The Colorado School Finance Decision

As Justin mentioned last week, the Colorado Supreme Court recently issued its long-awaited school finance adequacy deicision--sort of.  The court, in a 4-3 decision, issued three big rulings in the case--one retrospective and two prospective.  First, it held that school finance adequacy was justiciable, explicitly adopting the justiciability holding it has stated in a prior equity case, notwithstanding the very explicit separation of powers clause in the state constitution, and not considering that adequacy might just be different from equity when it comes to separation of powers. The court held that, retrospecitively, it was error for the intermediate appellate court to order dismissal on separation of powers grounds. 

Second, the court prospectively instructed the trial court on remand to apply the "rational basis" standard of review to its evaluation of the merits of the constitutional claim.  That is, on remand, the court is to evaluate whether the challenged legislation is rationally related to the legislative objective (or duty) of establishing and maintaining a "thorough and efficient" education system.  This is the first time I have seen this standard applied to the initial merits decision in an adequacy case, and it seems like a very easy standard for the state to meet, but I've learned not to assume anything in adequacy-land. 

Third, the court cryptically predicted that, if a violation of the state constitution were to be found on remand, the proper remedial posture for the court to take would be that of remedial abstention.  Essentially, the court explained that it could find a violation, but not direct the legislature to remedy the violation in any specific way.  Instead, the court held that the trial court "must provide the legislature with an appropriate period of time to change the funding system so as to bring the system in compliance with the Colorado Constitution."  Of course, the immediate concern that leaps to mind here is whether any legislative response to a judicial order specifically holding the system unconstitutional (other than a legislative action reducing funding) could ever be held to be irrational or unrelated to the constitutional standard at the remedial stage.  I'm curious as to what sort of remedy the court thinks that this approach will really yield. 

Three of the seven justices dissented together, arguing that the adequacy of education spending is a nonjusticiable political question, agreeing with the minority of states to have considered the issue.  Most surprising to me was the lack of any discussion whatsoever of individual rights to education, even to reject any such notion.  As we watch this case on remand, it will be interesting to see whether justiciability with a highly deferential standard of review and no propect of an injunctive remedy is any better than non jusiticiability, from the plaintiffs' perspective.  Taking the case all the way back up may not be smart (particularly financially), where the state supreme court has already telegraphed a very difficult road to victory and no remedy beyond a declaration in the event of such an unlikely victory.   

Catching Up

Well, ELA was awesome, but I was mostly MIA on the Net. So, it's time to catch up a little. 

First, more stupid zero-tolerance fallout. A girl brought empty gun shells to show science teacher ... and suspended. This is not as bad as some others, but these kind of stories continue weekly these days. At some point the embarrassment factor must kick in. h/t S.M.

Great report from Fordham law on state data system privacy elements and the Washington Post coverage (EdWeek too). I can't disagree with the authors legally, but I do think their natural inclination to protect, protect, protect is the wrong inclination and is going to slow down important research that could improve schools. The solution here is just to let public universities store the data warehouses. We are public institutions within the public trust, but it connects data and researchers more closely. I would like to see more universities getting into this business. 

Bryan Jason Ford (@BryanJasonFord) on the implications of the Supreme Court's denial of cert. in Stancourt v. Worthington City Sch. Dist.. This is pretty good if you are a special ed. person or interested in the Supreme Court approval process. 

Pictures from ELA 09

Here is the Flickr slideshow from the Education Law Association Conference in Louisville. Many of the photos in the red and green ballroom are from the Rose at 20 event that we sponsored. You can click on the photo to get the information on it.

Created with Admarket's flickrSLiDR.

Integrating Web 2.0 Technology into School Law Courses

At the Education Law Association conference this past week, I presented on Integrating Web 2.0 Technology into School Law Courses. Sometimes when I present on this subject I just lay out the tools, but this time I decided to try a different tact.

So, you should know that I borrowed Lawrence Lessig's presentation style, lots of Michael Wesch's data, and Scott McLeod's ideas, amongst others, ... and combined them into this presentation. Also, this is the handout that I gave out in the session on how I use YouTube, wikis, podcasts and blogs in my own teaching. Also, this is the Center for which I am an associate director.

My sources are embedded in this page.

This video is available at blip, and vimeo.

Our Position at UK and a Few More in Law

I wanted to put our new Open Rank position at the University of Kentucky, Department of Education Leadership Studies out there. We are looking for someone in one or more of these areas: leadership in educational technology, teacher leadership, engagement with diverse communities, instructional leadership, professional learning communities, economics of education, or quantitative research methods. Basically, we're pretty open and are just going to take the best person we see on the market, so please send in your vita. We are a growing and exciting faculty looking to reorient educational leadership preparation programs. We have a fabulous new Dean that is very supportive of technology and our department. I'm biased, but it is a damn good position. And, if leadership is not your thing, then check out one of the other 7 positions we have in the college this year.

Plus, as a bonus, here are a few more law oriented jobs on the market so far this year (it is sort of a hot speciality this year - I think that is a good thing for law scholars on the market):

Wayne State - The sometimes forgotten 30,000 student university in Michigan.

George Washington University - This is a higher ed. and very good position. GW is doing a lot of cool stuff, especially online, plus you have access to the power players in Washington.

Plymouth State - Looking for someone in special education law. I hear New Hampshire is beautiful.

University of Toledo - Ohio is a hotbed for educational law profs - and Toledo looks to be joining the group.

Quinnipiac Law School - They would consider a candidate with expertise in special education law.

Southern Connecticut State - I would image there would be plenty of resources there.

Southern Illinois - Edwardsville - This is an urban campus just outside Saint Louis (and where I got my bachelors).

As, always, I'll be putting these on the job board.

ELA Decompression

Well, ELA is over for another year and I thought I would decompress for a minute with some broader thoughts.

1. Everyone seemed to enjoy Louisville. I think it held up quite well for a conference city. I was a little surprised, but happily so. 
2. The General Sessions lacked a little umph this year. Most years I enjoy the generals more than the breakouts at ELA, but this year the opposite was true. Charles Rose was a big name, but dry speaker. Kevin Brady is the conference chair next year, so I'll be sure to send him some names - and you can too if you are an ELA attendee. He should bring some fresh ideas.
3. The breakouts were pretty good this year. I enjoyed several of them and learned a good deal. I do still hold the position that this one was the best session I attended. 
4. I got a wealth of new responsibilities this year. I am the new Chair of the Technology Committee for ELA. Not really sure what that means outside of planning a few webinars, but I'm looking forward to seeing how ELA can expand. I look forward to working with David Doty (@canyonsdave) on these issues. David is also in line to be President of ELA in a couple years, so congratulations (there is not a better person to integrate some tech. in the organization than him - he is a very impressive fellow).
5. Cate Smith, the new executive director, did well in her first conference. I think everyone has a quiet confidence in her. ELA's staff, though, Jody and Judy, were perhaps even more impressive as a lot of planning for this event probably fell to them during the transition. 
6. There were a LOT of students there this year. I was so pleased to see that. It really speaks well for ELA's future. We need to find a way to continue to encourage student participation. Maybe reserving a few additional sessions for students to present or bringing back some student only oriented activities. Anyway, encouraging signs.
7. I'm looking forward to the leadership of Brad Colwell. Brad and I go way back, and he is more than a competent leader. We chatted a little and he even entertained the idea of making the School Law Reporter public. That's the kind of outside the box thinking that will take ELA to new places. Plus, a little SIU representing ... and that always pleases me.
8. Vancouver next year. That could be painful for the organization, but at least it will be beautiful.

In sum, I am excited about the future of ELA. There have been times in the past few years when I questioned whether ELA could reinvent itself for the next generation, but I think the changes of the past year and the events of this conference have answered a lot of those questions for me. Now, though, the challenge is to move past the potential of new leadership toward real, lasting changes. It is not going to be easy, but it can be done and I think there are a core group of people interested in pursuing that objective.

LiveBlogging ELA - No Substitute for Networking ... I'm Talking to You Students

Got to talk to a lot of students at ELA today. Writing "students" and talking to them really gives me a weird feeling because just a year or two ago I was one of them. Now firmly and comfortably on the other side, I can admit that I was feeling a lot of the same feelings and asking myself a lot of the same questions (as in, what in the hell compelled me to come to this embarrassing thing?). 

But, like them, I came. I didn't know anyone (but my professor or two) and for the most part I sat quietly in rooms in the corner hoping that no one would really notice me or that I was not getting in any of these "more important" people's way. I did it. I been there. I've sat in my hotel room (not the conference hotel but some cheap Days Inn down the street) some nights with pizza and the TV instead of going out with all the "cooler" people. I watched conversations happen from a distance wondering if anyone would bother to include me. It's frustrating. It's embarrassing. It's humbling. I could think of about a million other things I would rather do than attend an academic conference as a student.

But, students, you are learning and that learning cannot be replaced in any other fashion. It's one thing to know the name Martha McCarthy or Kern Alexander or Charlie Russo or so many others. You can even see their pictures, right? You can read their papers. But, you can't get a sense of the person until you see them. Not just when they are presenting. But, watch them interact in the hallways. Or chair a session. Or at a different table in the restaurant. Their lives were and are no different than yours. You are on that same trajectory - you just haven't had the time to let the line rise from the axis. And, sure, they are doing more important things than you right now, but it's the "right now" clause in that sentence that really matters, not the "important things" clause.

In the academic world, everyone lives in small communities. I don't care if you are Diane Ravitch, every academic lives in a small world. On the entire planet, there are certainly less than 500 people teaching educational law as a career. And, 500 is not that many, especially because there are only about 200 that are really active members of the community at any given time. And, the really crazy thing, the thing I think it takes some students a while to realize, is that we really, really, really care about that community. Think about it. I'm devoting the best years of my working life to educational law. If you don't think I care about that at a deep, fundamental level, your missing the boat. If you have something to offer that community, even a little thing, I will bend over backwards to help you help us.

So, students, as you are sitting the corner of the presentation rooms don't think I didn't notice you. I did. You being at this conference tells me that you have something to offer. And, sure, I probably didn't read your name tag. I might not know your name yet. But, I saw you. I saw your face. I saw you learning. I saw you caring about this community. I thought to myself that person might have something to offer. And, next year, when I see you again, I am going to remember that I saw you last year. I'll wonder to myself which university your at. What your studying. But, our paths may or may not cross. I still may not know your name, but now I am in interested in you. I'm curious what you have to offer. I may ask a friend about you. And, next year (these things take time so you must be persistent), I'm going to make it a point to introduce myself. Ask if you are finishing up or what your dissertation topic is. You have shown me on multiple occasions that you care about this community - and, now, I want to make you part of it as quickly as possible. We'll help you find jobs. We'll help you get pubs. We'll take you out with us to have drinks at the bar - and, now, you'll have a network connected to the broader network, which is connected to the broader community, which is making an impact in changing our world for the better.

That's how it works. You need to be bold, but more importantly you need to be persistent. Inclusion in the network is earned through sustained humility and random flashes of brilliance. There is simply no substitute for networking of this capacity if you want to join the community. So, while you may be on your flight back wondering what it was worth, rest assured you were noticed and you were networked.  

Liveblogging ELA - Charles Rose's Conservative General Session

Small "c" conservative. But, conservative nevertheless. I would imagine that the General Counsel to any organization (Rose is the General Counsel to the U.S. Department of Education) is probably not your most motivational speaker, but Charles' presentation was, let's say, fact filled. He seems the kind of guy you charge with a huge project, and trust that it will get done. He has a lot of details and impresses me with the depth of his knowledge on education.

But, that said, I am not walking out excited about the federal government's role in education. Rose almost seemed content to keep the status quo and let innovation happen outside the DOE framework with some support through grants and whatnot. Now, constitutionally, you could argue that is the right position for the federal government. But, right now they are sitting on billions of dollars that could fundamentally alter the basic structure of our education system. But, that kind of change takes leadership and part of leadership is inspiration.

Now, you probably wouldn't think a bunch of lawyers really need inspiration, but, honestly, we need more inspiration than others because of our inherently conservative positions (protecting schools usually involves keeping the status quo). The Gen. Counsel of the DOE should be seen as one of our leaders. The potential power inherent in a room full of educational lawyers is enormous - but, Rose made little effort to tap into the large potential pool of resources and change.

Anyway, it was an informative presentation and I look forward to seeing what the US DOE can do with the current President, Secretary and Congress.  

Liveblogging ELA - Stats on School Law Learning

Vivian Hopp Gordon is not getting enough credit for the work she is doing researching school law instruction and learning nationally. She has surveyed school leaders and put those results into some nice presentations. Now she needs to get those into pubs so that I can pass them along to you. 

But, a taste: 

1. She surveyed hundreds of superintendents nationally and had a good response rate. 
2. School leaders rely heavily on their lawyers for legal information, in addition to practitioner magazines and PD. They do not think much of their legal information comes from law courses. In fact, just getting information from the Internet rated higher. 
3. School leaders want positive relationships with their counsel and seem to be relying on them more. 

Anyway, she is doing some good work and I want to recognize it. 

Liveblogging ELA - Cyber Charters

Okay, the best session of the conference so far (for me at least) was 2 presentations on cyber charter schools. It has me so stoked that I sort of want to write my own article about it. But, let me review their work first.

Brady, Umpstead & Eckes presented on the legal issues that might arise from Cyber-Charters. They think there are about 100,000 students in cyber-charters right now in about 25 states with authorizing statutes. For the most part, they identified both a lack of research on these "schools" and a lack of guiding statutes and regulations - but tried to use the existing legal structure to outline what they think should be the legal boundaries. This is an article well worth reading when it comes out. 

Belinda Cambre took a more local view of cyber-charters in New Orleans as they responded to Hurricane Katrina. They are expanding greatly and have 3 more applications under consideration in Louisiana right now. But Belinda too noted the lack of oversight and the lack of clarity regarding how such schools must operate. Synchronous for asynchronous requirements, for instance, are not clarified at all. Nor are how such schools supposed to interact with existing brick and mortar schools and/or homeschooling. 

Bottom line here are that we are legally flying blind on regulation of these cyber-charters. It is sort of a perfect storm of lower regulatory rigor on charters and lack of understanding of virtual - resulting in almost no oversight. Belinda even cited a school in Maine that, for a fee, will read your transcript and grant a diploma that is accepted at many universities. Clearly, we have not considered that kind of interaction of schools in one state granting diplomas to students in another state without the student ever visiting Maine. 

The REALLY CRAZY thing here is that this kind of interaction between schools and students basically blows up the entire model of public education in the United States linked to boundaries. Money is generated by boundaries. Students are assigned to schools based on boundaries. Teachers are certified based on boundaries. But, these boundaries are not necessary anymore and, while tech. folks like Scott M. have been preaching the possibility of this, this cyber-charter concept is the first potentially truly boundary breaking implementation of this. So, the boundaries are falling, but the law has almost no legal structure built to compensate for this change. 

Anyway, before today these concepts to me were mostly abstract. Anyone that understands the Internet could conceptualize such possibilities, but such concepts were mostly left to imaginary implementation. No more. Cyber-charters are pushing ahead and filling the possible space because they are literally almost operating in a legal vacuum.

Just an outstanding presentation, and, I think, a good example of why organizations like ELA are so important. Young researchers like these can get the legal mechanism moving, hopefully soon, to assure that schools are in touch with our democratic structures as expressed in law. Schools simply left to pure market mechanisms are dangerously out of touch with the American system. We can democratically handle this transition in schooling, but we are going to need a whole lot more presentations like this one. Bravo.  

Liveblogging ELA - Support for Pre-Service Law Grows

The last couple of years, several scholars, such as Dave Schimmel in this article, have argued that pre-service teachers need more exposure to legal and ethical issues before they hit the classroom. Well, at this conference I am seeing that support grow amongst representatives of Professional Standards Boards. Representatives of 2 Professional Standards Boards were in the last session I attended and both articulated support for a more formalized ethics and legal effort in pre-service. 

This is a very good sign and I was highly encouraged. While they articulated that they could not mandate classes that College of Education must offer, they would certainly highly support such an offering. Now, Colleges of Education move very slowly, but if Standards Boards are willing to openly express support for a ethical and legal component in pre-service, then I think Colleges of Education will slowly but surely respond. 

So, the task before us is to consolidate this open support for such a component by having these Professional Standards Board personnel publish this desire as openly and widely as possible. 

Liveblogging ELA

Well, the sessions have started, so let the blogging begin. I'll call it liveblogging, but it is sort of contemporaneous-blogging when I steal away a few minutes here and there. In this post, I want to sort of set the scene, report on the Rose session last night and give some initial thoughts.

Setting the Scene:
We are at the Brown Hotel in Louisville, which is a lovely old hotel. This is very much ELA's tradition and I like it. We get to stay in some of the best hotels in the country at low conference rates - which is just a good deal. There seems to be lots of bars and restaurants close, so that's good also. I think attendance is down a little because of the economy, but there are still a lot of people here and a very full slate of presentations. In fact, the conference extended a little this year into Wednesday night and until late Saturday evening.

Report on Rose at 20:
It went really well, and, again, thanks to everyone that helped. Governor Beshear came and spoke about education reforms in Kentucky and the impact of the Rose case. I think meshing the national scholarly audience and the local practitioner audience went as well as could have been expected. I think the practitioners were a little confused by the scholars and the scholars a little confused by the practitioners, but that seems to be the nature of the beast. Either way, I am getting very positive comments, so I am going to take it as a victory and move on. Really, I am just glad its over - it took a lot of my time and energy lately.

Initial Thoughts:
I think the thing I am excited about the most so far is the new make-up of the leadership of ELA. I really like Cate Smith as the new director. Brad Colwell will be a good President and I like the new incoming Board members. I am especially happy for Susan Bon from GMU and Tom Hutton who just left NSBA. I think they both bring a lot of good ideas to the table. I am excited to see what comes of that new energy.

Catching Up With Cases

Also, thanks to the Rose timedrain, I have been lax in putting out some important cases that have come down lately. So, let's get them out. 

First, last Friday Pontiac v. Spellings en banc came out of the 6th Circuit. Mark's got the details. It came down in a split decision, meaning the dismissal was affirmed. But, WOW, how close was that? We came 1 6th Circuit judge short of a Supreme Court case directly on NCLB - who knows, with the split decision, maybe the Supreme Court will think about taking it (although I doubt it because they probably collectively like the current result - although surely Scalia and Thomas will push for it). Anyway, this is an important case and I look forward to getting more details out about it soon. Gina, who I discussed this case with earlier in Edjurist TV, will be at ELA and we are planning to discuss the outcome. 

Also, the Colorado Supreme Court saved a school finance suit and sent it to trial in Lobato v. State. Here are some details and here is a analysis from Joshua Dunn at Education Next. This is not a victory for the plaintiff's, but it at least signals that the Supreme Court is interested in having this case heard on the merits. So, we'll see where that goes. 

ELA Starts Today

Lost for me in all the Rose hubub, has really been the ELA conference, which starts today in Louisville. Scott, Neal and I are all going to be presenting (Scott and Neal on important things ... me, not so much). I love ELA because everything interests me. Other conferences that I go to typically only about 1/2 the program interests me (believe it or not, there are just some things in education that bore me). This year, as always, the sessions look fantastic and I am especially looking forward to hearing Charles Rose, the General Counsel to the U.S. DOE, talk on ARRA and Race to the Top issues. 

Anyway, if you are planning to be there, be sure to say hi. If you are not, I'll be blogging the conference as always and bringing you as much good information as I can. I'll also post Twitter updates with the hashtag #ELA09 and if any of you also tweet, put that hashtag in your post and we can have a little miniconversation on the backchannel. 

Rose at 20 - Invite and Thank You's

I want to formally invite all my readers to come to Rose at 20: The Past and Future of School Finance Litigation (don't worry it's free!). Next Wednesday, we are having a little get together in the evening at the Brown Hotel in Louisville, KY to commemorate the 20th Anniversary of the Rose v. Council for Better Education lawsuit that lead to the overhaul of the Kentucky school finance system in the Kentucky Education Reform Act. The event is being held in conjunction with the annual meeting of the Education Law Association. Please click on either of the images for the full flyer.

Click for BrochureThe local participants include the Governor of Kentucky, Steve Beshear, the President of the University of Kentucky, Lee Todd, the Dean of the UK College of Education Mary John O'Hair, the Dean of the College of Law, David Brennen, Judge Ray Corns, and Debra Dawahare, who represented the vicitorious plaintiffs. Debra still works at Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs, who are also sponsoring the event - and, I can't thank them enough for their support! 

As part of the evening as well will be a Kentucky Law Journal Symposium on the impact of the Rose case nationally and the future of school finance litigation. Kern Alexander will moderate the symposium in which Craig Wood, Bill Thro, and William Koski will participate and publish papers in a special issue of the Kentucky Law Journal (look for it next Spring and I'll post when it comes out). 

It will be an absolutely lovely evening of remembrance and I want to thank Scott Bauries, my blogging partner here, for helping to coordinate the event from the law school side. I also want to think Neal Hutchens for being willing to come on board with this event, Dana Daughtee for editing the special issue of KLJ, and Lesley Stout for making KLJ a part of this. I also want to thank the staffs of the two Colleges including Mary Ann Vimont, Judy Griffin, Brad Duncan, and the folks at UK PR. I also want to thank Richard Day of EKU, Wayne Young of KASA and everyone else that helped me gather information about the case.

Also, I want to tell my readers how pleased I was to work with the Education Law Association and how comforting I found Cate Smith's leadership. I think that organization will be in good hands moving forward and if you are a reader of this blog, I do encourage you to consider membership in that organization (and tell them I sent you because I get a discount!).

But, seriously, a lot of people had to work together to pull off an event like this and I was especially pleased with how everything came together.

So, please come out and have a lovely evening.

Do We Need A Student Rights Scorecard?

Such scorecards seem to be effective. On the front page of Kentucky.com right now is a story on the fact that Kentucky got a D in children's rights (non-educational rights, that is). First Star and the Children's Advocacy Institute of USD Law gave out grades to each state and sent them to newspapers ... and ... front page, baby!

As far as I know, we don't really have anything similar for student educational rights. Maybe we should? Certainly we saw how effective the bullying scorecard was.

AASA Legislative Update on YouTube

Slowly, but ever so surely, the upper echelon of education is wading into Web 2.0 - and, rest assured I'll be here to report what I find that's related to educational law. It's about time, I say. It's nice that these people are finally talking to me in a format that I can understand. 

Today, AASA's Legislative Update by Bruce Hunter, their chief policy advocate, at the AASA YouTube channel. The latest episode talks ESEA, Common Core, and the impact of the health care legislation on kids and schools. Great stuff. 

Enhanced Attorney's Fees in Civil Rights Cases & NSBA's Public Stance

Mark Walsh, doing his usual outstanding job, had a great post today on the Supreme Court oral argument in a case involving enhanced attorney's fees. Mark does such a great job with the facts and the Justice's positions at oral argument, I won't repeat them here. The case is Perdue v. Kenny and, broadly, civil rights lawyers were awarded an extra 4 million in "enhanced fees" (on top of the 6 million in typically permissible fees) for doing such an outstanding job on a foster system case against the Georgia Department of Human Resources. And, I'll just tell you now I don't like that award either and judging from Mark's reporting, I sort of expect it to be struck down. Fine.

What does concern me, though, is NSBA's amicus brief supporting the state of Georgia. In short, I think it was a little distasteful on their part. They make three principal arguments: (1) enhanced fees hurt students by taking money away, (2) enhanced fees reduce the likelihood of settlements, and (3) enhanced fees will discourage voluntary changes on the part of schools. None of their arguments are that bad, but neither are their arguments that good. I can feel, a little, NSBA stretching to make their case in the brief (especially the quasi-complaining about tight budgets). In fact, I don't think the arguments were good enough for NSBA to get involved in this.

Civil rights are a hot political issue and it is one you don't want to be on the other side of unless there is a really good reason. At least in my opinion, there wasn't one in this case. For instance, next week at ELA I am helping to coordinate a remembrance of the Rose v. Council for Better Education school finance case out of Kentucky where lawyers for school districts substantially advanced civil rights for students in Kentucky. In that case, one could make a good argument that the lawyers for the school board should have received "enhanced fees" for the educational benefit they brought to poor, rural Kentucky children. So, NSBA's members have been on the other side of this equation in the past for one. 

But, generally, on occassion I question how far NSBA's attorneys are willing to go. And, this is one of those occassions. Don't get me wrong, I love the work that NSBA does and it frequently directly benefits me, and they should absolutely be outstanding advocates for their members. But, sometimes discretion is the better part of valor and it is good to not be seen as openly trying to diminish student and civil rights. Even though I agree with them that enhanced fees are probably not a good idea, making such a public statement in that forum I think was a little distasteful.

The Elephant and the Dragon ... A Review

This weekend I managed to squeeze in (between the celebrations of my sister being named homecoming queen! Yeah!) another of Dr. McLeod's recommendations. 

Today: The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What it Means for All of Us, Robyn Meredith, 2008, $10.85 on Amazon (but buy through CASTLE as our non-profit gets a little of the proceeds). Here's the book's website. 

The Bad:

1. Capitalist Ideology. At times, it's a little over-the-top and feels like it was written by a wall-street tycoon. This is not too annoying, but it is certainly noticeable at times (yes, i know I am picky as in the last one I complained about the socialism).   
2. A little heavy on history. I think most of it is relevant, but if you are not concerning about mid-twentieth century Indian and Chinese history you might want to skip the first few chapters. The part about eating kids was sort of especially gruesome. 
3. Slightly repetitious. This is something that many books in this genre suffer from, but I did notice it a few times in this one as well. 
4. Could have a few more citations, but that is probably just the scholar in me complaining. 

The Good: 

1. Well researched. You can clearly tell that the author, despite her young age, has gone to great lengths to gather facts and details. I appreciated that. I am sure it is still surface-level for geopolitical scholars, but for your average reader it contains a lot of great information. 
2. Not built to scare. A lot of books in this genre are built to scare people. For instance, even in The World is Flat I came away with a sense that Friedman thought scaring people might be effective. This book doesn't have any of that fear-mongering element. 
3. Not a lot of opinion. The author did a good job sticking to the facts and using facts to make points, as opposed to having opinions and then finding facts to support them. I thought this was a better approach than I have seen in a lot of books in the genre. 
4. Respectful. Because of the lack of opinion, there was little demonizing of either Indians, Chinese or Americans (or for that matter anyone else). 

Points Worth Mentioning: 

1. Education is America's immediate answer. Obviously I am going to love this point, but it was as clear as a church bell on a still Sunday morning. Like Fareed Zakaria, Meredith makes the point that education is one of America's last great advantages (heck, China closed all of its universities in the past century - some of since been reopened). And that education can spur innovation and economic activity into the next century. 
2. Outsourcing is real, but limited. Things that are easily outsourced ... have already been outsourced. So while we did lose the entire toy industry, most of the garment industry, most of the tech. manufacturing industry and many, many others (including my wife's old accounting job to India), many of the remaining jobs today will continue to remain in the United States because they are not as easily outsourced.
3. America is a net beneficiary from both outsourcing and China and India's increased relevance. Leaving geopolitics aside, just economically we benefit in two ways: (1) we save lots of money at Walmart as prices are deflated because of the cheap manufacturing costs; and (2) our 401k's and portfolios make money because American companies have profited substantially from the influx of cheap labor and new markets. So, while we complain about losing jobs, the vast majority of us are seeing real benefits from globalization. 
4. India and China are not Peers (yet). While there are billions of people and cities sprawling into the skyline and the countryside, neither China nor India are yet America's or Europe's peers. They are behind in almost every measure, have enormous societal welfare issues, spend less on almost everything, have an absurdly low standard of living, are still heavily illiterate, etc. Their sheer purchasing and production power because of the numbers makes them especially worth keeping an eye on, but they are no where near the American way of life (for better or worse). 
5. Economies Intertwined. But, while they are still playing catch-up and will be for many more decades, their economic impact on the global economy makes them impossible to ignore. It is not just that China holds a ton of dollars, but American companies will suffer enormously if China or India's economies stumble - and that will affect all of us by driving down the market, home prices, raising inflation, etc. They are part of our economy now (for better or worse). 
6. Education is our competitive advantage. There are lots more points, but you get the gist. However, I wanted to again return to education. Public schooling was our great competitive advantage during the post-War industrial build and it can be our great competitive advantage during the post information revolution reorganization. But, our current system was built for the industrial era, not the information era - and for education to again be our great competitive advantage, we have to adapt our schools.  

Recommendation: I loved this book. It was fabulous and I enjoyed every minute of it. It was well written, readable, fact-filled, and intelligent. It is probably a necessary read for most professors and a highly recommended read for most school administrators. Get it and enjoy it. 

In a Tight Market Year, A Few Jobs Available

It is a tight market for educational leadership positions nationwide, as it is in law and other areas. So, academic jobs will be a little scarce this year. But, I wanted to pass along a few that have come out already with a focus on law.

University of Missouri - I like lots of people there. If I wasnt' happy at UK, I would apply to this one.

University of Oklahoma - Where our new Dean just came from and has some cool infrastructure. Also, chance to work with and learn under Lawrence Rossow.

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee -A good school of education in a reform city. Lots of research opportunities.

University of Wyoming - A small but probably nimble department. I think this position would actually be fun with its heavily rural focus.

Boise State - This is beyond my knowledge, but they do have a great football team that plays on blue turf.

St. Cloud State - Close to Minneapolis and probably could serve a large market because of their R-I focus.

Anyway, hopefully that will help your academic job search along a little. You can always check out this page for more information on that. If you have an academic position related to education law, please let me know for priority posting.