Mike Petrilli has been ranking education policy people by their Klout scores for a few years. Here is the latest ranking. You will note that Arne Duncan is #1, I am #2, Randi Weingarten is #3. I am pleased to note that four members of the 20 top people are members of the board of the Network for Public Education: me, Xian Barrett, Julian Vasquez Heilig, and Anthony Cody.
I am not sure what any of this means. Just do your work, follow your passion, and don’t worry about your Klout score.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Interview by Madeline Brand, with a CTA member and a charter school founder:
http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/press-play-with-madeleine-brand
To paraphrase the old Avis commercial goes,
“I’m #2, but I try harder.”
Sadly, there was no mention of the fact that the charter schools are operating for proft… but lots of cries of “defending the status quo”.
From that link: “The Klout Score is a number between 1-100 that represents your influence. The more influential you are, the higher your Klout Score.”
Your score is 83, Arne’s is 84. He is winning by 1 Klout. My condolences.
Ed Detective, Love the “close reading”
And I don’t even get paid!
Well, in relation to sports (where there is an actual outcome and both sides must play by the rules) Red Sanders said “Winning isn’t everything. . . . It’s the only thing.” But “influence” (or should that be “influenza”?) in the educational policy realm isn’t a sport and there are no rules and with children’s minds in the balance what matters is getting policy and practices correct. Correct in the sense that those policies and procedures are just and equitable for all students.
Earlier today a friend had posted on FB the Newsweek rankings of high schools. My comment: Sort, rate, rank. We’re #1, go team, I ME MINE, I be the bestest. Ay ay ay ay ay, America’s obsession with pseudo-scientific falsehoods that are these rankings, especially rankings of K-12 public schools. I can make up some criteria and the rankings in the Newsweek one would be completely turned upside down. All falls into the category of “mental masturbation”.
There you go again with your blasphemy. How dare you question the god of Klout? I will continue to believe that Arne is “1 better” than Diane 😉
You forgot to credit SDP.
Yes, I did. Apologies SDP!
1 Klout for Duncan? Not a rout to pout about.
Forget that Klout, throw him Out!
Go Diane! Go NPE!
So does that translate to a “highly effective” VAM score for you? I think you deserve merit pay. 😉
No. She has to show growth. You have to compare her over three years. That’s how they do it in NC. BUT she can drop her lowest score the first time!
You cannot measure Diane’s Klout growth over time. You have to measure the Klout of her followers over three years to see her affect on their scores and get her value added Klout. That’s much more accurate. 😂
And they may not be the same followers each of the three years.
What were the predicted 2015 Klout scores? I need those for the value-added model.
TAGO!
I think we may be in an age of long-term Klout convergence.
It’s a backwards Lafter curve.
I had sent in my request to stop e-mails from Weingarten.
One thing I would like to is “un-klout” her…my definition of un-klouting also implies a personal escort—to a federal penitentiary as the “mis-representative” and false advocate for teachers…to a fate fit for traitors.
Diane, please use your Klout and your research skills to thoroughly disprove the bunk of the New Orleans “miracle.” Thanks.
Reblogged this on World's Greatest Detective of Education and commented:
Get your Klout scores here! Though they conceal more than they reveal, (like grades and test scores), our insane obsession with number rankings seems to have no end, especially when they are used to establish a dominant, “objective” master observer who is supposed to think for us and tell us what (and who) is “better.”
My favorite part of the article was this: “So what to make of this list? The most obvious observation is that a lot of education policy people with mega-Twitter followers don’t have Klout scores. Get yourselves signed up, folks!”
For shame! Today I learned that @AlfieKohn doesn’t have a Klout score. Though, I think he would much sooner write a book about how dumb Klout scores are. And I’d definitely buy it.
Here’s how ridiculous Petrilli’s “methodology” is–it takes no account of the quality of one’s contributions to the policy discussion around education, just the numbers (both Klout and Twitter). So Arne Duncan, who has done more to attack and destabilize our public schools and teachers, get a rating virtually identical to Dr. Ravitch, who has single handedly defended and advocated for a generation of teachers and students who have been systematically silenced and devalued.
Petrilli’s “rankings” merely point out the idiocy of using “data” to try to describe the quality of one’s interactions and relationships. It doesn’t work with teacher evaluation, or student learning–and it doesn’t “work” here.
The problem with ranking Arne Duncan is that he has speech writers and I am certain he neither writes speeches not his own tweets. A paid hand does it
That we pay for.
Thank goodness for Diane who counteracts the “klout” of Arne. Just imagine where we’d be without her. (Hint: An even bigger nightmare.)
Diane, you’re #1 in our hearts!
Why was U.S. Dept Of Ed Analyst, Paul Gammill, fired? Because he voiced concerns over the FERPA law.
He was in charge of directing and advising on the proposed P-20 cradle to career operation.He was appointed the director of the newly formed USDE Family Policy Compliance Office (FPCO).
“A 2007 study by Fordham Law School’s Center on Law and Information Policy opined that the Department’s effort to promote interoperability between state student data systems “appears as a backdoor means to create a national database of children’s information without express authority under NCLB to do so.” The study’s authors note, “[T]he lack of a privacy policy debate is a major concern. One would expect the federal government’s role in the interoperable standards to be minimal since NCLB did not authorize a national aggregation of data and interoperability functions to make aggregation and sharing easier.” The Fordham report also raises serious questions about the prudence of pushing states to expand student data systems at a time when existing data systems are highly vulnerable to invasions of student privacy and “do not appear to comply with the privacy requirements of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.”
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/02/01/ferpa