The efforts of Title I Monitor reporters Andrew Brownstein and Travis Hicks and EarlyStories blogger Richard Lee Colvin (Director of the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media at Teachers College) to explain, rationalize and even excuse the conflicts of interest of Edward Kame' ennui and his academic colleagues in the Reading First scandal strike your editor/this lawyer as bizarre. They might have come straight from Superman comics' Tales of the Bizzaro World. 

Anyone who can't see that it is a conflict of interest per se (by definition, on its face, inherently) when someone like Edward Kame' ennui plays a key role advising the federal government on the rules governing the purchase of Reading First products and also has a significant financial interest in selling a product in the Reading First market from a contract he entered into with a publisher while he was playing that role, is ethically challenged. See edbizbuzz of May 12.  His was a firing offense, and that should have been the end of it. The fact that it isn't says something very disturbing about the practice of government contract law in the public education marketplace.

Consider the same fact pattern in a different locale. Imagine an aerospace engineer hired by the Department of the Air Force to play a central role developing the design rules governing the competition for a family of new fighter aircaft, and the approval of such aircraft. During this assignment he contracts with an aircaft manufacturer to build an aircaft for that very competition. Then he attends a lunch at a downtown Washington restaurant that was set up by that aircraft manufacturer for its' CEO to meet with the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Aquisition, and the competition is known by all atending to be a prime subject of discussion. Explain - with a straight face - why everyone involved would not be sent packing from their jobs within 72 hours.

Now, explain how or why the ethical bar at Education should be lower than Defense - and let's not confining that bar to common or statutory law, but just common decency, good management, reasonable stewardship, and a sense of fiduciary obligation.

The fact that Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education Susan Neuman didn't act to terminate Kame' ennui's contract may make her complicit or simply not too bright, but it hardly excuses him. The obligation for full and candid disclosure always lies with the advisor, and it's unlikely that Kame' ennui gave his lunchmates a full explanation.

Edward Kame' ennui is not a child and his emails certainly don't suggest he is a naif when it comes to the worlds of consulting, Washington policy, academia or publishing. It's far more reasonable to assume that with his understanding even of the academic experience in conflicts management, Kame' ennui knew what he was doing at the very least deserved advice from counsel. After all, we are talking about an income stream of around $150,000 per year from Pearson. And if he hired a lawyer before this mess rather than after, it's hard to believe any counsel would have told Kame' ennui what he was doing was absolutely above board, a best business practice and good idea without legal risk. Is anyone here familiar with the concept of "willful neglect?"

This whole affair is nothing less than disgusting. It is an incredibly sad day for this country when any educator is actually prepared to argue about something that should be as clear as the nose on your face. Expect to see a discussion of what this says about K-12's evolution into a market in the coming days.