The headline says it all.
It certainly will be interesting to watch. I am not sure whether she will be a good secretary or a bad secretary, but the education department should be a little more interesting than usual. Fortunately, the education department doesn’t really do anything important, so I guess in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t matter who is in charge.
Oh no. Of all Trump’s nominees, she was the one I really wanted defeated. Special ed has already been trashed locally. Leaving it up to the states would be a disaster.
If its already trashed, there is only one other direction special ed can go…right?
Give her a chance to shake up the beast.
Things can always get worse. And I mean that they cut funding to the minimum of what they could get away with. People being mainstreamed because the class no longer exists,etc. And before that, my family had to threaten to sue to keep me in school for the entire day. There are people who need a higher authority breathing down their necks.
What’s that saying…“cheer up…things could be worse…and sure enough things did get worse”
She will shake up the status quo, which I think is a good thing, it creates opportunity for innovation to flourish.
Regarding charter schools, I see the same opportunity.
It’s true charter schools bleed off the families that care most about their kids education, which leaves more ‘chaff’ in the public schools.
The kids in charter schools will do better, if only because they are surrounded by a preponderance of families that care about education.
The kids left in bad public schools were already in trouble, there needs to be significant innovation to get them back on track.
This nomination shows that the draining of the swamp only made room for a sewage dump. It was the single, most crass example of the spoils system since the Boss Tweed political engine. I guess that sort of buying of office is just part and parcel of New York politicians.
She is devoid of any qualifications for the job except giving money for Trump’s election. I think Republicans would make El Chapo head of the FDA if Trump would have nominated him.
So would eliminating schools altogether.
Eliminating (public) schools altogether. Sounds like a plan
Her history of working for school choice for the past few decades is irrelevant?
Maybe that is President’s Trump’s plan. Have Secretary Devos eliminate public education, Tom Price can eliminate health and human services, and Secretary Scott Pruitt can eliminate our environment. :shrug:
Therein lies the key. The most consistent factor in successful schools is parental involvement and support.
If Trump is really going to improve education to achieve his stated goal of improving the lives of the folks in the poorest areas, it can’t be trivialized. Or addressed by some— at some point in the future concept.
I do favor school choice, but addressing this point is going to be critical to garnering long term support for real improvements. How do you help the kids whose parents aren’t as involved or as motivated about education. Letting these schools continue to deteriorate isn’t an answer that will get the support that will be necessary.
To this office, yes. I laud her for her lobbying efforts and her charitable works, but that does not make here an educator. Giving to the American Heart Association does not qualify one to perform open heart surgery.
Yes, rich people have school choice already, they move to expensive suburbs or send their kids to private schools. Poor families also deserve some degree of choice in their child’s education.
How we get the remaining families to care about education is more of a marketing problem than about teaching technique.
She is not an educator now. She is essentially a senior VP of education in corporate terms. Whether or not she will be successful remains to be seen, but her job is vision, planning, budgeting, and resource management.
I understand why intuitively people want the Education Secretary to be a former teacher, but I fail to see why one cannot be successful if they were not a teacher. A knowledge of our current education system, its flaws and strengths, and innovative ideas seem more relevant to me.
It’s hard to find a more liberal-left wing-secular minded group of people in America than public school teachers. And for a great many people, they have custody of your children for 30 hours a week. No surprise that by age 18, a growing number support abortion, same sex marriage, globalism and want no part of religion.
I read an article that didn’t support Devos’ nomination, and it primarily weighed her investment in a failed charter school system in Michigan as evidence for this. The same article cited a long-term study that showed the charter schools generally performed as well as or marginally better than the public schools. This had me scratching my head.
That’s why I asked, twice, if this was really a fight between the public school system and charter school system. No one answered.
Don’t know much about her except for her Amway ties and I would rather have the JWs knocking on my door than those with the Amway glaze in their eyes;)
My gut tells me that if she has any success, the teachers’ unions will have less.
She’s actually been very active advocate for school choice, and private and charter schools. This is something the government education bureaucracy is strongly opposed to. Part of draining the swamp is getting power out of the hands of unaccountable Washington bureaucrats and into the hands of parents. I don’t know why anybody would oppose that.
I think you misunderstand how Tammany Hall (Tweed’s political machine) worked. Essentially the machine was designed to monetize the political system. Contracts were awarded based on how much the contractor would kick back to Tammany. In the case of DeVos, I doubt very much that she plans to get rich being the Secretary of Education. She’s already a billionaire several times over. A better example of the “Tammanization” of the Department of Education was when Bill Clinton took a position as the Chancellor of a for-profit university, at several million per year, and then used his role as former President and husband of the chief US diplomat to help steer business their way.