Thanks EdWeek, for noticing the SOS convention. But why all the focus on divisions or on Bob George's day job, which the article calls a "point of contention"? It isn't? Bob, like most of SOS' leadership, was elected by a vote of the members. What company volunteers work for isn't an issue for EdWeek to gossip about. Shame on them.
Do they do this with other reform groups? If you want to talk about who works for who, let's take another look at who underwrites specific EdWeek articles -- Gates, Broad, other power philanthropists. Is this ethical journalism?
Sawchuck shares the bi-line but this is really just a rehash of Heitin's earlier piece. It even lifts quotes from old posts. Still comparing turnout between last year's march and the convention? Why? What's the point? Also, that old quote about Deb Meier's hesitance on fund raising is way outdated. Deb now serves on the SOS Steering Committee and has been actively raising support for the young organization.
Yes, thanks for noticing.