In The Washington Post today, her prospective successor to keep NCLB. If you鈥檝e heard her speak in the past two years, you wouldn鈥檛 learn anything new. Test scores are up, she writes, especially among poor and minority children. The backlash against NCLB鈥檚 accountability rules, she writes, 鈥渟peak[s] to the harsh truths it reveals.鈥�
NCLB can be improved, she says, and she鈥檚 all for it. But she doesn鈥檛 want to undermine its 鈥渃ore accountability provisions,鈥� she writes. She doesn鈥檛 say it, but from past statements, she probably means the goal for universal proficiency by the end of the 2013-14 school year; annual assessment; and disaggregation of student scores into subgroups representing races, ethnic minorities, and participation in programs for special education and English-language learners.
She also says there鈥檚 a unique coalition that supports the law, led by civil rights activists and business leaders. What she doesn鈥檛 say is whether she鈥檒l be a public spokeswoman for the law after Jan. 20. I鈥檓 betting she will be.
P.S. In yesterday鈥檚 Post, to Arne Duncan. Like Spellings鈥� op-ed, much of it was predictable. But Michael Dannenberg鈥檚 offered a fresh idea. The a horse-trade: Win the teacher unions鈥� support for teacher-pay initiatives with multi-billion-dollar increases for NCLB. Politically, it may be possible. Financially, wait and see.
