Mere Politics

Debate on CATS test Monday night

I will appear on KET's "Kentucky Tonight" program next Monday night, February 25 at 8:00 p.m. to debate Senate Bill 1, which would scrap the state CATS tests in favor of a standardized norm-referenced system. Sharon Oxedine, president of the Kentucky Education Association (the state teacher's union) will be defending the tests.  Two other guests have yet to be determined.

UPDATE: Well, hmmm. I think they replaced me. According to Polwatchers today the guests are Fort Thomas Independent Schools Superintendent John Williamson, Senate Majority Leader Dan Kelly, R-Springfield, House budget chairman Harry Moberly Jr., D-Richmond, and state Education Secretary Helen Mountjoy. But that's okay. Kelly is the best man for the job anyway. He's about as articulate a spokesman for common sense in education as there is. It ought to be good.

U of L receives "Red Light" Rating from Freedom of Speech organization

The University of Louisville was among a number of schools that received the worst rating from a national free speech organization: Cardinal Red.  The "Red Light" rating came from The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, whose report, "Spotlight on Speech Codes 2007" rates schools for the prevalence of student speech codes.

The report doesn't detail what infractions U of L committed to receive the rating, but it's hard to believe that it doesn't come from the increasing intolerance on the U of L campus for expression that might reflect negatively on gays.  U of L's "Safe Zone" program has come under fire for, among other things, treading on the freedom of expression.

The "Red Light" rating is given as follows:

A school is rated as a “red light” if it has at least one policy that both clearly and
substantially restricts freedom of speech. A “clear” restriction is one that unambiguously infringes on protected expression. In other words, the threat to free speech at a red-light institution is obvious on the face of the policy and does not depend on how the policy is applied. A “substantial” restriction on free speech is one that is broadly applicable to important categories of campus expression. For example, a ban on “offensive speech” would be a clear violation (in that it is unambiguous) as well as a substantial violation (in that it covers a great deal of what would be protected expression in the larger society). Such a policy would earn a university a red light.

Congratulations U of L.

New school chief a mixed bag

Reports are that State Rep. John Draud (R-Edgewood) will be getting the nod from the State School Board as Kentucky's new Education Commissioner.  Here are a few pluses and minuses of a Draud administration:

• PLUS: Draud has immediate credibility in the General Assembly.  Having been a legislator, and one who, although a Republican, has not been partisan in his attitude, he has working relationships in the legislature he can use to further his goals in the legislature. He also brings with him a knowledge of how the General Assembly works--no mean skill for state bureaucrat who has to work with lawmakers.
• MINUS: Draud lacks a dynamic personality.  Okay, let's put it this way: he isn't exactly Mr. Personality. He can be cold and aloof.  What he gains in legislative experience, he could lose here. Not that previous School Commissioners have ever given any evidence of having been to Charm School.  Thomas Boysen was probably the best in this regard, wowing legislators with his California glamour--although they finally saw through the glitz.  Bill Cody was so relationally inept that I had a better relationship with David Karem (the one who traditionally toted the Department of Education's water in the Senate) than he did.  Go figure. And I don't think the last one even tried to do this.  What was his name again?
• PLUS: Draud has strong credentials in school administration.  He's a successful school administrator. 'Nuff said.
• MINUS: He is a card-carrying member of the state education establishment. Alright, I admit it: to think that someone from outside the establishment (like Penny Sanders) would ever even be considered for the position is whistling Dixie.  Still, don't look for any big shakeups in Kentucky's education system. Draud was one of those who, during the big battles over education reforms in the late 90's, didn't seem to want to listen to any appeals for change.
• PLUS: Draud is not a shill for the teachers unions.  He is a school administrator, and school administrators are not traditionally beholden to the KEA.  This will come in handy later when Beshear starts issuing payoffs to the teachers unions for supporting him in the election.  He also has experience dealing with the unions and so presumably knows how to deal with them.

All in all, a mixed bag.

O Brothers! Stop the senseless leadership!

Over at Kentucky School News and Views, Richard Day criticizes Joe Brothers, the head of the State School Board, for moving ahead with the appointment of a new state schools chief in the face of a request from new Governor Steve Beshear to restart the process of hiring a new commissioner. 

Now I can see how someone could criticize the school board over this, but I'm not sure I understand how you could do it using Day's argument.  His criticism is that the Board is " railroading this choice."

Huh?

The position has been open for almost a year and its functions being performed by an assistant commissioner.  The one thing you can't criticize the Board for is "railroading this choice."  The only resemblance Brother's actions bear to locomotion as we know it is that Brothers appears to finally putting the cars back on the track after a train wreck.

I was critical too of the Board's Barbara Erwin fiasco, but I have a hard time feeling bad about how the Board has conducted itself since Brothers took the reins of the Board.  Finally, there seems to be some real leadership happening on education, and then, what do people want him to do?  They want him to stop it.

Just cut it out!  Someone needs to put a halt to this senseless leadership!

I don't see where this Board has any obligation under law or conscience to lay down and play dead simply because another governor is about to take over.  Every governor gets his chance to select his own members.  But, guess what?  It's not his turn yet.

And does anyone doubt that when Beshear does get his hands on the Board he's going to fill it with shills for the teachers unions that helped get him elected?  Let's hope not, but I'm not hopeful.

Maybe Day could articulate what obligation this board has to scratch everything it has done so far in the selection process because

In fact, one of the reasons I have heard offered for why the board is elected rather than appointed is to insulate it from the shifting winds of politics.  Yet now there are some people who want Board members  to wet a finger and stick it in the air.

And how much you want to bet these are people who would be having a fit if it was an incoming Republican governor who wanted immediate control over the Board's agenda?