What were you saying the new role of Ed. Secretary is again since it doesn’t have to do with anything dealing with educational experience?
You are assuming something as fact which is not in evidence. Specifically, that there’s some rigid, generally accepted definition of what the appropriate educational experience is for this job at this point in time.
Before I continue, let’s keep the following in mind: The US currently spends approximately twice as much on education as other developed nations. Our students, on average, obtain inferior outcomes (very high standard deviation on this, btw). And our dropout rates are 1.5X those of other developed nations.
Historically, the proper “educational experience” for the job is an educational professional who has come up “through the ranks”, teacher, principal, superintendent of a major school district. Arne Duncan was superintendent in Chicago. Rod Paige was super in Houston.
Because of the spending/outcomes/dropout conditions outlined in paragraph (2) above, a substantial number of Americans view the “proper educational experience” as outlined above as “doubling down on failure”, and are supportive of a change agent as opposed to traditional educator in the job. DeVos fits that definition. As I said before, I believe there were better change agents to be had; but this is where we are.
It should also be pointed out that there is precedent for appointing a Secretary with no educational experience. Reagan appointed Bill Bennett, and Bill Clinton appointed Richard Riley. So, the complaint that DeVos has no “traditional educator experience” is weak tea.
A man of your seniority, intellect, and wisdom should know that.
I’m not a man.
BTW, where’s that easily rewritten EO of BS you felt you needed to mention in regards to my comments about Mr. Payne’s profound article?
Mr. Trump doesn’t consult me as to scheduling. But, more to the point, are you not aware that the sticking point for the judges was the green card part of the ban?