Thomas Friedman of the New York Times thinks that Arne Duncan should be the next Secretary of State. He would like to see Race to the Top applied to our international relations.
Readers have reacted. Leonie Haimson in New York City suggested that Arne could close embassies that can’t end wars and conflicts.
Here is another good idea:
He could start an innovative new trend of “Charter Embassies.” They would be U.S. embassies that are publicly funded, but cheaper to maintain and not beholden to rules of international law.
Actually, if you take it to its logical conclusion, every embassy would have its own foreign policy.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Brilliant analogy!
LikeLike
If Friedman recommends it I automatically disqualify it from consideration.
LikeLike
His brain is flat and he is a pompous, bloviating buffoon.
LikeLike
He has a brain???
LikeLike
Beware of the undertones which highlight the demonization of teachers, as Friedman boldly states how fearful he was of the Chicago teachers. As if solidarity and striking are criminal acts! His venom-injected rhetoric feeds our public’s minds, which is why education is in a crisis.
LikeLike
Staffed by TFA scabs…they are SO elite they can solve any problems merely because they graduated at the top of their Ivy League university. Five weeks of training on that country’s culture, politics and history and you are good to go! Free Tshirt from J Crew and substitute the elongated apple with a polluted globe.
LikeLike
I recommend a Harvard Press book, Being Global: 1) cognitive understanding; 2) creating value; 3) value that is mutually beneficial.
LikeLike
Has anyone read class warfare? If not you should!
LikeLike
yes. Fascinating tales about life among the hedge fund managers, the masters of the universe.
LikeLike
Leonie hits it right on!
However, will there be co-locations of those “Charter Embassies” into those phasing out embassies? We should ask the Consulate General of Co-location Moskowitz that question.
LikeLike
A charter embassy would probably appoint Mitt Romney ambassador to Great Britain.
LikeLike
this is my comment when I posted this to Democraticunderground.com http://www.democraticunderground.com/101649465:
Obama is better than anyone the Republicans put up for president any issue I can think of even education FUNDING, but when it comes to education “REFORM,” he is so wrong that Republicans applauded the appointment of Arne Duncan as Secretary of Education.
Republicans and corporate Democrats love the current version of education “reform” because Wall Street hedge fund managers have figured out how to financialize educating our kids and skimming yet more tax dollars into their own pockets instead of putting them in the classroom, and they will pay top dollar, both in campaign donations and after office high paying jobs, to the politicians who will put them in the driver’s seat and our money in their pockets.
I doubt that the problem with our foreign policy is that we kowtow to business interests TOO LITTLE.
You just have to read the Wikileaks on State Department cables about say Haiti, Levi Strauss, and the minimum wage to see how our current foreign policy already puts corporate profits over any hope of the poorest people in the world climbing out of poverty.
About the only way a corporate tool like Arne Duncan could improve on that is a “Race to the Top” to see which country can donate the most organs of those who die from our other foreign policies.
LikeLike
Check this out: http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/11/22/american-students-deserve-better-than-arne-duncan/
LikeLike
We better get students in on the conversation about school improvement. They are our clients and customers whose developmental needs must be met appropriately from K-12 and beyond. Let me say it…student rights are perhaps the next big platform on which real school reform should be built and the civil rights topic of this decade. Quit putting political pundits in office to mandate from on high policies that are not only shortsighted on behalf of the students, many are downright abusive and developmentally inappropriate. Until we permit teachers to be the sages on the stages in the education show, we are just getting in the way. Students must have much more to contribute to their experiences. If we let them, watch the shock and awe of the outcomes!
LikeLike
Sandy,
Your first statement got me thinking. If these business types really “care” about their customers then why aren’t they talking to the students? While surveys about their teachers completed by 8th graders may not help much, why aren’t the reform folks talking to the graduates about what they think of their education now that they have entered college and/of the workforce? They need to hear from the successful and the struggling. What made the difference? Talk to first year college students and wee how prepared they were and what helped or hindered their prep? When i was taught high school sciences many of my students came back and complained I wasn’t hard enough, they didn’t know enough and they should have studied harder. It was ironic since I was always i trouble with parents for being too hard and the principal was always telling me to be less serious and let them do fun labs. Now I am teaching 8th grade, still have the same parent and principal complaints and the students come back and tell me the same thing. I fell like after 10 years I have less of an idea of what makes a good teacher then I did when I started
LikeLike
Diane,
Where is a good objective source of the two-sides’ views of charters? As I understand it, if a student goes to a charter, the state aid goes with her. That would happen in the form of less aid received, if they attended a private school, or moved and attended school in another district since state aid is based on enrollment. What else does the original school of the student lose besides the $$ aid per student?
LikeLike
Typically, their best students. And they get to keep the kids who don’t speak English and those with severe disabilities and behavior problems. Most charters don’t want them.
LikeLike
So not all public charters have to use a lottery?
LikeLike
I became personally acquainted with charter schools when my daughter transferred from the public Escondido High School to a charter school last year. Escondido Charter School SELECTS their students by giving them a placement test. If students MEET their academic requirements, then they are accepted to attend. My daughter was not only accepted, by “pursued” because of her GPA. After one year, I was able to persuade my daughter to go back to public school, but during this time I became aware of some of this charter’s dubious practices. One of them is using public funds to pay for students to attend classes at the local community college because the charter doesn’t offer them. My daughter had to take 3 classes (one from 6 to 9pm) at Palomar College to be able to get her credits. Another practice is that if a student’s academic performance falls from the proficient level, he/she is automatically dismissed from the school. In addition to this, there was absolutely zero parent communication. I never received a single phone call, letter, back to school night/open house invitation or parent conferences. It even took several phone calls to get report cards sent to me. Although I didn’t support the decision of my daughter attending a charter school (I am a public school teacher) it was a good experience to get a first hand experience of what charter schools are all about.
LikeLike
In responsive to the question about the pros and cons of charter schools I offer these contrasting viewpoints from the recent charter initiative in Washington State:
Pros:
http://www.yeson1240.com/charter-school-implementation-faq/
Cons:
http://www.peopleforourpublicschools.org/faqs.html
Even though our ballot measure states that only non-profit charters can be authorized, charters can manage themselves as profit centers for private businesses through procurement decisions.
LikeLike
Yes, those “procurement decisions” of non-profit schools are really key. They were the primary cause of the downfall of a non-profit school where I worked, which I think people can learn from, particularly in regard to the insidious relationship that can exist between non-profit schools and their corporate sponsors, especially in areas where for-profits are not permitted to run charter schools.
One of the people involved in establishing the non-profit school where I taught was also one of the founders of K12 Inc, Mike Milken, the famous junk bonds trader and convicted felon. Although he tried to distance himself from our school, as well as companies under the umbrella of his corporation, his footprints were everywhere, which caused concerns for the federal government, as this was a college seeking federal financial aid for its students, and one of primary accrediting bodies had misgivings as well.
For years, the school’s policy was to hire 90% of the teachers as “independent contractors”. This meant we were not considered employees, and that enabled the school to avoid paying payroll taxes, unemployment compensation etc., let alone decent wages or any benefits. Eventually, they made the remaining 10% faculty “independent contractors,” too.
Our board of trustees was stacked with Milken’s cronies and executives from his companies, one of whom served as president of the board and was paid a hefty salary (those are usually voluntary positions), so they had a voting majority.
Some of the critical management services for the school were “contracted” to one of Milken’s companies and the brand name for that management company was labeled on virtually all school documents. It was also what was seen on caller ID whenever anyone from the school made outgoing phone calls. This raised concerns for regulators about the company’s relationship to the school, as well as the other practices previously mentioned, and about the school’s ability to engage in self-governance.
We never got federal financial aid. When our accrediting body investigated, ultimately concluded that many management practices were hinky and gave the school time to reorganize, the management contractor was eventually replaced but with yet another company under the umbrella of Milken’s parent corporation (that company’s name was then inserted on school documents). They didn’t alter how they hired all teachers as “:independent contractors”, and they really dragged their tails on formulating a new board. Thus, the school’s accreditation was withdrawn.
I had been told by senior administrators at my school that the federal government was onto Milken and his relationship to our school, and that it was the bold branding that tipped off our accrediting body. I think MIlken learned his lesson about branding, so I’d be surprised if any of his company’s names are on K12 documents today, especially in areas where for-profits are not allowed to run charters. You’d probably have to dig a lot deeper to find the ongoing relationship to him now.
I always wondered why states and school districts give tax payer dollars to companies owned by this convicted felon, when his sentencing judge concluded that he was, “willing to commit only crimes that were unlikely to be detected” and that he was was a man of “power in the financial world” who “repeatedly conspires to violate, and violates, securities and tax business in order to achieve more power and wealth for himself”. The federal government would not permit tax payer money to be given to his companies. States and school districts really need to wise up, too.
There were many other issues as well that I’m not mentioning, and I prefer to not name the school, as it was ultimately sold to another company, unrelated to Milken, has started anew, and I still teach there.
LikeLike
Under Duncan and Obama’s school system you could buy your own embassy and ambassadorship. After all it is market forces. If anyone would print what I have on Duncan lying to the State of California’s legislature to promote mayoral control his game is done and he will be thrown out. Why is everyone afraid of the truth. The fact is that while superintendent of Chicago he wrote a letter to the California Legislature stating that those before Daley took over in 1995 had put the Chicago Schools into $1.8 billion in debt which Daley, Vallas and Duncan had to clean up. The fact is that according to the 1994 Chicago Budget there was a surplus so how did he have to clean up anything? Daley, Vallas and Duncan caused the financial problems in Chicago. I have the letters and pertinent financial pages from the 1994 Chicago Budget and this information is widely enough dispersed that there is nothing they can do. How about running article on this. When Rod Paige, Sec. of Ed. under George Bush 1, got his office by lying about the 0% dropout rate in Houston and it was really 50% he lost his job and it has taken until Romney ran for him to try to come back. Why shouldn’t Duncan lose his job for lying to another state to push mayoral control in California (AB 1381) for political ideological reasons?
LikeLike