"In Connecticut, my understanding, although I haven't seen the actual litigation, is that they want to measure every other year and not provide annual assessment as is required in the statute"
About this Quote
Spellings is doing two things at once here: asserting authority and disclaiming liability. The sentence opens with “my understanding,” then quickly adds the belt-and-suspenders caveat “although I haven’t seen the actual litigation.” That’s not verbal clutter; it’s a deliberate posture. She signals she’s informed enough to weigh in, but insulated enough to dodge a gotcha if the court record cuts against her. In public administration, that’s a common high-wire act: speak with force, leave yourself an escape hatch.
The concrete target is Connecticut’s desire “to measure every other year” rather than provide “annual assessment,” framed as a simple compliance issue: the statute “requires” it. By invoking the statute, Spellings shifts the dispute from policy preference to legal obligation. The subtext is a warning: this isn’t a debate about testing fatigue or administrative burden; it’s a question of whether a state is drifting out of federal alignment. The phrasing makes the state’s position sound almost casual - “they want to” - while the federal requirement is cast as fixed and impersonal.
Context matters: this is the language of the No Child Left Behind era, when annual testing was both the engine of accountability and the lightning rod for backlash. Spellings doesn’t litigate the merits because she doesn’t need to. She’s drawing a bright line around enforcement, using bureaucratic restraint as rhetorical leverage. The quiet threat sits between the commas: comply, or risk consequences without her ever having to say the word “penalty.”
The concrete target is Connecticut’s desire “to measure every other year” rather than provide “annual assessment,” framed as a simple compliance issue: the statute “requires” it. By invoking the statute, Spellings shifts the dispute from policy preference to legal obligation. The subtext is a warning: this isn’t a debate about testing fatigue or administrative burden; it’s a question of whether a state is drifting out of federal alignment. The phrasing makes the state’s position sound almost casual - “they want to” - while the federal requirement is cast as fixed and impersonal.
Context matters: this is the language of the No Child Left Behind era, when annual testing was both the engine of accountability and the lightning rod for backlash. Spellings doesn’t litigate the merits because she doesn’t need to. She’s drawing a bright line around enforcement, using bureaucratic restraint as rhetorical leverage. The quiet threat sits between the commas: comply, or risk consequences without her ever having to say the word “penalty.”
Quote Details
| Topic | Teaching |
|---|
More Quotes by Margaret
Add to List
