Latest News and Comment from Education

Saturday, October 3, 2015

Private funding to keep charter schools open ‘uncertain,’ backers say | The News Tribune

Private funding to keep charter schools open ‘uncertain,’ backers say | The News Tribune:

Private funding to keep charter schools open ‘uncertain,’ backers say






The Washington State Charter Schools Association has acknowledged that it has not yet raised enough private money to keep Washington charters running for a full school year.
Following a state Supreme Court ruling in September that invalidated Washington’s charter school law, the private association had expressed confidence it would be able to raise an estimated $14 million in donations to keep the schools running for a year.
But in a motion filed Wednesday with the Supreme Court, the association appears to be backing down from that confidence as it makes a plea for continued public funding for the remainder of the school year.
Charter schools received their September state funding, according to the state charter school commission, the appointed government body that authorized seven of the state’s nine charter schools.
The association said in its court motion that it is aware of potential donors, and that both it and the individual schools are actively seeking contributions.
But the court motion adds that “the results are uncertain. It would be pure speculation to believe that all nine schools could raise enough to continue operating through this school year.”
The association says in a news release that continued public funding is crucial to keeping the schools open.
“We believe these are public schools and will remain public schools in the future,” said Tom Franta, who heads the association.
The association is asking the state Supreme Court to delay the effective date of its Sept. 4 ruling, which struck down the charter school law approved by voters in 2012.
The association asks that the court delay enforcing the ruling until June 30 to allow students already enrolled in charter schools to complete the school year there. Nine charter schools with nearly 1,300 students — including three schools in Tacoma — had already opened when the Supreme Court ruling was issued.
The association argues that forcing students — especially special education students — to transition to another public school now would be harmful to their education. The court document says that special needs students make up more than 10 percent of the population at eight of the nine charters.
The association also contends that some school districts might have trouble accommodating returning students. One example cited in its motion says that Gray Middle School and First Creek Middle School in the Tacoma School District would each need to absorb 30 sixth graders who are now at Destiny Charter Middle School in Tacoma.
Tacoma Public Schools spokesman Dan Voelpel said the district has the capacity to accommodate those students.
“Without knowing who the students are and where they live and which middle schools the parents would choose for their children, I can’t say which schools they would go to,” he added.
The court said in September that privately operated, publicly funded charter schools do not qualify as common schools under Washington’s constitution and therefore are not entitled to public funding. They are not common schools, the court said, because they are not controlled by elected boards. Instead, charters are governed by nonprofit organizations that appoint their own boards to oversee operations.
On Sept. 24, state Attorney General Bob Ferguson filed a motion for reconsideration, asking the court to re-examine its decision. The court has given the charter association until Oct. 23 to file a similar request.
Angel Morton, president of the Tacoma Education Association, said in an opinion column onCrosscut.com that more than 1,000 educators have signed an online petition askingPrivate funding to keep charter schools open ‘uncertain,’ backers say | The News Tribune:








Read more here: http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/education/article37404117.html#storylink=cpy

Auditor ‘shocked’ by $71 million grant for charter schools | The Columbus Dispatch

Auditor ‘shocked’ by $71 million grant for charter schools | The Columbus Dispatch:

Auditor ‘shocked’ by $71 million grant for charter schools






Ohio Auditor Dave Yost said he’s shocked that the federal Department of Education gave Ohio a $71 million charter-school grant, given the state’s poor track record at ensuring that charters don’t misspend tax dollars.
“I figured we would be a couple of years away from being able to get back into contention for federal money,” Yost said on Friday, noting that a package of charter-reform bills stalled in the legislature this summer and still haven’t become law.
The state hasn’t received federal charter-school grant money in recent years “because the feds didn’t think we were the best of the best,” Yost said.
He said his office will be watching.
“My concern is that it is well-spent with proper monitoring. We’re going to haul out the microscope on this. We’re going to have active observation.”
The Dispatch reported this week that draft grant-application documents released by the department last month show that they described Ohio as a beacon of charter oversight. A few days later, David Hansen, the state official leading the grant effort, resigned for scrubbing data to make charter sponsors look better than they were.
Asked this week if the U.S. Department of Education was aware of the circumstances surrounding Hansen’s resignation, the department’s spokeswoman, Dorie Turner Nolt, said the competition was scored by independent peer reviewers who don’t work for the department.
But she said the department did put conditions on the grant.
“The department reviewed Ohio’s administrative structure and past performance with other federal grants, which is what led to the state having special conditions placed on its new grant,” Nolt said in an email. “Those conditions include requiring the state to submit quarterly reports on its grant activities and budget.
“We will continue to monitor Ohio — and all grantees — to ensure they are serving children well."
Yost, a Republican, said his office requested a copy of the state’s application for the federal grant, prepared under Hansen’s leadership, so he could determine what the state intends to spend the money on, but the department hasn’t provided it.
The Dispatch asked both the state and federal departments for the final application earlier this week but had received nothing by Friday evening. Ohio Department of Education spokeswoman Kim Norris said Friday afternoon that the request was still being processed by the department’s legal counsel.
“We are certainly proud to have this opportunity to have this grant in Ohio and intend to be completely transparent and accountable with Auditor ‘shocked’ by $71 million grant for charter schools | The Columbus Dispatch:

Big Education Ape: Ohio Congressman questions Arne Duncan’s $32 million charter grant - The Washington Post http://bit.ly/1Obugmz

Court Gets Back to Business | National Law Journal

Court Gets Back to Business | National Law Journal:

Court Gets Back to Business

Union fees, affirmative action on new docket.






With the future of affirmative action, union's agency shop fees, and the counting of one person, one vote in redistricting in the balance, the Roberts Court's conservative majority may return to dominate major rulings in the new term. But will it be conservative with a small or a big "c"?
In the last U.S. Supreme Court term, justices on the left led the major rulings from same-sex marriage to specialty license plates.
"The story of the last term is the left side of the court did a lot of winning," said Irvin Gornstein, executive director of the Supreme Court Institute at Georgetown University Law Center. "Justice [Anthony] Kennedy was the justice who usually joined the left side, but the chief justice and even Justice [Clarence] Thomas added to or provided the margin of victory."
But now, Gornstein predicted, "I would expect a return to the norm in which the right side of the court wins a majority but by no means all of the big cases with Justice Kennedy again the key vote in most of the key cases."
The main question in the new term is how conservative will any of those victories be, his Georgetown colleague, David Cole, said. Will the justices on the right take the broad or narrow path in deciding the most contentious issues, he asked.
"I would say generally when [the conservative majority] has had the option to take the moderate conservative route, that is what they have done, with some notable exceptions," Cole said.
The justices have agreed to decide 48 cases thus far. Thirteen of those cases were added to the docket three days after their Sept. 28 conference during which they culled more than a thousand petitions filed throughout the summer months.
The court used to issue the list more quickly, but last year it adopted an unwritten policy of taking more time to be sure that cases it is granting are teed up properly and don't have procedural flaws or other "vehicle problems."
Some of the more closely watched issues on the horizon, including abortion-clinic regulation and the contraceptive mandate in the Affordable Care Act, were put off or not acted on. The court did not act on United States v. Newman, in which the federal government appealed a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that limited insider-trading liability.
The threat for progressives, civil rights groups and consumer organizations comes in the cases involving the always divisive issues of affirmative action, union dues, voting and even class actions. And if, as predicted by many, the justices do take up pending petitions on abortion-clinic regulation, religious nonprofits' objections to contraceptive health insurance, and voting rights, the stakes in the term for those groups would likely skyrocket.
At least six petitions have been filed by nonprofit religious organizations challenging the government's method of accommodating their objections to providing contraceptive health insurance. The government had won those cases in six federal appellate courts until Sept. 17 when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit created a split.
The government has urged the justices to grant review to resolve the split and it suggests taking the D.C. Circuit case, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Washington v. Burwell, because it involves all types of insurance plans.
The two cases involving abortion-clinic restrictions are a Mississippi case — Currier v. Jackson Woman's Health Organization, which has been distributed for the justices' conference seven times — and a case from Texas, Whole Woman's Health v. Cole, which was just filed Sept. 2 with a response due Oct. 5. Two panels of the Fifth Circuit are in conflict and the justices are likely waiting for the Texas response to be filed before deciding whether to grant review in either or both cases.
David Strauss of the University of Chicago Law School noted that many of the biggest issues on the docket have already been before the justices, such as affirmative action.
"But for some reason, they haven't resolved the issue," he said. Strauss added: "I think they will get an abortion case this term. There are so many cases out there that, however unappetizing it is to them to get back into abortion, I think they will."
The justices will face mostly unexceptional arguments for the next two weeks. The second week of the October argument cycle will bring a parade of solicitors general to the lectern. In three cases being argued after the Columbus Day holiday, no fewer than four former or current U.S. solicitors general will argue before the court.
What follows is a look at some of the key cases already granted review.
The justices will decide in Evenwel v. Abbott the politically potent question of whether the one-person, one-vote principle for drawing state legislative districts allows states to apportion based on total population or requires states to use voter population. In past cases, the justices have suggested both.
"This has fairly major implications for how elections are run in this country," Jones Day's Hashim Mooppan said.
Nearly every state, including Texas, uses total population and has been doing so for half a century.
The primary force behind the challenge is the same man behind the term's affirmative action case — Edward Blum of the Project for Fair Representation.
Bert Rein, of Wiley Rein, at mic, representing Abigail Fisher, to his right, in the Fisher v University of Texas case, addressing the media after delivering arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court.  October 10, 2012.  Photo by Diego M. Radzinschi/THE NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL.
For the second time in two years in Fisher v. University of Texas-Austin, the justices will examine whether the university's consideration of race as a factor in its admissions policy passes the Constitution's most searching review — strict scrutiny.
After the high court in a 7-1 decision sent the case back to the Fifth Circuit to apply stricter strict scrutiny, that appellate court re-endorsed the university's policy. Bert Rein (left) of Washington's Wiley Rein returns to the lectern to argue for Fisher.
Two straightforward questions face the justices in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association: Should Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977) be overruled, ending public-sector "agency shop" arrangements? And, does the First Amendment require that public nonunion members affirmatively opt in to paying fees related to collective bargaining on their behalf, and not opt out as is the current practice.
"I would not feel very good coming into this if I were [the union] given what I've seen from the Roberts Court on this issue in the past few years," said Erin Murphy of Bancroft. "This isn't a few justices offhandedly suggesting they're open to reconsidering Abood. This comes on the heels of two back-to-back, solid five-justice majority opinions that fundamentally undermine every aspect of the reasoning in the Abood decision."
An estimated 2,000 prisoners in Montgomery v. Louisiana are hoping the justices will decide that their decision invalidating mandatory life in prison without parole for juvenile murderers applies retroactively.
The Georgia death penalty case Foster v. Chatman involves a particularly egregious use of race-based peremptory juror challenges by the prosecution. Although the case has attracted considerable attention, it may not have much impact beyond its particular facts. However, peremptory challenges have been controversial for some justices, such as Stephen Breyer, who has suggested the only way to end their discriminatory use is to abolish them.
The high court also continues to wrestle with administration of the death penalty and will examine

Read more: http://www.nationallawjournal.com/id=1202738857053/Court-Gets-Back-to-Business#ixzz3nVyP0tR1





What Will Happen to No Child Left Behind Now That Arne Duncan Is Resigning? - The Atlantic

What Will Happen to No Child Left Behind Now That Arne Duncan Is Resigning? - The Atlantic:

Now That Arne Duncan Is Out, Is No Child Left Behind to Stay?

The education law’s death is just around the corner.






In a weird way, U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan’s surprising resignation is good news for the people who want the beleaguered No Child Left Behind overhauled as soon as possible.

Duncan, one of the final two members left from President Obama’s original cabinet, announced on Friday that he will be stepping down in December. Known for his creation of his controversial Race to the Top grant program and push for teacher accountability, Duncan is widely seen as one of America’s most powerful education secretaries in recent history.

His imminent departure, combined with those of House Speaker John Boehner and Representative John Kline, may be nerve-racking for No Child Left Behind’s critics because Congress is—or at least was—so close to successfully reauthorizing the five-decade-old omnibus education law from which it arose. That law, known as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, was supposed to be reauthorized in 2007, but political infighting and other hiccups prevented that from happening year after year.

Now that the House and Senate have each passed bills to reauthorize it, Congress is closer than ever to actually doing away with the Bush-era policy—particularly because the Senate’s version is, thanks largely to its co-writers Lamar Alexander and Elizabeth Warren, a bipartisan proposal. But the pressure is on: As they stand, the House and Senate bills are substantially different, and the two chambers need to reconcile those differences for the legislation to make it to the president’s desk by the end of the year.

Boehner, Duncan, and Kline are key players in this process—Boehner is the last sitting member of Congress to have helped write No Child Left Behind, while Kline chairs the House education committee; Duncan because he is the chief executive of the department charged with carrying out the policy.



Now that all three are on their way out, it may seem like the rewrite is doomed. But it could be just the opposite, said Tamara Hiler, the education-policy advisor at the think tank Third Way. In fact, Duncan’s announcement on Friday, she said, could “actually be a sign that this is going to get done faster … that [it] could actually speed up the timeline.”



“Between him and John Boehner and John Kline all [leaving], this sort of sends a message to everyone that it’s now or never,” Hiler said. “There’s a culmination happening.” The four members of Congress chairing the education committees, she continued, “have a reason to want to get this [rewrite] done now, to take this issue off of the table” and focus on preparing for all the other impending uncertainties—who will replace Boehner as speaker of the House and Obama as president, to name a few.



Duncan’s announcement could also be an indication that the future of the rewrite is all but sealed, according to Hiler. The prospective law is likely to rein in the education secretary’s responsibilities, giving states more of a say in how schools are to be held accountable for student performance and progress. The amount of What Will Happen to No Child Left Behind Now That Arne Duncan Is Resigning? - The Atlantic:


Who is John King, and Will He Be Even More Controversial Than Arne? | EdSurge News

Who is John King, and Will He Be Even More Controversial Than Arne? | EdSurge News:
Who is John King, and Will He Be Even More Controversial Than Arne?



In his official press conference on Friday, October 2, President Barack Obama announced that John B. King, Jr. would take over the role of Secretary of Education from Arne Duncan. Obama sang King’s praises, saying “John has been an educator all his life--a teacher, a principal… he’s the right man to lead the department.”
Arne Duncan and John King are similar in that they both support a number of reform strategies, including charter schools, Common Core, and stringent teacher evaluation. As such, King may face some of the same challenges and criticisms as Duncan going forward. But Mr. King is no stranger to controversy, and while he may occupy his position for only a year, depending on the upcoming 2016 presidential election, he’s already getting his share of support and criticism in the press and in social media.
King’s Background
King was born in Brooklyn to an African-American educator and a Puerto Rican New York City public school teacher. His father was the first African-American principal of a public school in Brooklyn.
When speaking about his upbringing at Obama’s press conference, King shared personal heartbreak from his youth: “I lost my mom when I was 8, my dad when I was 12.” According to King, “NYC public school teachers are the reason that I stayed alive.” King went to acquire an undergraduate degree from Harvard, a law degree from Yale, and a doctorate in education from Columbia.
A proponent of charter schools, King started Boston’s Roxbury Prep charter school in 1999 and acted as Managing Director of Uncommon Schools beginning in 2005. Boston Magazine cited Roxbury’s high state standardized test scores in 2010: “Poor black and Latino kids from Roxbury are whipping the rest of Massachusetts on the MCAS.”
[He has] dogged support for the Common Core, for high-stakes testing, and for a badly flawed teacher evaluation system. DIANE RAVITCH
King entered New York state’s education department in 2009, and by 2011 had become its commissioner, where he oversaw the adoption of Common Core standards--which the New York Times referred to as “the most significant change during his tenure.” King joined the US Department of Education as a senior advisor in January 2015, which Obama cited positively in speech at the press conference: “He’s got a great team already at the Department of Education. Hisfamily is equally cool and good-looking.”

Not All Gold Stars in New York

Back in New York, having a good-looking family is not what King is predominantly remembered for. Rather, individuals might recall more of his stance on Common Core and his overseeing of the introduction of new teacher evaluations, which some New Yorkers and commentators found extreme.

While serving as Commissioner of Education of the State of New York, King introduced evaluation partially based on students’ progress on state standardized tests. Couple that with more difficult exams for prospective teaching candidates, and teacher certifications dropped by 20 percent in 2014. Vocal academic Diane Ravitch wrote on the morning of October 2, 2015 that King was extremely controversial “because of his dogged support for the Common Core, for high-stakes testing, and for a badly flawed teacher evaluation system.”

Also concerned about Obama’s appointment of King are several teachers’ unions and the NYS Allies for Public Education, a parent organization. Last year, the New York State United Teachers approved a vote of no confidence and called for King's removal. King was criticized by the union for “the implementation of Common Core learning standards and accused of failing to listen to teachers on ‘professional issues,’” according to AuburnPub.com.

"Here’s one big question mark: the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (essentially No Child Left Behind) reauthorization. Duncan didn’t show really any enthusiasm for that, and I don’t think we know what King will do on that either."MICHAEL HORN, CO-FOUNDER OF THE CLAYTON CHRISTENSEN INSTITUTE
Critics of the “reformer movement” are also questioning King’s ability to lead a nation of public school educators and learners given his apparent charter school proclivities. He supports “the type of draconian discipline policies for which many charters have become notorious” writes one New York public school teacher.

Looking Forward

While King has received a flurry of both support and criticism on social media in the last few hours alone, commentators are also contributing thoughts on what topics will prove to be most challenging for King going forward.
“Here’s one big question mark: the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (essentially No Child Left Behind) reauthorization. Duncan didn’t show really any enthusiasm for that, and I don’t think we know what King will do on that either,” Michael Horn, co-founder of the Clayton Christensen Institute, told EdSurge in an interview.
Tom Murray of the Alliance for Excellent Education agrees: “It’s quite possible that the US Department of Education lose some of its power moving forward on that.”
Whether constituents are comfortable with Obama’s appointment or not, perhaps the biggest challenge facing King can be summed up in one word: time. King will likely only be in power for a year. Do you think that’s enough time for him to make lasting change? Leave comments below. Who is John King, and Will He Be Even More Controversial Than Arne? | EdSurge News:

Arne Duncan Is Stepping Down; John B. King Nominated as US Secretary of Education
US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said today that he will step down in December after serving in the role since 2008. President Obama has selected Deputy Secretary Dr...




Timeline: Notable Moments Along Arne Duncan's Education Journey
Education has been a core theme for Barack Obama, since his days as a candidate for the office of the Presidency. The administration has kept education as a front-and-center issue, driven in no small part by the passion and commitment of Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education and one of Obama's closest associates...

The Arne Duncan era is over — but his noxious policies mean childhood in America is still under threat - Salon.com

The Arne Duncan era is over — but his noxious policies mean childhood in America is still under threat - Salon.com:

The Arne Duncan era is over — but his noxious policies mean childhood in America is still under threat

"Reforming schools should not be a proxy for reforming society," educator and journalist Megan Erickson tells Salon




In keeping with a long Washington tradition of announcing less-than-good news at the end of the week, when many journalists are operating at three-quarter-speed (due to hangovers or laziness), the Obama administration announced on Friday that Arne Duncan, President Obama’s old hoops buddy, who the Washington Post once called “the most powerful education secretary in U.S. history,” was stepping down from the Department of Education. He was one of the precious few original members of the administration still standing. It had been a long seven years.
Duncan is leaving the DOE in a politically awkward position; it is currently a target of abuse from both the Tea Party right and the populist left. But as Politico’s Michael Grunwald recently detailed — in a profile of Duncan that now reads like a first draft of his legacy — that’s been true for the Duncan-era department essentially since Day One. Consummate progressive technocrat that he is, Duncan has always been drawn to top-down solutions, regardless of whether the politics made sense. And for nearly an entire presidency, it seemed to work.
Lately, though, it seems that the education reform movement that Duncan has so conspicuously embraced has lost some momentum. While many of the changes spurred by “Race to the Top” won’t go away any time soon, there’s at least some evidence to suggest that, as a political force, the education reform movement, which has never had major grassroots behind it, may have peaked. And if the next president is teachers’ union favorite Hillary Rodham Clinton, it’s even possible that some of the measures undertaken by Duncan and supported by reformers may be reversed.
If that’s the case, there will be plenty of folks who won’t be crying. And one of them will be Megan Erickson, the educator, journalist and author whose new book “Class War: The Privatization of Childhood” was released by Verso Books last month. Using her experience as a teacher for a foundation, Erickson subjects not only the education reform movement but much of modern childhood itself to a leftist analysis. Her conclusions suggest that while figures like Duncan are part of the problem, if the goal is to shield childhood from neoliberalism as much as possible, then defeating reformers isn’t enough.
Recently, Salon spoke with Erickson over the phone about her her book, Arne Duncan, the education reform movement and how neoliberalism is changing our very understanding of childhood’s purpose. Our conversation, which can be found below, has been edited for clarity and length. (Disclosure: I am a fan of Jacobin, where Erickson serves as an editor, and have previously written two posts for the magazine’s blog.)
So where did this book come from?
I got my master’s degree teaching at Columbia University at Teacher’s College. I student-taught 9th and 10th grade at Stuyvesant High School. Then I taught at the Young Woman’s Leadership School Network; and I actually had a great experience there.
What I saw in the schools really dismayed me; just the general atmosphere of pressure and standardized testing. At the same time, I was living in Greenpoint, so I would see kids running from the YMCA all the time. They were playing, they were learning music and getting outdoor experience in the park — they were having fun. It was the way teaching should be, as opposed to the kind of punitive, “metal-detector” The Arne Duncan era is over — but his noxious policies mean childhood in America is still under threat - Salon.com:

Friday, October 2, 2015

California Gold Ribbon Schools Program - California School Recognition Program (CA Dept of Education)

California Gold Ribbon Schools Program - California School Recognition Program (CA Dept of Education):
California Gold Ribbon Schools Program
A program for 2015-2016 which honors some of California's outstanding public schools. Schools that are selected demonstrate exemplary achievements in implementing state standards in priority areas.




The California Department of Education (CDE) seeks to recognize outstanding educational programs and practices. The California Gold Ribbon Schools Award was created to honor schools while the California Distinguished Schools Program is on hiatus as California transitions to new assessment and accountability systems. Last year, we recognized 193 middle schools and 180 high schools as Gold Ribbon School Award recipients. We will honor elementary schools in 2016.
Traditionally, the Distinguished Schools Program honored public schools that showed improved student outcomes as measured through Standardized Testing and Reporting scores and additional measures. As programs and policies evolve, the CDE looks toward the same recognition of educational quality with the implementation of academic content and performance standards adopted by the State Board of Education for all pupils, including English learners.
California elementary schools that have made tremendous gains in implementing State Board policies and their Local Control Accountability Plan are invited to apply for the Gold Ribbon Schools Award. Model programs and practices should include standards-based activities, projects, strategies, and practices that schools have adopted during this transitional period, which can be replicated by other local educational agencies.

2016 Elementary Schools Program

2016 Application Package

Gold Ribbon Schools Award 
Exemplary Programs

Past Recipients

Related Information




2015 Sponsors and Special Friends

Naming Sponsor
California Casualty External link opens in new window or tab. — Headquartered in San Mateo, California Casualty is proud to sponsor the CDE’s School Recognition program because we are committed to education and have supported California teachers and students at school, in the community and behind the wheel for over 60 years.

It is an honor to recognize educators who make a difference every day for our children. It takes real commitment to go far above and beyond to help students reach their full potential. Follow the link above to learn more about California Casualty and our sponsorship of the California Department of Education’s California School Recognition Program.
Diamond
Platinum
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Copper

 

Questions:   Awards Team | awards@cde.ca.gov | 916-319-0842

Do Democrats Give a Crap About Public Schools? John King as Next US Secretary of Education | gadflyonthewallblog

Do Democrats Give a Crap About Public Schools? John King as Next US Secretary of Education | gadflyonthewallblog:

Do Democrats Give a Crap About Public Schools? John King as Next US Secretary of Education

John King, Arne Duncan



Meet the New Boss.
Same as the Old Boss.
Arne Duncan is out. John King is in.
It’s the kind of tone deaf decision we’ve come to expect from President Barack Obama on education matters.
We’ve put up with 7 years of Duncan’s buffoonery as U.S. Secretary of Education: A man with no practical knowledge of the field. A corporate functionary. A drone. A mouthpiece for all the worst ideas of the 1% to sabotage public schools and replace them with charters.
And who does Obama replace him with!? Former New York State Chancellor King!? A man who was almost run out of his state on a rail!? A man with – admittedly – more experience than Duncan but all of the worst kind.
King resigned his NY position in the throes of terrible publicity for his and NY Board of Regents’ foolish approval of an obviously fraudulent charter school run by anDo Democrats Give a Crap About Public Schools? John King as Next US Secretary of Education | gadflyonthewallblog:

Arne Duncan’s Exit: Not Unexpected. | deutsch29

Arne Duncan’s Exit: Not Unexpected. | deutsch29:

Arne Duncan’s Exit: Not Unexpected.






It’s true: US Secretary Arne Duncan has resigned. He will be out of the White House in December. His story is that he is headed back to Chicago to be with his family.
What is noteworthy is that Obama has another year in the White House. The Duncans could have stayed in Virginia where they were residing (and where Duncan’s kids were attending Common-Core-free public school) for another entire school year. Instead, Duncan’s wife, Karen, and their children headed back to Chicago in July– more than a full school year before Obama would finish his time as a two-term president.
So, for Duncan to say that he is resigning to be with the fam seems more like he knew he would be resigning at the end of 2015– right in the middle of a school year. So, it became realistic for the Duncans to move back to Chicago summer 2015.
Then there is the issue of someone to fill in as secretary for the remainder of Obama’s term. Not any officially recognized secretary, just a sub. Enter former New York State Chancellor John King– the perfect guy to “fail upward.” King resigned his position as NYS chancellor in the throes of terrible publicity for his and NY Board of Regents’ foolish approval for established fraud— Ted J. Morris, Jr.— the responsibility for which neither the New York State Education Department (NYSED) Arne Duncan’s Exit: Not Unexpected. | deutsch29: