information and get it out there and learn from them. >> then at 7:00 p.m. on "oral histories," to continue our series on photojournalists with an interview. >> end up following a woman named sandy herman who ended up on the front page of "the post," yelling at these freshman who were lined up against the call with their chins stuck there like this. i'm convinced that story helped -- >> american history tv, all weekend, every weekend, only on c-span3. next, education secretary betsy devos discusses education policy, including school choice and alternative education options. after her remarks at the kennedy

school of government at harvard university, secretary devos sits down with professor paul peterson and takes questions from the audience. [ applause ] >> good evening, everyone. i'm the academic dean of the harvard kennedy school. tonight, we are joined by a professor and a very special guest to explore the critical question of how to improve our education system. in particular, should we address the challenges of our education system by shifting resources from school districts to parents by giving them tax dollars to choose whether to send their children to public schools, charter schools, or private? this is the latest chapter in a debate that's been going on for

some time. milton friedman developed the idea of choice in his 1955 essay "the role of government in education." policymakers, including our guests here tonight, developed these programs into experiments in the '80s and '90s. given that this debate has been going on for more than 06 years, why did 1900 people sign the facebook page to protest tonight's event? the controversy surrounding this forum reflects large and profound divisions in american politics and society today. this country is more divided now than it's been in many decades. many people on all sides feel fearful and deeply threatened. for educators, this is an especially sad moment, because it's made many people stop listening to each other. in this time of division, what we need most is to listen and understand one another instead of circling the wagons into our

own echo chamber. the kennedy school is all about understanding differences and building bridges, but creating an inclusive space is now difficult because many people from all sides would rather shut each other down rather than hear what one another are saying. i'm sure many people followed the controversy over colin kaepernick and the others who have been kneeling during the playing of the national anthem. what are they saying? from the farms of virginia to the halls of philadelphia to the fields at gettysburg the idea that we are all created equal is the deepest of american aspirations. these americans in silently kneeling remind our fellow citizens how we're all falling short of that ideal because some of us are imprisoned or killed at hutch meijer rates than others. yet many view their very speech as un-american. many people on the left side of the political spectrum are also

feeling fear and threats that prevents them from listening to other views. we have seen students and activists shut down conservative speakers at several college campuses over the past year. shutting people down is contrary to the values of this space in the harvard kennedy school. here we encourage the exchange of ideas and different viewpoints. even if we do not agree especially if we do not agree it is important to hear and allow others in attendance to listen and speak as well. the practice of our forum and ask these principals by giving speaker an opportunity to articulate their views and insisting they take questions from you, the audience. people will have an opportunity to ask questions in the last portion of tonight's event. i will ask the harvard university police to escort from the forum anyone who prevents others from speaking by disrupting this event.

our practice of dialogue is critical. when you prevent others from speak or hearing disagreeable views or when you refuse to be challenged it means you have so sure that you're right and so sure they are wrong that you have nothing to learn from them, but on an issue like school choice how can anyone be so sure of themselves? when we look back years from now we might see school choice as, the south side of chicago or detroit michigan. it enables them to escape failing schools and seize the opportunity for a better life. school choice might enable educators to the widest array of opportunities for students. on the other hand we may come to see that school choice became a

way to exploit uninformed parents that sent children to private schools while enriching the operators of those schools. still worse, we may come to see a misguided effort to abandon s the dreams of jefferson for a system of common schools in which americans from all backgrounds learn how to be citizens of a successful republic together. i do not presume to know how the future will judge us on this question or so many others. i do think that looking at the evidence there help us all reach a better future. evidence about what kinds of public and pry strike that school arrangements were. he is senior editor. paul peterson is director of education and governor. he is a senior editor of

education next, a great journal of education policies. he is a member of the american academy of arts and sciences. and the national academy of education. he's written many, many books, including "saving schools" to virtual learning, school politics, chicago style, and city limits, which is a study of urban politics and policies. elizabeth devos is the 11th secretary of education of the united states. she's been involved in politics and education policy for more than 30 years in her home state of michigan and nationwide. in an interview she recounted how she first got engaged with education issues in a visit to pot else's house christian school in grand rapids. there she saw a school that managed to create a safe, warm, and rich educational learning environment for many low-income children. she started helping individual

students with tuition, then supporting the school itself, which her family still does through their philanthropy. this grew into a larger effort to provide a scholarship fund. and then she pursued this commitment to choice in the public policy domain, working to pass michigan's first charter school law in 1993. then, as now, she seeks to transform education systems to provide such choices for parents and students broadly. her advocacy has drawn fierce criticism. "the new york times" wrote it's hard to find anyone more passionate about the idea of steering public dollars away from public schools than betsy devos. her senate confirmation vote to become education secretary could not have been closer. it was split 50/50 with vice president pence breaking the tie. so we have a lot to talk about and controversial issues. i'll be returning later to moderate the question and answer period.

for now please welcome paul peterson and secretary elizabeth devos. [ applause ] >> thank you for the kind introduction and thank you for the opportunity to be here at the kennedy school. truly one of the gems of post secondary education. professon peterson, i look forward to our conversation, but i first want to recognize the significance and influential contribution to the advancement of school choice you've made over the years. through both the program on education policy and governance here at harvard and education next, few scholars have left such indelible fingerprints on this critical conversation. thank you for continuing to facilitatitate that dialogue.

and a special thanks to the president for her decade of leadership at one of america's finest institutes of higher learning. i wish her nothing but the best. here in cambridge, there are many great people working on many great ideas to better the lives of all americans and people across the globe. that's been the case for a very long time. your graduates have gone on to shape culture and society, create new businesses and new technologies to help cure diseases and lead governments at all levels around the globe. it's a privilege to be here at the kennedy school. i don't want to talk about my edge, but president john f. kennedy is the first president i can remember. i do know that president kennedy understood the proper role of the states, and once warned that "every time we try to lift a

problem from our own shoulders and shift that problem to the hands of the government, we are sacrificing the liberties of our people." president kennedy had it right then. and despite the fact that we have all too often disregarded his observations, he's still right today. one of the many pernicious effects of the growth of government is people worry less and less about each other. thinking their worries are now in the hands of so-called experts in washington. there's perhaps no better example than our current education system. many inside and outside of government insist the government system is best equipped to educate children. in that fantasy scenario, the state replaces the family. the schoolhouse becomes a home, a and the child becomes a constituent. not too long ago, the american federation for teachers tweeted at me. the union wrote "betsy devos says public should invest in

individual students." no, we should invest in a system of great public schools for all kids. the union bosses made it clear, they care more about a system created in the 1800s than they do about students. their focus is on school buildings, instead of school kids. isn't education supposed to be about kids? education is an investment in individual students. that's why funding and focus should follow the student, not the other way around. i've been on the job now for some time. and i came into office with a core belief. it is the inalienable right and responsibility of parents to best choose the learning environment that meets their child's needs. i'm more convinced of that today. this symposium rightly squs us

to consider the future of school choice. but the current reality is, the vast majority of futures in america today are less to chance, not to choice. the world got to see what many of us already knew in the film "waiting for superman." parents who want to free their child from a failing school are sometimes allowed by the system to enter a lottery for only a few seats in a different school. even today, thousands of children compete for a limited number of openings. as if children were part of a bingo game. i suggest that any sycophant of the system or skeptic of choice visit one of these lotteries. watch the faces of these parents, many of whom are struggling to get by every day. watch their faces hidden in their hands or covered in tears

because they didn't win new future for their son or daughter. this scene is heart wrenching, and it's down right disgraceful. children's futures aren't to be gambled. there are too many kids trapped in a school that doesn't meet their needs. there are too many parents who are denied the fundamental right to decide the best way to educate their child. it's what makes me so passionate about change thing paradigm once and for all. now, i've been called the school choice secretary by some. i think it's meant as an insult. but i wear it as a badge of honor. so let's talk for a moment about what choice really is. school choice. defenders of the system would have you believe it means vouchlers, right? and charter schools, private schools or maybe even religious schools. it means taking money from public schools.

no accountability, no standard, the wild west, the market run amok. they've done a mighty fine job setting the scene for that house of horrors in the press. they did so by trying to paint an indelible line, forcing a false dichotomy. if you support giving parents any options, any say, you must therefore be dopposed to public schools, public schoolteachers and public school students. yet nothing could be further from the truth. think about who. yes, who. probably a good time to think about it since it's just about dinnertime. like education, we all need food to grow and thrive. but we don't all want or need the exact same thing at the exact same time. what tastes good to me may not taste good to you. what's working for me right now

might not work a few years from now. accordingly, we choose how to get -- best get the food that meets our unique needs. think about how you eat. you could visit a grocery store or a convenience store to buy food and cook at home. or you could visit a restaurant. maybe a sit-down place or a fast food joint. maybe a hybrid that combines the best of both. here at the department of education, there aren't many restaurants. but you know what? food trucks started lining the streets to provide options. some are better than others. and some are even local restaurants that have added food trucks to their businesses to better feet themeet their custo needs. if you visit a food truck instead of a restaurant, do you hate restaurants? are you trying to put grocery stores out of business? no. you are simply making the right

choice for you based on your individual needs at the time. just as in how you eat, education is not a binary choice. being for equal access and opportunity, being for choice is not being against anything. i'm not for or against any one type, one brand or one breed of school choice. i'm not for any type of school over another. but the definitions we have traditionally worked from have become tools that divide us. isn't the public made up of students and parents? isn't public money really their money? taxpayer money? and doesn't every school aim to serve a public good? a school that prepares its students to lead successful lives is a benefit to all of us. the definition of public

education should be to educate the public. that's why we should fight less about the word that comes before school. i suspect all of you here at harvard applied to schools and will take your education and continue to the public good. when you chose to attend harvard, did anyone suggest you were against public universities? no, you sat down and figured out the best fit for you. you compared options and made an informed decision. no one seems to criticize that choice. no one thinks choice in higher education is wrong. so why is it wrong in elementary, middle, or high school? instead of dividing the public when it comes to education, the focus should be on the end, not the means. we should be for students, all

students. and that's why i'm for parents having access to the learning environment that's the right fit for their child. i believe in students, and i trust parents. so with that understanding of choice, what does the future look like? i'm not a creature of washington, so i'm not afraid to say this. we do not know what the future of school choice looks like. and that's not only something with which i'm okay. it's something i celebrate and embrace. what this looks like for a famtly in wyoming will be different than a family in indiana decides.

states are different, families are dynamic, and children are uniq unique. each should be free to pursue different avenues that lead each child to his or her fullest future. that's why i whole heartedly believe the future of choice does not begin with a new federal mandate from washington. that might sound counterintuitive to some. but after eight months in washington, and three decades working in space, i know that washington tries to mandate choice. all we'll end up with is a mountain of mediocrity, a surge of spending and a bloat of bureaucracy to go along with it. but washington does have an important supporting role to play in the future of choice. we can amplify the voices of those who only want better for their kids. we can assist states who are working to further empower parents and urge those who

haven't. we don't need a new federal program to administer. washington, and in particular, the u.s. department of education, just needs to get out of the way. that's because the real future of choice, it's their futures to shape and it's already under way today. i recently went on a tour of the heartland to visit the teachers, parents and students shaping their own futures. i wanted to highlight and learn from innovative educators breaking free of the standard mold to better meet the needs of their students. what i saw was encouraging. traditional public schools, charter schools, private schools, parochial schools, home schools, even a high school at a zoo. they were all different. all with unique approaches. but what they all had in common was just that, a deliberate focus on serving their students.

and students and parents chose them. what worked in those schools for those students might not work everywhere. and it might not work for you. but it worked for them. and that is the future of school choice. there was another common characteristic these schools shared. they all embraced doing right by the students without anyone in washington giving them a permission slip to do so. more important ly, without anyoe in washington telling them no. that is also the future of choice. just as no one school is the right fit for every student, there is no one size fits all from washington, d.c. when it comes to education. the future of choice lies in the states. in places that have been at the forefront of this effort for several years. like arizona, florida, indiana,

wisconsin, and in places that are just now entering the arena. like arkansas, mississippi, montana, and even where some might have thought unthinkable, illinois. today, 26 states and washington, d.c. offer private school choice programs that allow more parents to access more educational options to serve their kid's needs. while there are similarities, no two are the same. different states, different needs, different students, different solutions. that's the future of choice. it's important for all of us to remember that we're not just talking about abstract theory or a wild social experiment here. this is about putting people, parents and students, above policies and politics. i've seen the tremendous impact of empowering parents and the corresponding impact on students

up close and in person. i saw it again on my school tour. i heard it directly from the students, the parents, teachers and administrators that i had the privilege to meet. one student at a private high school, put it quite bluntly. at kca, i feel like i fit in. i feel like i belong. i didn't have that at my other school. every student in america deserves a shot to experience that same thing. and have no doubt, this isn't just about feelings. it's also about learning and achievement. it's about putting students at the center of everything we do. and time and time again, studies have shown that more options yield better results for all students. just yesterday, a new study was released that looked at the tax

credit scholarship program that provides low income parents the opportunity to send their students to the school of their choice. florida's program was one of the first in the nation, and today serves more than 100,000 students across the state. while previous studies have shown increased achievement for scholarship recipients, this study found a significantly increased college attendance rate. further, this study demonstrated the longer a student participated in the choice program, the better their long-term educational outcome. the data are encouraging. but i didn't need another research paper to know the program works. i've seen living proof. danesha failed third grade twice, on the path to dropping out just like her mother and brother had before her. thankfully, her god mother found this scholarship program and a

small school that fit her needs. she told me that nearly a we can to ten days into attending that school, she knew she had found a fit and she was on herrer way to thriving. she graduated high school, the first in her family to do so. graduated college, and just this may, earned her masters degree. danesha is living proof that choice works. and there are many more like her out there. hundreds of thousands more who don't have those same opportunities today. i firmly believe we, as a nation, stand at a crossroads. nearly everyone agrees, what we're doing now is not working. and the data are quite clear in confirming that. we're in the middle of the pack at best compared to other nations, middle, average.

it's not the future we should feel comfortable offering anyone. so what do we do? what does the future hold? more funding? does that fix the problem? again, the data would show otherwise. with the u.s. spending significantly more -- [ cheers and applause ] again, the data would show otherwise, with the u.s. spending significantly more per pupil than every other country in the developed world, and without the student achievement to go along with it. we can keep doing what we've been doing for generations, and keep expecting different results. t that is, as we know, the definition of insanity. or we can do something different. we can be bold. we can be unafraid. we can choose to do what's right, not because it's easy, but because it's hard.

many thought kennedy's words were merely a dream. some each thought they were dangerous. but his vision and determination made them a reality. and that's a reality we still reap the benefits from today. if we can put a man on the moon, surely we can put families in charge of their own destiny. we can rethink schools. and i posit we embrace the future of education as one that integrates choice in every decision we made. not choice translated to vouchers or charter schools or private schools. no, choice translated as giving every part in this great land more control. more of a say in their child's future. more choices. the future of choice lies in trusting and empowering parents, all parents.

not just those who have the power, prestige, or financial wherewithal to make choices. no more choice for me but not for thee from politicians in washington or in statehouses. the future of choice lies in caring less about the word that comes before school and more about the individual students that school seeks to serve. the future of choice lies in funding and supporting individual students, not systems or buildings. the future of choice lies in allowing students to progress at their own pace, to take charge of their learning, in recognizing them as the unique individuals they are. the future of choice lies in embracing learning that fosters creativity, communication, collaboration, and critical thinking. traits that prepare students for further education of the workforce, and for life long learning.

the future of choice lies in recognizing america, the greatest country in the history of mankind, can and must do better for our students. all of them. because we must do better for our future. our children are 100% of our future. they deserve 100% of our effort. thank you again for the opportunity to share my thoughts, and i look forward to our conversation. [ applause ] >> madame secretary, thank you

very much for joining us at harvard. it's very gracious of you to come. it's an honor to have you in our midst. you have focused so much of your time and energy over the years on education, and i know that's a really important thing. but some people say that unless we address the problems of poverty and mall nourishment among so many children, education isn't going to have a chance. so shouldn't those problems be given priority? >> that's a really good question, and i think obviously when we talk about focusing on individual children and supporting individual children, issues go beyond just issues of education. but my focus has been on offering opportunities for all children to have a great education. and i am a firm believer that if all parents are empowered with

the same kind of opportunities, we're going to see some significant changes if opportunity in general, for those who have really faced generational poverty and have not felt opportunity in our country. i believe this is the biggest barrier to opportunity ultimately, is the lack of access and the opportunity to choose the kind of education that works for their child. >> some people say we have 14,000 school districts in the country, and people can move to the community of their choice, and they can choose their school by choosing the neighborhood in which they wish to live. don't we already have school choice? >> unfortunately, many families don't have that opportunity. they are stuck in the schools to which they're assigned. and they don't have the opportunity of moving somewhere else. i've heard many stories from families who wished that they could send their child to a

school other than the ones to which they're assigned. and they don't have the economic means to make that decision. if they're empowered with choice, with the funds for their child to choose a school that will work, they will have opportunities that will be well beyond the ones that are right there in their assigned district. >> well, okay. so i understand that this broadens choice to people without means. but aren't some parents better equipped to make those choices, more skills, and can figure out how to navigate through a choice system, won't they take advantage of that opportunity at the expense of others? >> i've met a lot of parents over the years that have been working on this. i think it's an insult to parents to suggest that they can't figure these things out. i think it's an insult to parents from low income

situations that suggest that just because of their economic situation, that therefore can't figure things out or don't care about their children. it is an insult, and i've never seen any parent that hasn't truly wanted and loved their child and wanted better for their child. and i think about denesha merryweather, the woman i referred to. in her case, her mother was not capable of making a decision, but she has a god mother in her life that found a better option for her. [ inaudible ] >> one of the arguments we hear in massachusetts especially last year, in the election campaign, was that if you expand charter schools, and do give some parents more choice, you'll take money away from the public

schools, from the schools run by the districts. so what's your take on that? >> well, again, i'm trying to make the argument that we should be focused on funding students, not funding buildings or systems. if students are empowered to go where -- to a place that's going to work for them, those environments are going to form up in support of students. and i think we get really hung up on where it comes before schools and we don't think about the fact that we're talking about kid's lives, where we're arguing about systems and approaches to education that clearly have worked for some, but they're not working for too many. but my view is, empower parents to make those choice, and the schools will -- the schools that are not able to give -- they'll

start to make the changes as a result. we've seen that in florida, where the widest range of choices, and in the districts where the greatest number of choices exist, and students go to a wide variety of schools, the traditional public schools there have actually improved as a result. i think we would see that y, bu this is a matter for states to deal with. >> how rapidly should we expand our choice system? is there a pace that you think is the right pace? it's been very slow until now. >> i think yesterday would be really good. seriously, we are losing thousands and thousands of kids every year. we can't wait any longer. we really can't wait any longer. we've been doing things the same

way and expecting different results for more than a couple of decades. this country was built on creative entrepreneurial risk taking people. and education is ripe for those

types of people to grab hold and solve problems and meet the needles of students. i went to all kinds of schools, and, you know, to a place, they were very focused on meeting the needs of specific kids. they were very open to say we're not for everybody. and we don't expect everybody to want to come here. i think all schools should have that attitude. and all schools should be focused on rethinking how they can meet their student's needs. >> what do you think of the introduction of technology into the schools, creating these learning programs? do you think this is a potential force to disrupt the system in a major way? >> i think technology has great and see what ultimately will work for the most kids and that's not to suggest that moving from where we are today that we should move to another scenario where it's very much the same, only in a different approach or format. i happen to think that personalized -- it held great promise. but i think that, you know, that might work for a lot of kids but not for everybody. we shouldn't expect that everybody is going to learn in the future in the same way. >> you mentioned in your remarks

that florida tax credit program has been identified as really quite successful in getting kids to college. and i like that, because it was my students that did that study. so thank you for that. >> i was so pleased to see it come out. >> but there's been a lot of talk about a federal tax credit program. have you going to announce the unveiling of a tax credit program this >> not here and not now. >> is there a hope that we can see this coming down the track? >> there's -- yes, there's certainly a lot of hope for that. but as i said, if we go with a federal tax credit approach, we need to ensure that it's not one that's going to create a whole other bureaucracy to administer. again, i really believe that

states are best equipped and best positioned to address the broadest range of choice on an individual state level. i think it's great to see states take thing on in different and creative ways, and i would just hope that more states would embrace this notion and the ones that have it would expand their offering, and get more aer issse about offering parents more choices. >> i appreciate the fact that state and local governments are primarily responsible for our schools. but there is some federal law, we do have a department of education. what would you say are some of the accomplishments you've been able to realize. i know it's only eight months since your term, but can you sort of sum up what you think are some of the most important things? >> sure. well, obviously the

implementation of the every student succeed act that congress passed late in the last session or the last term is really an important part of the responsibility of the department. the intention of that bill was to really return a lot of flexibility to the states and to allow the states to become more creative in their approaches to meeting the student's needs there. that process is under way. we have 35 or '7 more states to plan to approve. that's a big part of the k-12 focus at the department right now. we've been reviewing and in some cases either pausing or starting a new rule making process on a number of regulations, related to higher education. and that process is ongoing. we're also in the midst of a very big review of the

department in general to look for ways to streamline and make more effective and efficient the work of the department. and to also review all of the regulations, you know, every administration is more and more regulations piled on, and very few times do you take a step back and say, what is relevant and what is really necessary today? we're committed to divesting as many of those as we can. >> with respect to the every student succeeds act, passed in 2015, they asked for measuring something other than test scores. that's one of the things in congress. what is your thinking on that? >> well, you know, all the states are coming up with different measures. i think that's an interesting approach. i'm not sure that that's the

right approach or the best approach. but i'll withhold judgment and let's see what the state's results are. and another thing to remember is that these plans are words on paper. the real proof is going to be how they implement things. a lot of the creativity or a lot of the flexibility that congress intentionally built into the law is -- will come in the implementation of these plans in the state. one of my goals is to continue to really urge and encourage states to press things as far as they can. you know, take what opportunity you have and let's switch from being compliance mentality, which has been the case over the last decade or two, and into one that's more -- takes more ownership around your education in the state for which you're

responsible. >> these are all fascinating comments that you have. but i think i better turn the conversation over to others and let some of the students -- you want to -- >> thank you very much, paul. thank you very much, secretary devos. i know a lot of people have questions to ask, and there are four microphones. as per the usual forum drill, scattered around the forum. and let me remind everyone in the room of the importance of discourse and exchange. and civility and most importantly, allowing everyone to fully participate in this question and answer period. both listening, hearing, and speaking. and the rules of the forum question and answer are designed to do that. the first rule, for those of you who haven't been there, please identify your self-. the second is, ask a question

that is compact and brief. and i'm afraid i will have to cut off anything like a lengthy statement and questions end with a question mark. and the third rule is one question per person, please. who would like to go? yes, ma'am. >> hello, secretary devos. i'm actually a parent here. i don't know how many parents there are in this room. i have children who have been in district schools, charter schools and parochial schools. so i think all systemks work for us. but i think as a whole most systems are not working for black parents like me. they're not working for parents who aren't rich. and so i'm going to assume you have good intentions, really. so i think that there should be something from the federal government. why don't you think you should

have any control over setting minimums of what that should look like so systems -- just new systems popping up not serving our -- >> what is the role of the federal government to make sure the system functions well for everyone? >> well, first of all, let me thank you for asking that question, and it's really great to hear about the fact that you have had experience with different schools. how many kids do you have? >> i have three. >> three, okay. what grades are they in? [ inaudible ] >> okay. great. my goal, my hope is that all parents, like you and all others would have the power to be able to choose the school that is right for your child. to have the funds that go to your child, traditional hi today that go to a system rather than

being able to be directed by you, that you would be able to say this school is not working for my kid today. and i'm going to find one that's working better. now, accompanying that, there has to be a lot of great information available to parents, to be able to know how -- first of all, what is the school's approach to teaching and learning? and secondly, what are the results? how are kids doing who go here? and all of that information i think first and foremost needs to be very transparent to parents, so that would help inform your decision. but it starts with you being empowered to make that choice and that decision for your child. and we have lots of -- i guarantee in this audience, we have lots of families, representatives from lots of families able to make those decisions because they had the economic means to do it. it's not right for some people

to be able to choose and you not to be able to. and yet we spend more and more and more money funneling through a system that tries to tell you we're going to do better next year and then it doesn't. >> thank you. i'm sorry, i have to -- [ inaudible ] >> absolutely. i love to talk to parents. >> the gentleman here. >> hi, my name is ken, i'm a senior at the college, but i've been lucky enough to take a class with professor peterson. we looked at a large body of academic research that shows the effectiveness of charter schools and other school choice programs. however, public schools are still falling behind. how do we bring that accountability and transparency that we've seen with charter schools and apply it to public schools? and what role does the federal government may in making that transiti transition? >> first of all, every student

succeeds act is going to bring more information to individuals. schools are going to have to report more information to parents. that's a good step. but i think we have to go much further in many cases. and again, i'll refer back to the school tour i did a couple of weeks ago. where schools have kind of thrown out what they've done before and have taken -- considered their student -- the student population they have and have readdressed their approach to helping students learn. the first school i went to was in casper, wyoming. it's a traditional public school. the county that casper is in has open district choice. so they don't have any private school choice there, yet. but they have open district choice. and this school has been run by teachers for 26 years.

and just within the last few years, they switched to a mastery based competency approach to teaching and learning in the school. and they did so without anybody else telling them they had to do that. they as a community decided that was what was right for the students they were serving. the kids are thrilled. the kids -- i loved visiting with them. if i had that opportunity when i was in school, and there's probably a few others in here who could move as fast as you were able to in whatever subject or take as long as you needed in another subject, i think that kind of an approach could have some revolutionary results for a lot of kids who are getting bored to death or getting left behind. but i would challenge all schools, all existing schools today to look seriously at some of these new approaches to make sure kids are engaged and that

their curiosity isn't snuffed out by the time they're in fourth or fifth grade. >> thank you. up here in the ball kcony. >> hi, secretary devos. i'm a dual degree candidate here at the kennedy school. before this i was a teacher in district schools and charter schools. as an educator, we as a country have agreed that keeping kids safe in schools is a prime value. making sure that every kid who walks in a school at the beginning of a day leaves healthy, happy, physically and emotionally safe. now, your administration is very busy since the beginning of the year. many of the policies your administration has passed make educators such as myself feel that we have fewer tools in that toolbox towards keeping kids safe in our classroom. whether that's repealing title nine protections that make it

difficult -- mauz because [ applause ] or whether that's protecting families from predator for profit schools with we can start talking past one

another instead of talking about the issue itself. so with respect to the transgender bathroom guidance, as you know, the whole legal history on that issue is very complicated, difficult, unclear and uncertain. let's just say that this respect to any student that feels unsafe or discriminated against in their school, that is the last thing we want and the office for civil rights that department of education continued to hear and work with the schools that have any of those issues to deal with and we're committed to do that on behalf of the students, any student that has any issue it may feel is discriminatory. we're continuing to do that. with respect to the title 9 sexual assault on campus issue, as you know, we have taken steps

to start a rule making process that is going to actually be -- actually going to go about this the right way. i credit the former administration for raising campus sexual assault to a level -- it's not an issue we're going to be sweeping under room or putting into a backroom of a college administration building. it should not be that way. i have said it before, i'll say it again. one sexual assault is one too many. by the same token, one student that is denied due process is one too many. so we need inhad sure that policy and that framework is fair to all students. all students and we're committed to doing that. >> one more question up here. >> hi, my name is -- i'm a master -- here at the kennedy school. so you're a billionaire with lots and lots of investments and

the so-called school choice movement is a way to open the flood gates for corporate interest to make money off of the backs of students. how much do you expect your networth to increase as a result of your policy choices and what are your friends on wall street and in the business world like the koch brothers saying about the potential to get rich off the backs of students? you can choose to answer. >> let me just say i've been involved with education choice for 30 years. i have written lots of checks to support giving parents and kids options to choose a school of their choice. the balance of -- the balance on my income has gone very much the other way and will continue do so. i am committed -- i am committed to insuring every child, every child has the opportunity to get

an ekal opportunity to get a great education. that means every child, not rich kids. not kids whose parents are politicians and can get them into the right school under the right circumstances. every kid. >> are you suggesting -- >> i'm sorry, one per customer. i know a lot of people that mic. so i'm going to do a lightning round of three more questions and the secretary can choose to answer which ever one she wants to deal with. three rounds. grrs i'm sorry the event is scheduled to go to 7:00 p.m. so she's got to go unfortunately. i will remain for as long as you want to talk. paul may remain but we have time for a lightning round of three questions very brief, beginning with you, miami. >> thank you very much for being here tonight.

i'm a student at harvard law school and as a graduate of mit, i believe in stem education to save from a myriad of careers. i'm aware of your department's announcement of millions of dollars to support stem education. so how can that investment and your personal involvement insure more young people and specifically young women pursue careers in stem. >> i'm going to collect two more. >> hi, my name is suzy. i'm a first year mvp student and a former math teacher in new orleans. so you mention that every child in education is important. i share that view but my question is about $1 billion of title one fund that you proposed to be portable. what steps will you insure that low income schools receive what they need to raise that bar for children who won't or can't

leave. >> so, about the funds and low income communities in the schools and their help, third question and i'm going to turn it over to the secretary. >> hello, i'm a senior at the college and i'm from grand rapids michigan. so my question to michigan. you mentioned that taxpayer dollars belong to the taxpayers and individual families, thanks in part to your advocacy in michigan we lead the nation in for profit schools. a review of michigan charter schools in the detroit area found widespread wasteful spending, corruption, poor state performance and little transparency with corporations profiting at the expense of michigan students, especially those in detroit. so given the fact in michigan they have a lot of choice but not good choices and corporations are propheting from that, why do you think choice is approp reet for the nation?

>> so stem for young people, women, children left behind. >> i'm going to go with charter schools first. first of all of the students that are still left in the city of detroit, 49% of them -- excuse me. everybody who has had had means and wants to move elsewhere, has moved outside of the city of detroit. and the students that are there, 49% of them have chosen to go to charter schools. nobody's forcing them to go to charter schools. of the traditional public schools in detroit, not one of them has ever been closed down because of performance. yet, there have been over 20 charter schools closed. i site those statistics and ask you to think about that. is there room for improvement? absoutlaly. but the reality is of kids going

to chart eer schools in michiga and the city of detroit, they're gaining three or four months more per year over their public school counterparts. so there is a difference. now, billion dollars no longer in the budget, but that would have been an optional program for states to embrace if they wanted to go to a student waited funding formula in their state to provide parents more choices. it was a choice thing. stem, great for young women to be encouraged to pursue stem related careers and with a special emphasis on computer science, which has not tradit n traditionally been discussed as part of stem more broadly. and we're looking forward to rolling out an opportunity for young kids to get really more opportunities to be exposed to and engaged in stem subjects and particularly young girls because

science is cool and math is cool and we need to make sure that they understand that and know the opportunities for the long term. >> thank you, very much. thank you very much. i just want to take a minute to close for the evening. i've been to many forum events and this forum event, there has been the most strongly held and widely held set of views that i've experienced in a forum and i think that in a context like that conversation like we just have had had are very, very difficult and i think we did a reasonable and good job of allowing this exchange. i want to thank secretary devos. we have a lot of poise and curage. thank you for coming here. and thank you for professor peterson for an extremely engaging conversation on one of

the most important policy topics there is, which is how to educate our next generation. thank you very much.