I am not sure that most teachers, school principals, school boards, superintendents, or higher education faculty are aware of the guidelines and objectives of the Federal "Race to the top" program. It appears that the main objective on the surface of the policy may be for schools and school leaders to compete for federal funding, based on student achievement and progress; however, I'm not sure that most school districts are in need of more bureaucractic top-down policies.
The policy initiative "sounds" like a good idea on the surface (or in sound bytes)-the idea of having states "compete" for public money based on proposed changes. This time we must ask:
1) How will the federal government be held accountable for funding what is truly needed to change schools?
2) And, how will the federal government be held accountable if proposed changes are not implemented or proven to be effective for those student population groups where school changes are most needed?
Some states, more than others, may have the resources to make substantial changes. However, other communities may lack the overall infrastructure (i.e. access to jobs, healthcare, early childhood education, strong moral leadership, community partnerships, etc.) to adequately deliver what was intially promised. For example, very rarely have I witnessed a failing business, turn itself around without a complete new mission, vision, staffing, leadership, and the start up of a new customer base.  Any proposed changes in practice or curriculum requires financial resources, visionary leadership, and community development. Is the government prepared to first assist troubled communities before it throws money at a morally bankrupt and ethically corrupt system based on what the school organizations propose to do?
As President Obama told the automobile industry, "We will only bail you out with taxpayer money, if you do something totally different. What you are doing, is not working. What worked then, does not work now."
I believe that collaboratively, as a nation, we should first decide what is needed now in school communities across the nation, admit that the current system is stuck in a cultural lag, and then put our accumulated resources (i.e. taxpayers' dollars, researchers, social justice advocates, and policymakers) together to discover what kind of educational system and schooling is most beneficial not simply to the masses, but also to diverse school communities. Second, we really need to examine in what ways is the proposed program different from NCLB? In many ways it reeks of neoliberal politics as usual.
Nonetheless, more needs to be openly discussed in open forums. EdWeek explains the programs, supporters viewpoints, and dissenters perspectives here: http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2009/09/02/03stim-race.h29.html?tkn=RY...
My two cents,
Venus