mr. schnur is talking. i would argue decades of experience particularly out of education tell us it's not whether you do it, it's how well. there are three decades on turnarounds. corporate reengineering. in the best case scenarios, these work 30% of the time. to imagine that we can identify some models that we will then require folks to use and imagine that that is going to increase the likelihood that they will succeedcy think just to -- to allow our aspirations to exceed what we can actually usefully do. to give one very concrete example i think particularly on the teacher evaluation front what i am concerned about, you may have read or heard where new school models, hybrid schools like carpe deem or rocket ship academies or you know, the school of one in new york city. one of the important things to note is these school models become very nearly illegal under much of what we're talking about in terms of state-of-the-art teacher evaluation. these schools do not have a teacher of record in the conventiona

mr. schnur alluded to provide political cover for state and union leaders who trying to get themselves out of an anachronistic systems. often even when you have superintendents like mr. grier or far-sighted union leaders who would like to do things differently, they get pulled back by their constituents who ask what is in it for us. one of the powerful levers of voluntary competitive grants is the answer to what is in it for us is we can go out, we can bring a spotlight we can bring home dollars. and it provides us a chance to leapfrog into the swoyft. 21st century. fourth, thing is a federal role when it comes to basic research. it is enormously useful in this front. what i would encourage, though, is we keep in mind that the federal role if we think about doppler rad darpa is how do we leverage technological innovations and involved in trying to recommend particular models of implementation. so i hope that's helpful. >> very good. very comprehensive. >> i'm sorry. in regard to what is positive about it, i think first of all, in your segment, senator was that no child left behind was inef

mr. hess, inner schnur, you already had your shot. we'll skip you. so mr. hess, we'll just go down. what are the two or three things you like about the bill, what are the two or three things you don't like the bill, if that's a fair enough question. >> sure. i appreciate the opportunity to be here, mr. chairman, senator enzi, members. for me, unlike mr. schnur, i don't spend as much time on the ground. i spend much more

mr. schnur? it says, if the state chooses to use a student -- use student growth as a measure of academic progress and to determine if students are on track to college and career readiness, a student performing below the on track level of performance for the student's grade level under subsection blah, blah, blah, on the academic assessment for the subject under sup text blah, blah, blah, is attaining a rate of academic growth in the subject that indicate that the student will be on track to college and career readiness in not more than a specified number of years and two, a student who is performing at or above the on track level performance for the student's grade level on the academic grade level for the subject is continuing to make academic growth. so for states that choose a growth model, we are addressing i think what you raised. are you satisfied? >> i think that's good. my view is that having not federally prescribed but state some big goals about increasing percentage of kids meeting bi

mr. schnur? it says, if the state chooses to use a student -- use student growth as a measure of academic progress and to determine if students are on track to college and career readiness, a student performing below the on track

mr. hess, inner schnur, you already had your shot. we'll skip you. so mr. hess, we'll just go down. what are the two or three things you like about the bill, what are the two or thr