"Least influential of education's most influential information sources."
-- Education Week Research Center
"full of very lively short items and is always on top of the news...He gets extra points for skewering my high school rating system"
-- Jay Mathews, The Washington Post
"a daily dose of information from the education policy world, blended with a shot of attitude and a dash of humor"
-- Education Week
"unexpectedly entertaining"..."tackle[s] a potentially mindfogging subject with cutting clarity... they're reading those mushy, brain-numbing education stories so you don't have to!"
-- Mickey Kaus
"a very smart blog... this is the site to read"
-- Ryan Lizza
"everyone who's anyone reads Eduwonk"
-- Richard Colvin
"designed to cut through the fog and direct specialists and non-specialists alike to the center of the liveliest and most politically relevant debates on the future of our schools"
-- The New Dem Daily
"peppered with smart and witty comments on the education news of the day"
-- Education Gadfly
"don't hate Eduwonk cuz it's so good"
-- Alexander Russo, This Week In Education
"the morning's first stop for education bomb-throwers everywhere"
-- Mike Antonucci, Intercepts
"…the big dog on the ed policy blog-ck…"
-- Michele McLaughlin
"I check Eduwonk several times a day, especially since I cut back on caffeine"
-- Joe Williams
"...one of the few bloggers who isn't completely nuts"
-- Mike Petrilli, Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
"I have just three 'go to' websites: The Texas Legislature, Texas Longhorn sports, and Eduwonk"
-- Sandy Kress
"penetrating analysis in a lively style on a wide range of issues"
-- Walt Gardner
"Fabulous"
-- Education Week's Alyson Klein
"thugs"
-- Susan Ohanian
Smart List: 60 People Shaping the Future of K-12 Education
I’m not sure that is the right policy question, Andy. I think part of the quality problem has been the rush to replicate/expand. That’s why the NACSA brief is a little confusing. What’s wrong with having a high-quality charter school that’s simply one school? Doesn’t the expand/replicate approach inherently discriminate against independently operated charters and merely favor the KIPPs of the world?
That’s a great point bschaeffer. Two thoughts. First, as I tried to do in the “smart caps” paper and idea,
http://www.educationsector.org/sites/default/files/publications/CharterSchoolCaps.pdf
which a few states have innovated with now, there should be a balance in the policy to ensure that one-offs are not discriminated against. As the data show CMO doesn’t inherently equal quality any more than one-off means low-quality. And, when a group of educators want to create a school in one place to better serve some kids that’s for the good and there should be room for that in policy – in my view – and also not pressure that expansion is the only path.
But, second, that said, in terms of rapidly increasing the number of high-quality seats in places that need them desperately today, the networks bring more to the table. Yes, 100 great new schools is 100 great schools regardless of whether they are CMOS or one-offs but in practice the CMOS can get there faster so if you can encourage the good ones there is a pragmatic attraction to that approach.
Thanks, Andy. I think we’re likely to disagree on some of the fundamental ideas about the role of charters, but I will take a look at the “smart caps” paper.