Special Report
Federal Opinion

The Buy-In Myth

By Dan Weisberg — April 30, 2010 2 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

Late last month, the U.S. Department of Education announced the first winners in its Race to the Top grants competition, sending shock waves through statehouses across the country. Only Delaware and Tennessee won awards, leaving 39 other applicants—14 of them finalists—out of the first-round money.

Commentators pored over the results, searching for the secret to winning. They latched on to one of the most accessible explanations: The winning states had convinced nearly all of their local school districts and teachers’ unions to support their applications.

The need for broad buy-in—and its implication that states must water down their proposals to get it—quickly became conventional wisdom. The Wall Street Journal wrote that the results “sent a message to state capitals that winners must garner broad support from teachers’ unions and local school boards.” The Associated Press concluded that strong local support in Delaware and Tennessee “helped them stand out from the other 14 finalists.” Education Week’s headline read, “Local Buy-In Helps Two States Win Race to Top” (March 29, 2010).

There’s just one problem: It’s not true.

Several states secured as much buy-in as the winners but still finished far behind them. Some of those states, like Utah and Kansas, didn’t even qualify for the finals. Idaho secured support from every single union in the state, but managed only a 28th-place finish. Buy-in was not enough to make up for major weaknesses in these states’ applications.

At the same time, states with relatively low buy-in still came very close to winning. Florida finished in fourth place even though only 8 percent of local unions signed on to its plan. Louisiana earned the highest score in the contest’s most heavily weighted category—“great teachers and leaders”—despite earning support from fewer than half its districts. Both states could have scored even higher by correcting specific deficiencies in their applications that had nothing to do with stakeholder support. Louisiana, for example, lost just 6 points on local buy-in, but 15 points for inadequately addressing the application section on math and science education.

Clearly, buy-in is not the golden ticket it has been made out to be. But if it’s not the key to winning, what is?

In short: vision and leadership. Tennessee and Delaware distinguished themselves by committing to bold, comprehensive reforms, such as creating rigorous teacher evaluations tied to student learning and making big changes in failing schools. They built their plans around changes to state laws, ensuring that all districts would faithfully implement the policies that were passed. They recognized that incorporating feedback from teachers and other stakeholders would strengthen their applications, but they made participation in the dialogue contingent on a commitment to sensible reforms.

What neither of these states did was water down its application to earn the blessing of unions and school boards. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what the buy-in myth encourages states to do. It wrongly suggests that Florida, Louisiana, and other states that put forward strong proposals lost because they went too far, when the truth is that they could have won by going just a little bit farther.

Being bold, after all, is what the Race to the Top is all about. It’s why education leaders believe it’s an opportunity to transform public education and give generations of children a brighter future. That goal is still within reach—but only if states can separate myth from fact.

A version of this article appeared in the May 12, 2010 edition of Education Week as The Buy-In Myth

Events

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.
Sponsor
Assessment Webinar
Reflections on Evidence-Based Grading Practices: What We Learned for Next Year
Get real insights on evidence-based grading from K-12 leaders.
Content provided by Otus
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.
Sponsor
Student Well-Being Webinar
Creating Resilient Schools with a Trauma-Responsive MTSS
Join us to learn how school leaders are building a trauma-responsive MTSS to support students & improve school outcomes.
School & District Management Live Online Discussion A Seat at the Table: We Can’t Engage Students If They Aren’t Here: Strategies to Address the Absenteeism Conundrum
Absenteeism rates are growing fast. Join Peter DeWitt and experts to learn how to re-engage students & families.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Federal Trump Admin. Cuts Library Funding. What It Means for Students
In an executive order last week, the Trump administration mandated the reduction of seven agencies, including one that funds libraries around the country: the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS).
5 min read
President Donald Trump signs an executive order in the Oval Office at the White House, Monday, Feb. 10, 2025, in Washington.
President Donald Trump signs an executive order in the Oval Office at the White House, Monday, Feb. 10, 2025, in Washington.
Alex Brandon/AP
Federal The Ed. Dept. Axed Its Office of Ed Tech. What That Means for Schools
The office helped districts navigate new and emerging technology affecting schools.
A small group of diverse middle school students sit at their desks with personal laptops in front of each one as they work during a computer lab.
E+/Getty
Federal Letter to the Editor The Feds Should Take More Responsibility for Education
A letter to the editor disagrees with former Gov. Jeb Bush's recent opinion essay.
1 min read
Education Week opinion letters submissions
Gwen Keraval for Education Week
Federal Opinion The Wrong People Are Driving Our Education Policy
School choice advocates don’t understand the full ramifications of draining public resources to benefit private institutions.
Eugene Butler Jr.
4 min read
Moving investments, sending and receiving money, money transfer, Money tree, Growth for trading and investing, reallocating funding from the public sector to the private sector
iStock/Getty Images