Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

State of the Union mystery: What do Obama's Race to the Top plans mean?

Obama called education key to 'winning the future' and wants to replace No Child Left Behind with a plan based on his Race to the Top initiative. But that left some experts scratching their heads.

By Staff writer / January 26, 2011

President Obama delivers his State of the Union address on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 25. In his speech, he challenged Congress to invest in new research and education to meet 'our generation's Sputnik moment.' He proposed replacing No Child Left Behind, which is due for an overhaul, with a plan modeled after his Race to the Top program.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP


Education held a prominent place in President Obama’s State of the Union address Tuesday night, as he called for a re-commitment to "investing in better research and education" to meet “our generation’s Sputnik moment.”

Skip to next paragraph

Obama declared, "To win the future ... we also have to win the race to educate our kids." His words deliberately echoed his administration's Race to the Top program, even as he sounded some familiar themes, including the responsibility of parents and communities, the need for higher expectations in schools, and the importance of excellent teachers.

And he also put forth a few more specific proposals:

  • Prepare 100,000 more science, technology, engineering, and math teachers by the end of the decade.
  • Make permanent the tuition tax credit – worth $10,000 for four years of college – and expand the Pell Grant program.
  • Replace No Child Left Behind with a new, more flexible law, that he said should be modeled after his competitive Race to the Top grant program.

That last point had a few education experts scratching their heads, since Race to the Top is a totally different animal from the broader Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the formal name for No Child Left Behind. The ESEA is the means by which the federal government delivers most of its money to schools and states – more than $100 billion, mostly determined by certain formulas, compared with the $4 billion of competitive grants that made up Race to the Top.

“He’s putting his chips on something that has limited usefulness, but it’s not a broad usefulness, and we don’t even know yet how well states will spend the money from Race to the Top,” says Jack Jennings, executive director of the Center on Education Policy in Washington, who otherwise liked the education themes Obama sounded in his speech. “With No Child Left Behind, he should have talked about [the need for] broader reforms and improvements and raising standards, rather than making the theme of competitiveness the main thing.”

Race to the Top was widely seen as spurring big legislative changes in states, particularly around more accountability for teachers, as they vied for the pools of money. But it was also criticized by many who felt the priorities it emphasized were wrong, were disappointed in the selection of winners, or felt that a competition – that by definition left many states and districts out of the grants – was the wrong way to go.


Read Comments

View reader comments | Comment on this story