Skip to main content

This was predictable: Vision 2015 poised to become Vision 2020

Originally it was Vision 2012.

Then, when it became evident that the corporate donors weren't coming across with the promised money, it became Vision 2015.

I have been predicting for about two years now that with 2015 just around the corner it would be time to move the goal posts again.

I thought Vision 2020 would be a lame enough visual pun and give Rodel et al a long enough timeline to keep avoiding accountability.

Sure enough, here's a quote from their invite to a big event next week:
"Rodel is hosting an event to officially announce the foundation’s new mission to help Delaware become a global leader in public education by 2020, and to acknowledge all the work we’ve collectively accomplished in getting to this point."
The problem is that Rodel, and Governor Markell, all really do think that the public (and the General Assembly) is so stupid that they won't notice what's happening.

Based on prior experience here, they're right.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Shouldnt they maybe look in the mirror and say "Hey, we failed to make an impact by 2012 and then again by 2015, maybe we should close our doors."

Imagine being Paul Herdmann and getting a quarter mil a year and having absolutely NO accountability. And imagine that salary and your performance review where all your goals are "not met' and still keeping a job.

I'm telling you, the education game is the racket to be in!
Hube said…
Oh goodie. (/sarcasm) Maybe I can sic Arno Stark on 'em ...
Nancy Willing said…
Rodel gave a consultant 30K a few years ago to redo the Christina LOGO because - the usual stretch - it would be good for the children to have a more 'inspired' design. The design replacement was to turn the river and tributary logo into a sunburst. Sooooo original.....
I noticed that the district used the new logo for a month or two and has never used it again.
Even if Rodel decided to expend Herdman's quarter million into something more directly related to assisting educators, they'd likely just waste it.
Anonymous said…
Steve, I think we need a summit to write DPAS-II reviews for Murphy, Herdman and Markell, then publish them. We can use data from this years DCAS, whaddya say?
kavips said…
Since both of you are here, let me run this by you.. Was I wrong in my read of SB51 that it would disrupt or bypass all practices of tenure, in that the test would be applied to all teachers, and not just new ones?

No hurry now post passage, but in you leisure, if you could look over the part that erases those who were previously grandfathered in before 2003, without replacing any grandfathering in for any current teacher... My read was that this then enables the DOE to fire anyone based on arbitrary low testing scores, whereas before if someone had been teaching well for 40 years and was one year away from retirement, they would have been protected? Of course, firing someone for cause has big implications for the amount of pension they will receive.... and bad test scores is a "cause."

I was kind of surprised that the broadside I fired, bounced off with no notice from the DSEA.. Was I mistaken in how this could be interpreted by some future administration?

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...