Ten days ago, I wrote at length??here about the Department's shifting/uncertain position on federalism in education.
The basic tensions I pointed out popped up again this weekend, with Secretary Duncan's scolding of Hawaii for saving money by closing schools on 17 Fridays. "It's inconceivable to me that this is the best solution for Hawaii," wrote Duncan.
For what it's worth, I wholeheartedly agree with him on the merits--good for him for calling out Hawaii's leaders. This will hurt kids.
But the secretary's position just doesn't mesh with his frequent refrain that states and districts have the answers and don't need Washington's meddling. So the blaring question for the administration is: In what cases does the Department feel like it has the answers and states and districts are wrong?
The secretary's recent speech to school boards suggested that the need to address failing schools trumps the??No Washington Meddling Doctrine. The Hawaii case suggests that cutting school days trumps it too. Given the secretary's pushing of national standards and assessments, obviously those take precedence as well.
So what else is on that list?
I hate veering into snarkiness, so forgive me this, but it's beginning to look like states and districts don't need Washington's meddling until they do something the Department doesn't like.
To be clear, I'm not just trying to score debating points here by pointing out these holes. Defining the proper role for the feds vis-a-vis states and districts is a central challenge of reauthorizing NCLB.
The administration probably needs to come up with a coherent position on this. And based on recent actions, clearly it's not always "states and districts know best."