The Problem With Sec. Duncan Playing HR Guru
by Frederick M. Hess • Jan 13, 2014 at 2:36 pm
Cross-posted from Education Week
Cross-posted from Education Week
 Print |  Send |  RSS |
Share
I like our earnest Secretary of Education. I think he means well. That said, I've had serious reservations about the way he has approached his office, including his approach to Race to the Top, NCLB waivers, and the Common Core. Secretary Duncan has unapologetically and aggressively extended the federal role in education. Along the way, he has been dismissive of statutory constraints, allowed the whims of Department staff to become policy, run roughshod over the architecture of federalism, and bullied state officials. Duncan has seemed to regard concerns about separation of powers, federalism, or what statutes actually say as niceties that can't be allowed to slow his important work.
Against that backdrop, the Washington Post's Valerie Strauss recently reported that, "Duncan and at least one other Education Department official urged New York Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio and his team not to choose Montgomery County Schools Superintendent Joshua P. Starr as the city's next schools chancellor." Starr, of course, may be best known for having been publicly critical of elements of the Obama administration education agenda, including Race to the Top and teacher evaluation. When asked about Duncan's discussion with de Blasio, the Post reported that ED spokesman Massie Ritsch did not dispute this account.
My friend Andy Rotherham wrote about the story over at Eduwonk, dismissing the whole thing as a big nothingburger. I had a very different reaction, whether the call was initiated by de Blasio or Duncan.
I can kinda, sorta live with the Secretary of Education putting in a good word for certain people. I'm not crazy about it, but it's human nature and a decent impulse to support colleagues, friends, and protégés. And, if Duncan is asked for his take on a handful of candidates, putting in a good word about X and not Y obviously gets into a gray area of dissing Y. While the line may be vague, however, the distinction is still important.
