Harsanyi: Duncan’s Fundamental Dishonesty

April 8, 2009

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

Denver Post columnist David Harsanyi met with Secretary of Education Arne Duncan yesterday. The encounter did not go well for Secretary Duncan. He claimed that the Wall Street Journal editorial was “fundamentally dishonest” and maintained that no one had even tried to contact him, despite the newspaper’s contention that it did, repeatedly.

The Wall Street Journal, however, provided Harsanyi with evidence of extensive contacts with high level high ranking Duncan subordinates. Harsanyi wrote:

When I called the Wall Street Journal, I discovered a different — that is, meticulously sourced and exceedingly convincing — story, including documented e-mail conversations between the author and higher-ups in Duncan’s office. The voucher study — which showed progress compounding yearly — had been around since November and its existence is mandated by law. So at best, Duncan was willfully ignorant.

So let’s review. Harasanyi essentially asks Joanne Jacob’s question “What did Arne Duncan know and when did he know it?” directly to Secretary Duncan. His response: I KNEW NOTHING!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It looks as though the very next thing out of Secretary Duncan’s mouth was a denunciation of the Wall Street Journal and then a claim that they had made no effort to contact him. Given that this is empirically falsifiable, it certainly doesn’t add much to the Sergeant Schulz routine on his knowledge regarding the study.

Harsanyi goes on to discuss the incoherence of what Duncan had to say about the program:

But the most “fundamentally dishonest” aspect of the affair was Duncan’s feeble argument against the program. First, he strongly intimated that since only 1 percent of children were able to “escape” (and, boy, that’s some admission) from D.C. public schools through this program, it was not worth saving.

So, you may ask, why not allow the 1 percent to turn into 2 percent or 10 percent, instead of scrapping the program? After all, only moments earlier, Duncan claimed that there was no magic reform bullet and it would take a multitude of innovations to fix education.

Then, Duncan, after thrashing the scholarship program and study, emphasized that he was opposed to “pulling kids out of a program” in which they were “learning.” Geez. If they’re learning in this program, why kill it? And if the program was insignificant, as Duncan claimed, why keep these kids in it? Are these students worse off? Or are they just inconveniencing the rich kids?

Duncan can’t be honest, of course. Not when it’s about politics and paybacks to unions who are about as interested in reforming education as teenagers are in calculus.

Again with the magic bullet! The question isn’t whether vouchers are a magic bullet or not, but whether they help disadvantaged children learn better. The evidence is clear- THEY DO.

UPDATE: Mark Hemingway weighs in on the Denver Post column at NRO’s the Corner.

3 Comments | vouchers | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

Quality not Qualified!

April 2, 2009

 

gordon-1-7398851

 

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

The Wall Street Journal reports that Education Secretary Arne Duncan is planning on leveraging stimulus money for states to improve their collection and use of data demonstrating progress on student achievement and teacher quality.

How well states collect — and act upon — that data will determine whether they qualify for money, Mr. Duncan said. “In order for us to improve, we must be much more open and honest about what works in the classroom and what doesn’t,” he said in a conference call with reporters. Mr. Duncan added that the funding would be carried out with “absolute transparency and accountability.”

So far so good.

However, the article then says it wants states to track qualifications, especially in high-poverty schools.

There is of course a very large problem with that. Low-income students with high quality but “poorly qualified” teachers are lucky to have them. Far luckier than those with low quality but highly qualified teachers.

Overall, however, I like the direction they are going. If you are going to be doling out an absurd amount of money, you may as well try to get something in return for it. Participation is voluntary, and competitive, which is also good.

Leave a Comment » | school funding | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

Mas Arne Duncan!

March 5, 2009

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

Arne Duncan came out against destroying the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program yesterday. “I don’t think it makes sense to take kids out of a school where they’re happy and safe and satisfied and learning,” Duncan told the AP. “I think those kids need to stay in their school.”

Bravo, although some are interpreting this statement as simply supporting a kinder gentler bleed down of the program. Duncan’s position will however be less disruptive to the lives of students, and will allow the evaluation of the program to continue. Many Democrats, including President Obama at times, have expressed a willingness to support vouchers depending upon the results of research.

So far it appears to me from my distant perch in the hinterlands that Obama is making the same mistake as Dubya in allowing the Congressional wing of his own party run things once they had a majority. Nancy Pelosi = Tom Delay ergo Barack Obama = George W. Bush.

Yes, well, I hope not too. Let’s see what happens next.

2 Comments | vouchers | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

Onay Ildchay Eftlay Ehindbay

February 18, 2009

dr-evil-zip-it

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

Education Secretary Arne Duncan has signaled he’s open to changing the name of No Child Left Behind. (HT Eduwonk)

Conspiracy theory time! Is this:

1) A cheap way of giving the unions a symbolic victory, to make it easier to deny their more substantial demands?

2) The opening maneuver in the long-awaited rollback of the ridiculous promise to reach 100% student proficiency?

3) A red herring desgined to keep us busy with conspiracy theories and “name that law” contests so no one will notice that the administration isn’t going to do anything substantive on education policy, despite extravagent campaign promises?

4) All of the above?

The betting pool is now open.

But since we have a storied tradition of acronym contests here on JPGB, we can’t pass over the opportunity to come up with a replacement name for NCLB. And of course it has to start with “smart.” Zip it!

How about Smart And Clever Kids, Overcoming Fallacious Canards, Really Achieve Perfection? There’s an acronym for you.

2 Comments | NCLB | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Greg Forster

PJM on the Incredibly Interesting Uninterestingness of Arne Duncan

December 18, 2008

boring-world-of-niels-bohr1

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

This morning, Pajamas Media carries my column on the selection of Arne Duncan as Obama’s education secretary. At first, I agreed with Jay’s assessment that the choice is a boring subject, but after thinking about how boring it is, I now find it fascinating:

It really is amazing how totally uninteresting — how completely devoid of any possible justification for paying attention to it — the choice of Duncan for education secretary is. In fact, the selection has succeeded in fascinating me by achieving such an unprecedented level of anti-fascinatingness. It repels my interest so strongly that I can’t stop thinking about it.

Not that this means I’m wowed by the pick:

If Duncan is acceptable to everybody, that’s another way of saying he’s the lowest common denominator. And as a great education reformer once said: “Woe to you when all men speak well of you.”

2 Comments | politics | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Greg Forster

Next Entries »