New News About the CEP Report
The story surrounding the CEP report on NCLB keeps inching forward -- if you're interested -- with tidbits from Jack Jennings, head of the CEP, and the PR company that was in charge of rolling out the report.
UPDATE: EdWeek takes a shot at the story -- and lets a conservative critic take a shot at Jennings.
READ MORE>>
Some of the latest developments:
First, Shep Ranbom's CommunicationWorks, the outfit that handled the CEP report rollout (and publicity for just about everyone in education), tells me that no one at the firm was in touch with Dillon before the release date, and that I should talk to CEP about how Dillon got his hands on it ahead of time.
Then, CEP honcho Jack Jennings responded late this afternoon that the Times editorial this weekend got the report right and that he wants to "concentrate on the substance" of the report rather than on how it came out or how it's been interpreted. I'm not sure that's what's best -- or whether it'll hold -- but I appreciate the response.
Finally, overeager Andy Rotherham thinks I claimed to have unearthed a week-old press release and says I'm being too easy on CEP, to which I respond that only the most sleep-deprived reading of my post (What the CEP Really Meant To Say About NCLB) would lead him to think I thought the release was new to anyone but me.
What was news was that the NYT might have gotten ahold of the CEP findings ahead of time and the lack of any response from CEP -- which Andy passes along even as he's saying there's nothing new to see.
As to the document itself, this isn't a particularly unbalanced release. I don't know how Jennings was spinning the report in press interviews or at the event -- does anyone? -- and I've got my own issues with the scope of the report and about how it got leaked (Is This What Joyce Paid For?). But the press release itself -- headline, first graf, and lead quote -- each includes both positive and negative perceptions of NCLB implementation, and to my reading there's more good news about NCLB there than bad.
UPDATE: As if oblivious to all the controversy surrounding how the story has been played, EdWeek stunningly headlines the curriculum narrowing angle (NCLB Leads to Cuts for Some Subjects), plays it pretty even through the middle innings, and then closes with -- yikes -- comments questioning Jenning's neutrality on NCLB from a conservative critic who's writing what can probably be expected to be a critical profile of Jennings in an upcoming EdNext.
UPDATE: EdWeek takes a shot at the story -- and lets a conservative critic take a shot at Jennings.
READ MORE>>
Some of the latest developments:
First, Shep Ranbom's CommunicationWorks, the outfit that handled the CEP report rollout (and publicity for just about everyone in education), tells me that no one at the firm was in touch with Dillon before the release date, and that I should talk to CEP about how Dillon got his hands on it ahead of time.
Then, CEP honcho Jack Jennings responded late this afternoon that the Times editorial this weekend got the report right and that he wants to "concentrate on the substance" of the report rather than on how it came out or how it's been interpreted. I'm not sure that's what's best -- or whether it'll hold -- but I appreciate the response.
Finally, overeager Andy Rotherham thinks I claimed to have unearthed a week-old press release and says I'm being too easy on CEP, to which I respond that only the most sleep-deprived reading of my post (What the CEP Really Meant To Say About NCLB) would lead him to think I thought the release was new to anyone but me.
What was news was that the NYT might have gotten ahold of the CEP findings ahead of time and the lack of any response from CEP -- which Andy passes along even as he's saying there's nothing new to see.
As to the document itself, this isn't a particularly unbalanced release. I don't know how Jennings was spinning the report in press interviews or at the event -- does anyone? -- and I've got my own issues with the scope of the report and about how it got leaked (Is This What Joyce Paid For?). But the press release itself -- headline, first graf, and lead quote -- each includes both positive and negative perceptions of NCLB implementation, and to my reading there's more good news about NCLB there than bad.
UPDATE: As if oblivious to all the controversy surrounding how the story has been played, EdWeek stunningly headlines the curriculum narrowing angle (NCLB Leads to Cuts for Some Subjects), plays it pretty even through the middle innings, and then closes with -- yikes -- comments questioning Jenning's neutrality on NCLB from a conservative critic who's writing what can probably be expected to be a critical profile of Jennings in an upcoming EdNext.
posted by Alexander Russo at 4/03/2006 07:05:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home