What’s Required? The third Race to the Top (RTTT) assurance requires state authority to identify, intervene and turn around low-performing schools. This RTTT assurance also calls for states to allow alternative schools --- specifically, charter schools. State laws allowing for the intervention and turnaround of low-performing schools, and the development of charter schools, is a priority for the Department of Education and President Obama. In the President’s remarks following the announcement of RTTT, he specifically addressed the importance of identifying and improving low-performing schools, as well as the role of charter schools in raising standards. Why Turnaround Intervention & Why Charters? The call for the turnaround of low-performing schools is not a new education reform measure – much has been discussed and reported on about the impact and outcomes of turnaround schools. Data shows that successfully turning around a struggling school is difficult, yet still possible – especially when schools are held to performance and accountability measures. RTTT’s inclusion of turnaround school intervention and charter school authority relates to the latter point. While not publicly stated, clearly this assurance is a call for states to adopt performance measures that low-performing schools must be accountable to, in order to receive state education funding – a very similar model to that of the charter school state agreements. In addition to accountability measures, state intervention authority in low-performing schools also has two other key benefits: 1) students will no longer be subjected to schools with long track records of failure; and 2) the threat of intervention could generate improvements in low-performing schools. How Does Washington Measure Up? Washington is not in a strong position to meet this assurance unless legislation is passed during the January 2010 legislative session. Washington does not currently have legislation allowing for state intervention to turnaround low-performing schools. Without proposed legislation by the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) the state will not meet this assurance and, as such, will put forth a “low-performing” application. What Must Washington Do to be Competitive? In regards to charter school legislation, Washington state is not well positioned to meet this requirement of the assurance. Legislation to allow for charter schools in Washington state has been proposed and declined by the legislature three times due to high concerns from labor unions and charter school opponents. As such, it is not recommend that the legislature introduce charter school legislation. Instead the states’ proposal should highlight its alternative school programs as a means to try to meet the charter school requirement in this assurance.     Anne Luce is a guest blogger and graduate student at Seattle University earning a master’s degree in public administration, with a focus on education.   Previous Blogs: Longitundinal Data Systems Common Standards Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers