<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: RTT-Palooza!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.eduwonk.com/2010/06/rtt-palooza.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.eduwonk.com/2010/06/rtt-palooza.html</link>
	<description>Education News, Analysis, and Commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:00:28 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: edlharris</title>
		<link>http://www.eduwonk.com/2010/06/rtt-palooza.html/comment-page-1#comment-207872</link>
		<dc:creator>edlharris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 20:02:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eduwonk.com/?p=6331#comment-207872</guid>
		<description>Pimp Actor James O&#039;Keefe&#039;s paymaster, Andrew Breitbart has discovered Michelle Rhee and describes the lost love between the mainstream/lamestream media and teachers and their unions:
&lt;a HREF=&quot;http://bigjournalism.com/tag/michelle-rhee/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Are Journalists Finally Getting Over their Pro-Teacher-Union Fetish?&lt;/A&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pimp Actor James O&#8217;Keefe&#8217;s paymaster, Andrew Breitbart has discovered Michelle Rhee and describes the lost love between the mainstream/lamestream media and teachers and their unions:<br />
<a HREF="http://bigjournalism.com/tag/michelle-rhee/" rel="nofollow">Are Journalists Finally Getting Over their Pro-Teacher-Union Fetish?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GGW</title>
		<link>http://www.eduwonk.com/2010/06/rtt-palooza.html/comment-page-1#comment-207871</link>
		<dc:creator>GGW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 18:15:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eduwonk.com/?p=6331#comment-207871</guid>
		<description>Simple solution: Make it the first question for each state &quot;interview.&quot;  Videotape interview.  Instruct all applicants that if the answer is yes, they need to bring copies to pass out.  

I&#039;d be surprised if state leaders would want to be on tape denying any side agreements, if indeed they&#039;d made any.  You don&#039;t need the AG.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Simple solution: Make it the first question for each state &#8220;interview.&#8221;  Videotape interview.  Instruct all applicants that if the answer is yes, they need to bring copies to pass out.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;d be surprised if state leaders would want to be on tape denying any side agreements, if indeed they&#8217;d made any.  You don&#8217;t need the AG.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sandy kress</title>
		<link>http://www.eduwonk.com/2010/06/rtt-palooza.html/comment-page-1#comment-207870</link>
		<dc:creator>sandy kress</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 17:08:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eduwonk.com/?p=6331#comment-207870</guid>
		<description>Andy, how can the USDOE make valid judgments about states&#039; commitments to reforms without having all the details before them regarding these side agreements? 

A state that allows such agreements that would effectively scuttle the reforms either during the course of the grants or after they&#039;re paid out is simply not in the same position as a state that is requiring (with requisite buy-in) ongoing implementation of the reforms.

This is exactly why I criticized RTTT in the beginning for being too geared to what&#039;s promised on paper, not what&#039;s actually done and not what&#039;s actually improved in terms of actual increases in student achievement.

I don&#039;t see this as a close call at all. The peer review committees had better get their hands on all such relevant data, or they&#039;re digging their own graves.

Talk about gaming the system! Sheesh.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Andy, how can the USDOE make valid judgments about states&#8217; commitments to reforms without having all the details before them regarding these side agreements? </p>
<p>A state that allows such agreements that would effectively scuttle the reforms either during the course of the grants or after they&#8217;re paid out is simply not in the same position as a state that is requiring (with requisite buy-in) ongoing implementation of the reforms.</p>
<p>This is exactly why I criticized RTTT in the beginning for being too geared to what&#8217;s promised on paper, not what&#8217;s actually done and not what&#8217;s actually improved in terms of actual increases in student achievement.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see this as a close call at all. The peer review committees had better get their hands on all such relevant data, or they&#8217;re digging their own graves.</p>
<p>Talk about gaming the system! Sheesh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

