWeek Market Brief Associate Editor Michele Molnar, who was instrumental in launching the publication, succumbed to cancer.
5 min read