Literally dozens of days ago, when the HRC-for-Sec notion first surfaced, I jumped on the bandwagon, and predicted on BMG it made too much sense not to happen. Most of my other predictions, um, not so hot.
Here’s my prediction for Ed Sec: Chicago Public Schools Superintendent Arne Duncan.
Why?
*Obama’s known him for a long time, seems to really like him.
*Obama only has 3 solid bball teammates in his cabinet. Duncan, who played pro ball in Australia and captained Harvard’s hoops team, would give them a full squad of 5. They could scrimmage against the Supreme Court team.
*Diversity of cabinet thus far has room for another white guy from Chicago.
*Duncan is part establishment, part reformer.
DC Schools chief Michelle Rhee, on the cover of this week’s Time Magazine, was praised by both candidates in a presidential debate. She or NYC’s Joel Klein, Teach For America’s Wendy Kopp, or advisor Jon Schnur (speaking in Boston this Friday) would be the “aggressive change” pick. But they’d also open up Obama up to K-12 controversy when he wants to focus on the economy.
*Kathleen Sebelius or scholar Linda Darling Hammond would be the establishment pick. But teachers unions turned cartwheels for Hillary during the primary. So Obama is free to follow his reform-oriented heart, and not going to appoint a status quo establishment type.
Duncan splits the difference. He can embrace Obama’s aggressive pro-charter-school and pro merit pay messages. But he heads a big district, and can speak to traditional K-12 constituencies pretty well. He’ll be pro NCLB at heart, to Ted Kennedy’s delight, and just make some cosmetic changes.
I did not understand her to be that way.
<
p>Thanks.
Fair question, since right after I posted, you put up your petition specifically promoting her!
<
p>And glad to have you joining the ed reform conversation, even though I respectfully disagree with some of your view!
<
p>By status quo, I mean she’s a serious scholar who seems to promote the basic teachers union agenda. Besides the “spend more” (lower class size, higher across-the-board salaries), meme which most elected Dems including Obama support….Darling-Hammond opposes at least 4 types of change:
<
p>Teach For America and other non-traditional paths into teaching,
<
p>Charter schools and public school choice for inner-city parents,
<
p>Removing weak teachers,
<
p>Rewarding excellent teachers,
<
p>plus opposes standardized testing linked to accountability (though I’m not sure if I’d term that anti-status quo….it’s status quo now in most states, because Dems like Ted Kennedy have overruled anti-testing interest groups like teachers unions).
<
p>Obama disagrees with Darling-Hammond on all this. Look at his speech in Ohio.
And thank you for being respectful of my views!
<
p>I had a couple of comments to make re: your list of changes you believe Darling-Hammond does not support.
<
p>1. You said she does not support charter schools – yet she is the founder of a very successful high school in East Palo Alto. That does not sound as if she is against charter schools to me.
<
p>But then I found this quote from an interview with her:
“I’m an advocate for good schools, and I think some charter schools allow us to do some things to create those schools. Some charters don’t. The movement is very diverse. I don’t think the issue is charter versus non-charter, it’s how do we get schools to change in ways that are going to be more supportive to kids? I’d like to see regular public school districts taking charge of the issue the way charters are.”
<
p>So I guess she does not support BAD schools just because they happen to be charter. That is not a bad thing in my mind.
<
p>2. You say she is against Teach for America. What I understand is that she was a vocal critic of the program in its early years. After all – just because the idea the program is based on may be a good one – does not mean the execution was well done.
<
p>Some quotes from another interview concerning a more recent study:
“Our study doesn’t say you shouldn’t hire Teach for America teachers,” said Hammond, “Our study says everyone benefits from preparation, including Teach for America teachers-that they became more effective when they became certified.”
<
p>Darling-Hammond has recommended that Teach For America implement a teacher residency component, stating that if it did, “Teach for America could become part of [the] systemic solution” and thus address what she calls the “root of our nation’s teaching-quality issues,” and stop the “cycle that assigns the least prepared and least experienced teachers to the neediest students.”
<
p>Again, that does not sound like she is AGAINST TFA – but more that she is FOR high-quality training for teachers.In fact, she seems to be advocating for TFA as becoming part of the solution.
<
p>(Also that last quoted sentence sounds anything but “status quo” to me.)
<
p>3. You say she opposes standardized testing – and as you then point out that HAS BECOME the status quo. As I made obvious in my other post, I am opposed to standardized testing as well. I have observed it at my children’s schools and see what it has done to the curriculum.
<
p>Darling-Hammond’s life work is all about preparing high-quality teachers and improving our educational system. I say she is far from the status quo you think she is and is a true reformer.
<
p>
Left out that crucial word!