Tony California CORE and August 2013 - Whiteboard Advisors · Tony Bennett’s resignation in Florida makes the state more likely to withdraw from the PARCC Common Core assessment

www.whiteboardadvisors.com

Tony Bennett, California CORE Waivers, and Gainful Employment

August 2013

www.whiteboardadvisors.com

1

Why Education Insider?INTRODUCTION

The Value

We harness the wisdom of well‐connected influentials to provide insights and predict policy outcomes for stakeholders in the education debate.

Whiteboard Advisors is a policy‐oriented consulting practice. We provideproprietary research and strategic support to investors and philanthropicdonors, government leaders, and entrepreneurs who seek unparalleledunderstanding of the education policy and business environment.

Education Insider helps those who need quality information to make high‐stakes decisions about the direction of federal policy. Education Insidercombines the wisdom of informed crowds with expert analysis to offerunparalleled information, analysis, and forecasting on a range of federaleducation policy issues and likely outcomes.

Education Insider conducts an anonymous survey of a small group of keyeducation influentials (policymakers, thought leaders, and associationheads) to get their thoughts and commentary about the context of thecurrent debate and possible outcomes. This helps surface the underlyingdynamics that can affect the trajectory of policies, positively or negatively,and go deeper than the conventional wisdom and rhetoric.

2

Why Education Insider?INTRODUCTION

The Process

Education Insider is a monthly report that cuts through the noise andprovides real‐time insights on national education policy trends, debates,and issues—from the handful of decision makers that are really driving theprocess. We combine a survey of key education influencers with our ownanalysis to provide a unique perspective on the current state of debate.

Who Are The Insiders?Influential leaders who are shaping federal education reform, includingindividuals who have or are currently serving as key policy and political“insiders,” such as:

• Current and former White House and U.S. Department of Educationleaders;

• Current and former Congressional staff;• State education leaders including state school chiefs and formergovernors; and

• Leaders of major education organizations, think tanks and other keyinfluentials

Survey Insiders

Analyze Results

Report Insights

Drive Action

3

• Insiders are split about whether Commissioner Tony Bennett should have resigned his position in Florida over the Indiana school grading controversy. Insiders see greater impact from the episode on A‐F grading systems than the Common Core although a majority think Bennett’s departure makes it more likely Florida will withdraw from the PARCC consortium.

• Three out of four Insiders believe the district waiver the Department of Education granted to a consortium of school districts in California was bad policy.

• A small majority of Insiders believe the negotiated rulemaking panel for for‐profit colleges is biased against those colleges; nonetheless most Insiders think the final regulation will be about as favorable or more favorable to those schools than the previous regulation.

75% of Insiders believe that Tony Bennett’s resignation in Florida makes the state more likely to withdraw from the PARCC Common Core assessment consortium.

50% of Insiders believe Tony Bennett should have resigned his post in Florida as a result of the Indiana controversy.

14% of Insiders believe the new regulation on for‐profit colleges will be less‐favorable to those schools than the previous regulation.

79% of Insiders see the Indiana school grading controversy as a significant threat to A‐F school grading systems.

Executive SummaryINTRODUCTION

4

Table of ContentsINTRODUCTION

5

TONY BENNETT’S RESIGNATION 6

CALIFORNIA CORE WAIVER 24

GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT 29

What does Tony Bennett’s recent resignation mean for the Common Core, if anything?

• “Not much. It will give fodder for those who oppose and be too irrelevant for policy reasons for those that support.”

• “It can’t be good. Implications are worse for accountability generally.”

• “It will have little impact on the CCSS. There will continue to be noise on CCSS, and even some Bennett/CCSS echoes in the sectors trade news echo chamber. But the echoes will not have any noteworthy consequence—whether a state leaves the CCSS behind—on the field.”

• “It’s a blow, because he brought a tremendous amount of credibility to the overall effort –especially with some Republicans and the business community.”

• “Not much. More of a problem for the A‐F system.”

• “Two problems: Emboldens the foes even more. Puts FL’s continued assessment participation in jeopardy.”

• “Tony’s resignation complicates PARCC’s situation, but it’s not fatal for the Common Core.”

• “Very little. More impact on PARCC and A‐F grades for schools.”

Insider Insight: Tony Bennett’s Resignation and the Common CoreTONY BENNETT’S RESIGNATION

6

• “People who don’t like the Common Core will use it as ammunition, people who do will say it doesn’t matter. We should talking more honestly about the fact that no assessment or grading scheme is perfect and all of them will need to be adjusted. HOPEFULLY because of internal misalignment versus external pressures.”

• “It weakens the already weakening movement.”• “What did Stonewall Jackson’s 1863 death mean for the Confederacy? A force already on the ropes loses a major leader.

• “Very embarrassing and will further contribute to growing unease among state legislators about thevalue of this exercise.”

• “Nothing at all.”• “Bad news since Scott is a wimp.”• “Another few weeks of guaranteed bad publicity.”• “Not great, but other chiefs can carry it across the finish line.”

• “Not much. Just one less prominent supporter as a chief whose resignation had nothing to do with Common Core.”

Insider Insight: Tony Bennett’s Resignation and the Common Core (continued)

TONY BENNETT’S RESIGNATION

7

• “Probably nothing to the Common Core but it hurts PARCC and not having a strong leader in FL during the next year will be unfortunate for Ed reform in general.”

• “Not much beyond Florida.”

• “Undermines sanctity of the ‘reform’ movement. To the extent that Common Core is tied to that movement (and I would argue it is), it undermines the Common Core as well.”

• “Not good.”

• “My concern is not what it means for Common Core, but Florida’s participation in PARCC. If Florida leaves PARCC, I don’t know how the consortium survives.”

• “Not too much; however, his actions will very likely have implications for accountability and the darling world of reformers.”

• “It may hurt its effort in Florida but nowhere else.”

• “Very little. CCSS’s success or failure isn’t linked to one person. Instead, CCSS is becoming the piñata for whatever a group hates about education. Unfunded mandate, federal overreach, too much testing, etc. It’s a ‘choose your own adventure’ for ways to undermine a reform.”

• “The resignation means absolutely nothing for Common Core State Standards. The Standards are in place, adopted by 45 states and DC. While it may have some impact on the tests, the Standards are here to stay.”

Insider Insight: Tony Bennett’s Resignation and the Common Core (continued)


8

Question: Will Tony Bennett’s resignation have any impact on Florida remaining in PARCC?

Tony Bennett’s Resignation: Impact on Florida’s PARCC ParticipationTONY BENNETT’S RESIGNATION

9

7%

18%

75%

Will Tony Bennett’s resignation have any impact on Florida remaining in PARCC?

Decreases the likelihood of Florida withdrawingNo EffectIncreases the likelihood of Florida withdrawing

Most Insiders think that Tony Bennett’s resignation will increase the likelihood of Florida withdrawing from the PARCC assessment consortium.

Why or why not?

• “Ultimately it will depend on 1) his successor, and 2) how effective the anti‐core campaign is.”

• “Jeb Bush and his Foundation for Excellence in Education will work hard to keep Florida in PARCC.”

• “None of the choices accurately capture what will happen. Florida has been an ungainly leader in the consortium, neither leading nor getting out of the way. That will continue, and it will continue to give PARCC headaches. But if for some reason the state bails out on PARCC—as leader, as fiscal agent, or as a member of PARCC—it will produce similar, irritating chaos in an already chaos plagued organization.”

• “They were probably withdrawing anyway, but this would seem to seal the deal.”

• “He was the state’s bulwark, the conservative protecting participation in common assessments. And now the Vandals sack Rome.”

• “Teetering before he left, likely now.”

Insider Insight: Tony Bennett’s Resignation and Impact on Florida’s PARCC Participation


10

• “This is really a toss‐up...and whether or not they stay with PARCC won’t really be a signal for how they will deal with the CCSS overall. I think we are in danger of conflating those two things. These tests are pretty burdensome, and decisions not to stay in the consortium may have more to do with dollars than a commitment to the CCSS. We need more tests in the market.”

• “Momentum is going in this direction.”

• “Leadership vacuum means decisions will be put off.”

• “Tony was a strong voice of reason and support for the CCSS—with his departure, I worry about the right‐wing anti‐CCSS gaining ground. PARCC will just be collateral damage.”

• “I suspect Florida was going to pull out of PARCC anyway, especially for the high school grades, but this probably seals it.”

• “Bennett was one of the most vocal GOP Common Core supporters. Florida’s support was already waning, and this doesn’t help its chances of staying the course.”

• “He was a strong influence and given the conservative nature of the state legislature there may be no one strong enough, unless Jeb Bush steps in, to defend the PARCC and Common Core.”

• “Governor Scott seems to be looking for an exit and that’s a lot easier with Bennett out of the picture.”

Insider Insight: Tony Bennett’s Resignation and Impact on Florida’s PARCC Participation (continued)


11

• “Legislative leaders (who will have to fund the budget) are vocal in their desire for the state to leave PARCC. Without a strong voice in the department of education as a counterweight, those legislators could carry the day.”

• “At face value, it increases the likelihood of Florida withdrawing, as Governor Scott tries to find support from the right wing in the move. The ultimate decision will depend on who replaces Bennett.”

• “Of course this could change depending who the permanent replacement is.”

• “Legislators will have to prove that they are not in the pocket of the so‐called ‘national education experts.’”

Insider Insight: Tony Bennett’s Resignation and Impact on Florida’s PARCC Participation (continued)


12

• “Considering the AFT’s FOIA request, I think it is a coordinated attack against reformers.”• “There’s more to the story than what happened in Indiana. Tony had created problems for himself

in Florida.”

• “My impressions aren’t good based on media accounts—even if the media accounts are only somewhat accurate, going beyond this particular story, this shines a light generally on how ‘easy’ it is to manipulate/change accountability information behind the scenes. The accountability crowd needs to address this issue head on—the lack of transparency about how accountability is calculated is a serious flaw that should be addressed. Otherwise, an already skeptical public will turn on these accountability systems.”

• “Probably an honest effort to tweak the grading system to match it up with reality. But very clumsily executed. But none of us probably knows for sure.”

• “It is a sad demise. He was an important leader. He’ll continue on in the field, but never again in a position of such public visibility. Bennett made a fatal error. Leaders in a position of public trust should not alter results without due public process. That said, it is important to reflect on the incentives that drove Bennett to make the decision he made, especially the accountability framework that downgraded the school whose grade he revised. Such frameworks are a much needed aspect of school accountability and performance management, but it is possible to imagine one that recognizes schools for growth in different ways, or that allows a school to appeal if it believes it has evidence to the contrary of its rating. In both cases the circumstances would have been different and Bennett could have acted differently.”

Insider Insight: What are Your Impressions Over the Events that Led to Tony Bennett Resigning?


13

• “Every.Single.Chief. Has to revise their grading formula at first. They all have hitches and we need to be very open and honest about that. The disturbing issue is that if that was all this is, it’s so benign it begs a good discussion. I am just not clear why the resignation.”

• “Probably more to the story than meets the eye.”

• “The is the real‐world of policy‐making, warts and all, not a gauzy Aaron Sorkin production.”

• “He was careless, even impetuous, in the manner he handled the re‐consideration of the schools’ grades. BUT it’s remarkable a reformer gets taken down for a single mistake like this when the defenders of the status quo can keep on keeping on while they get away daily with feckless decisions and perpetual mediocrity.”

• “There is more to the story not yet known.”

• “It’s hysterical. The Ed reform community who thinks we just need to keep redesigning the thermometer to tell us if the patient is sick doesn’t actually want to talk about how to fix the schools, they just want to talk about how we can better determine which schools are bad.”

• “The accountability systems that states are creating are (1) brand new and (2) complex. There will need to be improvements to them as states learn what is and isn’t working properly. It’s not crazy to look at schools you think are ‘high performing’ and use them to calibrate your accountability metrics. However...when the ‘high performing’ test case is run by a huge donor...well...that spells trouble....”

• “If what has been reported is indeed true, changing grades was technically the correct thing to do to account for flaws in the grading formula. But the real issue that led to fodder for reporters is the internal communications and emails that were handled very poorly.”

Insider Insight: What are Your Impressions Over the Events that Led to Tony Bennett Resigning? (continued)


14

• “I’m not sure we have the whole story yet; yet to be released emails might fill in the gaps. My own sense is that 1) he didn’t do it because of the connection of the donor; 2) any new grading system is going to need to be tweaked; but 3) he should have found a way to have a separate grade for the Christel House high school.”

• “His actions weren’t malicious—he erred on the side of his friend and supporter when things were unclear. Now he’s paying the price for not being careful.”

• “I’ve always been concerned about Tony’s ability as a leader with demonstrated results. Yes, he’s a straight talker. But, he’s not a proven leader who had an impact on key indicators such as closing the achievement gap.”

• “When will folks learn not to use email? More seriously, this shows that subjectivity does exist in accountability systems and as such political thoughts enter the arena. The long‐term implications of his foolish actions are unclear; however, I do believe what he did has handed the ‘reformers'’ opponents much with which to play. What is most interesting right now is watching most of the darling lovers of reform trying to brush off what Bennett did as nothing more than a small mistake. It was a HUGE mistake and had he been a federal employee would have been illegal under the Hatch Act.”

• “Bennett made a stupid mistake. And he and Florida made a worse mistake by not getting out in front of this story.”



15

• “Pure stupid politics. It was a bad decision on his part back in Indiana, but is it enough to resign?”

• “These accountability systems are political. It seems obvious from the leaked emails that they were trying to fix the accountability system to keep it from unraveling. That’s the kind of situation public officials get confronted with. What they shouldn’t have done is try to get this school to an A or do it out of the public eye and without explanation. They’re paying a price for that.”

• “The timing of the release of the information was suspect at best, coming as it did right on the heels of a series of positive stories about his Indiana policies. That said, what he did—changing a school’s grade to fit a preconceived notion of where it ‘should’ have scored—is absolutely indefensible.”

• “Surprised by how quickly he stepped down. He was either looking for an out or hiding something much worse.”

• “He shouldn’t have had to—but because he leaned towards Republicans and is a reformer he is subject to extra scrutiny and held to a higher standard.”

• “We don’t know the entire story. Five leaked emails don’t reveal the entire decision‐making process. Schools could appeal their grade in IN if they didn’t agree with it. There was a process in place to make A‐F work.”

• “Overblown.”



16

Question: Should Tony Bennett have resigned?

Should Tony Bennett Have Resigned?TONY BENNETT’S RESIGNATION

17

50%50%

Should Tony Bennett have resigned?

Yes No

Insiders are equally divided regarding whether Bennett should have resigned.

Why or why not?

• “Not sure. Only he knows what else is in his emails.”

• “His explanations didn’t change the impression left by the emails. He lost credibility as an advocate for using data to inform policy decisions.”

• “Regardless of the explanations that have come out since and the context to the decision to change grades, it is a huge black mark on these simplistic A‐F grading schemes. It only reinforces the view that there are incentives for gaming and plenty opportunities for doing so if you are the lead education chief in a state.”

• “If he had stayed, this story would have even more legs than it already does.”

• “It is a fundamental breach of public trust to alter results. It undermines the credibility of both accountability systems and the movement use data to improve school performance.”

• “In these cases do one of two things: Stay and defend what seemed like a supremely rational decision, very poorly and politically deftly executed. Apologize for being politically deaf on this, but use the opportunity to defend revisions born of reality. Try to hang in there. If there is more than that going on, say ‘I messed up,’ and resign.”

• “Credibility was gone, even after his explanation, which was highly plausible.”

Insider Insight: Should Tony Bennett Have Resigned?TONY BENNETT’S RESIGNATION

18

• “Well, not just for the IN emails. There might have been more we don't know going on.”

• “Based on what we know now, I don’t think what he did was outrageous. It was a tough judgment call.”

• “The criticism he would have endured if he stayed wouldn’t have been good for him or Florida’s students.”

• “Yes, he had an ethics/integrity issue but he could have weathered the storm.”

• “This episode is on the level of apologize, accept responsibility and move on. It’s not a firing offense. If more emails come out then that’s a different story.”

• “The rules just have to apply to everyone.”

• “Few had confidence in him, as a result of this. Even moreso when one saw how his wife’s company benefited from his office in Indiana.”

• “Storm would have passed.”

Insider Insight: Should Tony Bennett Have Resigned? (continued)TONY BENNETT’S RESIGNATION

19

Question: Will the A to F grading controversy in Indiana have any impact on A to F grading programs in other states?

Impact of Grading Controversy on Other StatesTONY BENNETT’S RESIGNATION

20

0%7%

14%

62%

17%

1 ‐ No impact 2 3 4 5 ‐ Majorimpact

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Will the A to F grading controversy in Indiana have any impact on A to F grading

programs in other states?

Almost 80% of Insiders think the grading controversy will have an impact on A to F grading programs in other states.

21

Insider Insight: Impact of Grading Controversy on Other StatesTONY BENNETT’S RESIGNATION

Why?

• “There has already been significant press, especially in the education‐wonk community, about how easily A‐F can be manipulated. Not sure that it has long legs, though.”

• “Trust in government is already low. States will be scrutinized and the data for the A‐F grades better be transparent and trustworthy.”

• “Some impact, but not much. The events likely solidify views of opponents and will argued away as anomalous by proponents.”

• “I hope people look not just at the idea of grading systems, but also at the rules for determining the grades. My understanding is that IN’s grading system was highly dependent on school level proficiency attainment, which although an important measure is predicted mainly by the socio economic status of the students in the school. It is possible to include growth and change of status measures to create methods for recognizing schools that area closing performance gaps and catching up with other, more high performing schools.”

• “It becomes fodder, especially because of the resignation without much discussion over why.”

• “Contributes to a sense that the grading policies are complex, easy to manipulate and not truly transparent.”

• “It will slow the adoption in other places, not roll back plans already in place.”

22

Insider Insight: Impact of Grading Controversy on Other States (continued)


• “Simply pushing A‐F policies without helping states get all the details worked out in a sophisticated, fair, and smart accountability system has suffered a setback. So much more is needed to make A‐F or any complex grading system work. (Btw, who’s working on and delivering policy and practice plans to do this?)”

• “It just pulls back the curtain on how so much of the ed reform talk is simply manipulating the numbers to confuse and befuddle the masses. Real people, moms and dads, will just use this as further proof that the ed establishment is mostly interested in intellectual self‐gratification.”

• “Education isn’t very good at continuous improvement. We think we have to do things once, and then move on. These new grading systems will need tweaks. I worry that the IN lesson will make people scared to fix problems in their systems...and that the unfixed metrics will eventually take the systems down.”

• “I hope it will have an impact. I think it will raise the question of whether boiling it down to one grade really makes sense. We don’t want to overload parents with data but we could do better than just a single grade.”

• “I think the A‐F reformers are done. Tony Bennett’s actions show the likelihood that such systems turn into the Wheel of Fortune of School Reform where A’s can be bought for $15K or more.”

23

Insider Insight: Impact of Grading Controversy on Other States (continued)


• “Yes, there will be some impact and stronger efforts to insure no tampering.”

• “No difference substantively but hopefully it will make state officials more comfortable with being transparent about the decisions underlying these systems.

• “I think opponents of A‐F grading will try to attach this episode to every state’s program. That will mean that states must be absolutely transparent in the criteria they use for assigning letter grades—and if they make ANY changes to any school’s grade, those must be completely out in the open.”

• “Just another example of how good policy can be ruined by bad implementation.”

• “It raises questions about the methodology used in IN and which other states have used similar methodologies or processes. But this isn’t just an A‐F issue, it is a present concern with any accountability or teacher eval system.”

• “Calls into question arbitrary nature of rating systems. Also makes you wonder if the same kind of ‘cheating’ is going on elsewhere.”

Question: Was the U.S. Department of Education’s approval of the California CORE waiver good policy or bad policy?

California CORE WaiverCALIFORNIA CORE WAIVER

24

25%

75%

Was the U.S. Department of Education’s approval of the California CORE waiver

good policy or bad policy?

Good policy Bad policy

Three out of four Insiders think that the U.S. Department of Education’s approval of the district‐level California CORE waiver was bad policy.

Why?

• “Fracturing accountability even more down to the district level makes a national discussion of macro education issues that much harder and it erodes state authority and it makes it hard to understand what’s the line or rationale for where ED won’t bend. Is there nothing they won’t permit? Why CORE but not Burlington, Vermont? Why push for common standards but permit so much local control in how you collect and use data and what you measure?”

• “Regardless of what opinions we hold of NCLB, it was meant to be a set of shared principles. If it doesn’t work, use the process and change it for all. First, almost all states opt out, now districts opt out. I await the school and classroom waivers that by precedent must surely be allowed now. We created our country as a place governed by mutually agreed upon law, not the single opinion of men/ women. This matters. A lot.”

• “This is an ominous step towards the direction of nationalizing the operation of our nation’s schools.”

• “Terrible decision, so many implications outside of just the districts. It was plausible before to argue against federal overreach, now it’s nearly impossible.”

• “Bad precedent.”

Insider Insight: Was the California CORE Waiver Good Policy or Bad Policy?

CALIFORNIA CORE WAIVER

25

• “This waiver seems to gut the premise of most large federal education programs (Title I, Title II, IDEA, etc.) which are known as ‘state‐administered’ programs—meaning that the state is responsible for monitoring and oversight of federal dollars. This puts the California Department of Education in a very tricky position—the state did not go for the waiver, but presumably the state will still be responsible for making sure these districts spend their funds consistent with the CORE waiver? Glad I am not them. Also glad I am not USED—because practically speaking they are now holding the oversight hot potato for these CORE districts. Politically it seems like it would be untenable for USED to come down hard on the California Department of Education for a lack of oversight of these districts, when USED basically went around them with these waivers.”

• “Washington shouldn’t be bargaining with state political subdivisions without going through the state.”

• “The waiver was not well put together, the process for approval wasn’t transparent, it doesn’t maintain accountability. In other words it does none of the things the Secretary of Education keeps piously saying that the waivers all do. Price to be paid for that down the road besides what it means now for kids in these districts who just had the rug pulled out from under them.”

Insider Insight: Was the California CORE Waiver Good Policy or Bad Policy? (continued)


26

• “Terrible. At this point, the Department is just making things up as they go along. It’s impossible to discern a coherent strategy. RTT for states, for districts; waivers for states, for districts. They are leaving federal education policy a complete shambles. The next Secretary of Education will need to be SERVPRO.”

• “The Feds shouldn’t have the authority to go around the states.”

• “So Arne Duncan really is now the chairman of the national school board, superintendent of every state, administrator of every school district, and probably principal of every school.”

• “The California Department of Education couldn’t get its act together, and the CORE districts needed relief. If the waiver allows them to adopt better policies to serve kids without removing state accountability requirements, it’s fine with me.”

• “Just imagine what a Republican president will do with this authority and what Arne Duncan as a school leader would have said.”



27

• “This is the single worst thing to happen to Federal education policy in the last several decades. It truly signifies the ‘national school board’ that Lamar Alexander warns about so frequently, and has the potential to completely upend any notion of state and local control of education that policymakers of both parties claim to support. Once again, if George W. Bush were to have tried something like this—i.e. completely ending state control of education—the media, Democrats in Congress, all of the education, civil rights, and business groups would have united in opposition. But because it’s a Democratic Secretary of Education who gets a free pass from everyone in this town, the education policy community turns a blind eye. This will have a lasting negative impact on Federal education policy, and there may be no turning back.”

• “At the very least, it sets a precedent that is entirely unclear. Under what conditions does the Administration believe it is ok to waive federal requirements for local districts? How is the oversight board an adequate accountability measure when it falls outside elected government officials with mayors, school boards, governors, and legislators? The Administration jumped into new uncharted territory with a press release, not any robust presentation of the legal arguments or principles they are putting into place with this policy.”

• “ED really had no choice, if it was to keep forward motion going.”

• “Now you have a state with different policies for different districts. Accountability will be a problem since some now have flexibility while others don’t. These are mostly large school systems which had the advantage of banding together to do something which smaller ones don’t.”



28

Question: Will the negotiated rulemaking on Gainful Employment result in a regulation that is less favorable, about the same, or more favorable for for‐profit colleges as the regulation that was struck down?

Gainful Employment Rulemaking Regulations and For‐Profit Colleges

GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT

29

14%

48%10%

28%

Will the negotiated rulemaking result in a regulation that is less favorable, about the same,

or more favorable for for‐profit colleges?

Less favorableAbout the sameMore favorableDon't know

While Insiders are split on the issue, the largest percentage think that negotiated rulemaking will result in a regulation that is about the same for for‐profit colleges.

Why?

• “The Department clearly set up the panel for failure so the Department (rather than the negotiators) could rewrite the rule.”

• “Probably about the same. Ideally Gainful Employment would be reported by all institutions, not just for‐profits, but there’s something especially unsavory about a business model that relies on student loans to make a profit.”

• “Less favorable. Have you seen the list of negotiators? At least they tried to appear fair in representatives last round.”

• “Hard to see how it could get worse, but this one will get thrown out too.”• “The court case tossed the rule but established the Department’s authority. They’ll use that.”• “The Administration thinks they got it about right the first time and doesn’t want a big, new battle

over gainful employment. The goal is to fix the problems the courts noted, and move on to the rest of their agenda.”

• “The Administration does not have a higher education agenda. They launch this rulemaking at the same time CFPB says that half of $1 trillion in federal student loan debt is not being repaid, in part because of IBR is too confusing and complicated.”

• “They’ll find a less arbitrary way to measure repayment rates. The rest will stay largely the same.

• “This is what will be the outcome given the political climate. This is unfortunate.”

Insider Insight: Gainful Employment Rulemaking Regulations and For‐Profit Colleges

GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT

30

Question: For‐profit colleges are claiming the pool of Gainful Employment negotiators is unfair to them. In your view, is the pool unfairly biased against for‐profit colleges?

Gainful Employment Negotiator PoolGAINFUL EMPLOYMENT

31

54%

7%

39%

Is the pool of Gainful Employment negotiators unfair to for‐profit colleges?

YesNoDon't know

A small majority of Insiders believe that the pool of Gainful Employment negotiators if unfair to for‐profit colleges.

Why?

• “I think it is more that the panel is set to ensure failure. That way the Department writes the rule.”

• “When you have labor unions representing businesses and IAVA as consumer rep (albeit the alternate) it is hard to argue this is a fair pool.”

• “The current administration is demonstrably anti‐for‐profit in education.”

• “The whole thing is rigged to get a specific outcome. There will be no negotiation, there will be no compromise. Duncan and his team loathe the for‐profit community and are trying to destroy it root and branch. If they could use negotiated rule asking to require summary execution of anyone who works at, owns stock in, or thinks favorably of a for‐profit college, they’d already be putting on the executioner’s hood.”

• “They’re biased but not unfairly biased. For‐profits make up half of all loan defaults. They deserve to be scrutinized.”

• “But rightfully so.”

• “Of course it is. Need proof? One of the business representatives to the panel appointed by the Department was actually from the AFL CIO. That’s right—this administration believes that a labor union is an actual business! This is just one of many ways the entire panel is stacked against for‐profits.”

• “Why not apply this to all colleges?”

Insider Insight: Gainful Employment Negotiator Pool GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT

32

Whiteboard Advisors

33

Email: [email protected]

Follow: WhiteBdAdvisor

Visit: http://www.whiteboardadvisors.com

Blog: http://www.whiteboardadvisors.com/news

Sign up for Whiteboard Weekly Notes for the latest education news. Subscribe using your QR Code reader or by visiting: http://eepurl.com/nW3D

Documents

Tony California CORE and August 2013 - Whiteboard Advisors · Tony Bennett’s resignation in Florida makes the state more likely to withdraw from the PARCC Common Core assessment