I am inclined to agree with this critique of the peer review process. All the major stakeholder groups in k-12 should be represented in all of these review panels. That includes the unions, state and local education agencies, academia and the think tanks, k-12 interest groups, AND school improvement providers.

Why?

First: Stakeholder positions should stand or fall as policy based on the merits of a case made in the open, rather than as a special pleadings by one or more groups to some official the Department in secret.

Second: Every stakeholder group needs to develop some empathy with the legitimate perspectives of every other stakeholder. Those working on a panel with their "opposites" will inevitably take back their understanding of the other groups to their own decisionmaking circles. It did not hurt the cause of world peace for American and Soviet negotiators to respect each other and even become friends.

Third: if we move our de facto policy forum from never-ending cross-town debates in the media over general ideas, to the conference table and real decisions that must be made today, we will move public education forward at a much faster rate.

The Secetary ought to have some kind of public list to draw from for assignment to these review panels. Individuals and institutions on the list should be appointed by the Secretary on some rational basis reduced to writing. Organizations should have the right to petition to be placed on the list and provided with reasons if they are rejected.

The rational basis test is a very low regulatory bar, and the primary purpose of the list is to support public understanding and Congressional oversight.

When the Department appoints a review panel, the rule of should be roughly equal representation across the stakeholder groups, although the Secrearary should be permitted to weight the group in any direction if there is an explanation in writing. This announcement should be placed in the Federal Register, with perhaps seven day's notice, allowing time for comment and protest before the final decision.

Many do not like "regulation," but public education is in a state of great change and flux, and too much of it is negative. I firmly believe that once people are faced with real decisions rather than vaguely implied scenarios, most want to solve the problem in ways that accomodate most interests most of the time. Better review panels are a step in that direction.