In November 2002, the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) was dissolved. Out of the reorganization arose two new offices within the department, the Institute of Education Sciences and the Office of Innovation and Improvement, signaling the Bush administration's commitment to both scientifically based research and continuous innovation within education. What no one really bothered to ask was whether the nation's schools need more innovation and, if so, is the federal government proficient at nurturing it? Education really needs more innovation. Any field of endeavor that rejects innovation will wither intellectually. But necessary as it is, innovation has its pitfalls. For one thing, many proposals that claim to be innovative are merely a revival of some failed idea from the past. If one is in the business of funding novelties, it is important to know the history of education reform in order to avoid funding anew that which was deemed "innovative" a century ago. There are surely ways that the federal government can help support innovation, but only if those who are in charge are especially cautious and exceedingly humble. One of the Office of Innovation and Improvement's most important tasks is to establish the criteria by which it judges contenders for federal largesse. The challenge for the Department of Education is to support well-designed, promising improvements in American educational practice without frittering away federal funds on one-shot hot ideas and hucksters.