Arne Duncan, Chicago Public Schools Superintendent, will be put forward by Obama as Secretary of Education - the head of the US Department of Education. The Washington Post summed him up like this: "In seven years as chief executive of the Chicago school system, Arne Duncan earned a reputation as a leader who pushed for strong measures to improve schools but also reached out to the teachers union and the community." Meh.

On-the-ground Chicago colleagues agree with the both-sides description. Duncan seems less than visionary but like Obama himself: respectful reformer. He partners with teachers, which appeals to the old guard, while his support for merit pay, charter schools, and traditional accountability measures appeal to the standards-based reform folks who brought us NCLB and increased stakes on state tests. He's known to be approachable, friendly, and nice, which could be as political as it is behavioral.

Some have let Duncan off the hook for making bigger changes in Chicago Public Schools (CPS) since he worked under the stringent rule of Mayor Daley, known for maintaining control over his executive team. Others fault him for not being a teacher himself and so lacking necessary knowledge about how learning happens and what teaching students at the bottom of a bureaucracy requires.

Regarding the arts, we don't know exactly what to expect from Duncan. Given his willingness to placate advocates, a vocal arts ed advocacy effort might be great for sequential, sustained arts education in P-12 environments. His penchant for charter schools, traditional accountability measures, and merit pay could go either way. Obama spoke, during the campaign, about improving accountability measures in NCLB. Dems and Republicans have given up much of their support for NCLB. The teacher unions seem to have improved their game against NCLB.

Duncan did hire a CEO of Arts Education for CPS, but locals say the impact of that office hasn't been felt. Some question whether the hiring was meant to only placate the arts ed advocates. Some question what will happen to that office when its contract is up. Ultimately, it's a good decision that fell flat when no other arts-positive decisions were made by Duncan to support it.

Change, indeed. With NCLB up for reauthorization as soon as the economy and foreign disasters don't seem so horrendous, with a middle-of-the-road yet decisive Sec of Ed, with a president who's about evolutionary change, we're promised NCLB 2.0 will be different. A little information tells us Duncan ignored the arts but didn't eschew them.

Still, I'm a little worried. Check out this exchange on an Ed Week Live Chat about the impact Arne Duncan will have, when Connecticut's arts ed staffer asked a question.

"Do Arne Duncan's track record and public statements suggest that he will work to ensure that all children -- not just children in suburban schools -- receive a balanced education that includes sequential instruction in art and music, physical education, and other core non-tested subjects, rather than a narrow test-preparation curriculum?

Frederick Hess: If anything, Duncan's entire career in public education has been focused on helping improving schooling for students in the urban core. Whether one reads those efforts as focused on ensuring mastery of essential skills or as advancing a "balanced education" is a judgment call. But most observers, whatever else they might think of this or that particular of Duncan's tenure, would agree that he is an ardent champion of providing quality schools for inner-city children.

(Hess is director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute and faculty associate at Harvard's Education Policy and Governance program.)

In 100 words, Hess demeaned the idea of a balanced education by putting it in quotes and pitting it against "mastery of essential skills." Who cares about the arts? Kids can't read! Arts are not important compared to math. Then he shifted the question completely, ensuring us of Duncan's focus on quality, which we're left to assume, is nothing so frivolous as a balanced education.

Just to be clear: what is manure about Hess's diminishing of the arts and other subjects is the assumed and very false opposition of mastery of essential skills and balanced education. These two successes--which we owe our children--are simultaneously possible. They can, do, and are happening in schools with high-poverty, EPL dominance, and other "risk factors."

So if this false opposition is how Duncan sees it, arts ed advocates are about to be called on to re-do the last 10 years. Dust off your Critical Links and Champions of Change, folks! Its time to revisit Why the arts?

But I can't find any info on why Hess should answer that question at all. If anyone knows why Hess could or should speak for Duncan, let us know. It'll make the difference in my sleeping through the night or not.