"A pig in a poke"
That is how one legislator described the education bill thus far.
When asked how the hundreds of millions of dollars that the state could receive from the federal government (if we qualify for the "Race to the top") was going to be spent, The response was along the lines of "We aren't going to tell you".
That did not go over well. If legislators had half an idea at least a significant percent was going to go for teacher incentives for performance I think that could go a long way.
Many conservatives like the concepts (accountability, reward for performance) even without the federal money. Other members are concerned with the long term strings that usually follow federal money. What will happen when the federal money runs out?
As it is now the governors staff is playing a little tight lipped in hopes it will give them an advantage in the application process over other states.
The tenure issue is a battle as well but is a little more clear. The gov. wants to make the evaluation to receive tenure a year later and make it so a large chunk of that evaluation (50%) be based on if the teacher was able to help improve students from their previous performance (NOT on the students performance compared to other students in better schools or parts of the state) The TEA wants that standard to be lower so more teachers get tenure faster. They want it to be about 35% of the evaluation. They also want all significant evaluation to continue to end after 4 years as a teacher.
I guess they figure nothing could change for the next 30 or so years of that teachers employ.