Secretary Reville could have asked why none of the three finalists were strong enough to earn a positive recommendation from the Charter School Office, and what could be done to help improve the quality of charter applications. After all, the CSO has approved and rejected charter applications regularly over the years. In fact, proponents of charter schools have praised the quality of the CSO’s evaluations. Instead he chose what he somehow divined to be the politically expedient road.
How did he figure out that a “tough pill” needed to be swallowed?
If the answer is that he made such a significant decision all by himself, then I think I should be entitled to ask a follow-up question: what does that say about the administration he is part of?
lightiris says
Really?
<
p>There’s a whole Commonwealth of students, families, and educators who might quibble with that characterization. Charter schools, while certainly a hot-button issue and one worthy of discussion, are hardly the most burning issue in education here in the Commonwealth. The numbers of students in traditional public schools dwarf the numbers of students in charters. Their most pressing needs have little to do with the minutiae of charter schools.
david-whelan says
Funding, in general, is the prevailing issue in public education and charter funding is a huge part of that discussion in many communities, Swampscott and Gloucester amongst that group. Because of the inequity in the charter funding formula that Deval Patrick correctly identified as a candidate in 2006, disticts like mine lose $500k plus per year, most of which would go towards paying for fixed costs. So Mr. Dolan is in fact correct because he lives in a community effected by the horrible formula.
peter-dolan says
It’s about the decision making process of the head of an executive department that happens to be responsible for Education.
<
p>There is an independent evaluation process in place designed to ensure our state revenue is well spent. With no questions raised about the process itself, a Secretary determined that the result of the evaluation process was politically inconvenient.
<
p>Along with another officer of his department, he worked to secretly overturn that evaluation, leading to the expenditure of millions of dollars, the attempted launch of a new public institution that has a much higher likelihood of not being viable, straining a small urban school district, all because the Secretary believes it will help his team remain viable to promote their agenda – the Secretary’s words, not mine.
<
p>I’d like to know how the political calculus behind this decision was worked out. Who participated in the decision?
<
p>Again, it’s not about charter schools.
pablo says
I don’t think he’s the sort of person who goes around consulting with others. He knows best, and takes every opportunity to let you know it.
justice4all says
among many. It’s is core the handling of this Gloucester Charter School, far from being merely “minutae” speaks to leadership, to ethics, and to the much vaunted transparency and to fair and reasonable process. I submit to you that the Patrick administration and his appointee have failed on these points during the decision-making process for this charter school. If we accept that past history is usually a good indicator of future performance, what does this say about the Governor and Mr. Reville? I think it says plenty.
sabutai says
I see about 5 people posting/commenting quite extensively on this, and about another 5 people mentioning it from time to time. How prevalent do these questions have to become before Deval Patrick takes them seriously, you suppose?
justice4all says
the million dollar, “should he be re-elected” question. If the Patrick Administration is serious about getting re-elected, they will take it seriously.
<
p>Personally, I think there are a bunch of folks on BMG that recognize the optics of the Gloucester Charter School issue and other “mistakes” that have been made, but don’t want to say anything to upset the apple cart. It’s not that they love what’s been going on, it just “our guy, right or wrong.” But if Dems are serious about keeping the corner office, they’d best get their heads out of the sand. People are not amused right now.
johnny-reason says
The 64,000 dollar question is how badly does Reville hurt Deval in November. I say a lot. He is absent any personality and he is apt to screw up between now and November. His negatives are way to high, thus he gets the heave. Perhaps a nice consulting gig at some second rate university in the city.
lightiris says
is how many voter even know who Paul Reville is. My guess is single digits.
justice4all says
Not until Charlie Baker, Grace Ross, Tim Cahill, et al, gets a hold of him, when the campaign for governor begins in earnest. They will remind the voters constantly how the limousine liberals failed in leadership, transparency, ethics, etc. fill in the blank. The reviled Mr. Reville will be a common household name.
kirth says
have a band called “The Raiders?”
burlington-maul says
Paul Reville (left) and Mitchell Chester.