Obama's parents met in in a Russian language class at the University of Hawaii at Manoawhere his father was a foreign student on a scholarship. During that time, the elder Obama completed his undergraduate degree in economics in Hawaii, graduating in June He then left to attend graduate school on a scholarship at Harvard Universitywhere he earned an M. Obama's parents divorced in March
Caught between extraordinary public expectations and relatively modest constitutional authority, U. Like his predecessors, Obama has sought to harness and consolidate his influence outside of Congress.
He also has made contributions of his own to the arsenal of administrative policy devices. The most creative, perhaps, is his Race to the Top initiative, which attempted to spur wide-ranging reforms in education, a policy domain in which past presidents exercised very little independent authority.
In doing so, it does not assess the efficacy of the particular policies promoted by the initiative, nor does it investigate how Race to the Top altered practices within schools or districts. Rather, the focus is the education policymaking process itself; the adoption of education policies is the outcome of interest.
No single test provides incontrovertible evidence about its causal effects.
The overall findings, however, indicate that Race to the Top had a meaningful impact on the production of education policy across the United States. In its aftermath, all states experienced a marked surge in the adoption of education policies. This surge does not appear to be a statistical aberration or an extension of past policy trends.
Legislators from all states reported that Race to the Top affected policy deliberations within their states. In the main, the evidence suggests that by strategically deploying funds to cash-strapped states and massively increasing the public profile of a controversial set of education policies, the president managed to stimulate reforms that had stalled in state legislatures, stood no chance of enactment in Congress, and could not be accomplished via unilateral action.
Asking States to Compete On February 17,President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of ARRAlegislation that was designed to stimulate the economy; support job creation; and invest in critical sectors, including education, in the aftermath of the Great Recession.
From the outset, the president saw Race to the Top as a way to induce state-level policymaking that aligned with his education objectives on college readiness, the creation of new data systems, teacher effectiveness, and persistently low-performing schools.
Department of Education ED exercised considerable discretion over the design and operation of the Race to the Top competition. Within a handful of broad priorities identified by Congress in ARRA, the Obama administration chose which specific policies would be rewarded, and by how much; how many states would receive financial rewards, and in what amount; and what kinds of oversight mechanisms would be used to ensure compliance.
From an operational standpoint, Race to the Top was nearly entirely the handiwork of ED. Race to the Top comprised three distinct phases of competition. Both Phase 1 and Phase 2 included specific education-policy priorities on which each applicant would be evaluated.
States were asked to describe their current status and outline their future goals in meeting the criteria in each of these categories. The education policy priorities spanned six major scoring categories and one competitive preference category see Table 1. To assist states in writing their applications, ED offered technical assistance workshops, webinars, and training materials.
Additionally, nonprofit organizations such as the National Council on Teacher Quality published reports intended to help states maximize their likelihood of winning an award. Nonetheless, substantial uncertainty shrouded some components of the competition, including the exact grading procedures, number of possible winners, total allocated prize amount per winning state, and prize allocation mechanism and timeline.
When all was said and done, 40 states and the District of Columbia submitted applications to Phase 1 of the competition. Finalists and winners were announced in March Figure 1 identifies all winners and award amounts.
Thirty-five states and the District of Columbia submitted applications to Phase 2 of the competition in June Having exhausted the ARRA funds, the president in sought additional support for the competition.
That spring, Congress allotted funds to support a third phase, in which only losing finalists from Phase 2 could participate. A significantly higher percentage of participating states won in Phase 3, although the amounts of these grants were considerably smaller than those from Phases 1 and 2.
States that won Race to the Top grants were subject to a nontrivial monitoring process, complete with annual performance reports, accountability protocols, and site visits.
After receiving an award letter, a state could immediately withdraw up to Impact on State Policy In its public rhetoric, the Obama administration emphasized its intention to use Race to the Top to stimulate new education-policy activity.
How would we know if it succeeded? To identify the effects of Race to the Top on state-level policymaking, ideally one would take advantage of plausibly random variation in either eligibility or participation.
Unfortunately, neither of these strategies is possible, as all states were allowed to enter the competition and participation was entirely voluntary. To determine that number, my research team and I documented trends in actual policy enactments across the 50 states and the District of Columbia.
We tracked numerous policies that clearly fit the various criteria laid out under Race to the Top, and covered such topics as charter schools, data management, intervention into low-performing schools, and the use of test scores for school personnel policy, as well as three additional control policies—increased high-school graduation requirements, the establishment of 3rd-grade test-based promotion policies, and tax credits to support private-school scholarships—that were similar to Race to the Top policies but were neither mentioned nor rewarded under the program see sidebar, opposite page, for specific policies tracked for Race to the Top applications and state adoptions.
Across all 50 states and the District of Columbia, we examined whether a state legislature, governor, school board, professional standards board, or any other governing body with statewide authority had enacted a qualifying policy each year between and The paper shows how social value creation and business models are interrelated in the context of the bottom of the pyramid (BOP) business formation.
William Howell of the University of Chicago talks with Marty West about the Every Student Succeeds Act and federal education policy in the Obama administration on the EdNext podcast. Essay about American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - The financial crisis of was estimated to be the most dangerous since the Great Depression of the ’s (The financial crisis, ).
The catalyst was the bubble burst of the housing market. Policy Paper: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act This Research Paper Policy Paper: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and other 64,+ term papers, college essay examples and free essays are available now on benjaminpohle.com The American Recovery And Reinvestment Act Politics Essay.
Print Reference this. Published: 23rd March, (About the Recovery Act, ). The problems of economic crisis are severe and have resulted in recession, closing of businesses, job loss, and families losing their homes.
But has the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, really. In , the National Commission on Excellence in Education released the landmark report, "A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform." It was the first report to scrutinize the practice of lowering academic expectations to maintain the appearance of high student achievement levels.