Welp, Education Secretary Zoie Saunders has gone and stepped into it. Big time.

When news broke of her directive that all Vermont’s public school districts would have to officially attest to their compliance with Trump administration orders against diversity, equity and inclusion policies and curricula, my own Outrage-O-Meter didn’t quite hit the red zone. Saunders’ message was more nuanced than it seemed at first blush; it sought simple attestation rather than any actual changes to policy, program or curriculum. It was kind of a “cover your ass” situation. These days, many a larger and more respected institution than the Vermont Agency of Education has been engaged in similar ass-covering maneuvers.

But man, did it kick up a shitstorm, and Saunders found herself walking the whole thing back, not once but twice, within a few days and with the help of Attorney General Charity Clark. This, after some districts indicated they would not comply and the public education community as a whole reacted with confusion and anger.

And I get it. Saunders’ original missive wasn’t clearly written, it asked superintendents to sign their names to attestations that might or might not satisfy the federal government. Plus the Trump administration’s own “guidance” is a poorly-executed study in opacity.

The real problem is that Saunders’ unforced error played into the perception, warranted or otherwise, that Saunders was imported from Trumpland for the purpose of Floridafying our school system. It reinforced educators’ fears about her true intentions and those of the Scott administration. And that may have repercussions for her ability to lead the public education system in the future.

This brouhaha (one step up from “kerfuffle”) has been covered ably by VTDigger, Vermont Public and Seven Days. Here’s the gist, as I understand it.

On Friday evening (newsdump!), Saunders instructed school superintendents to individually certify compliance with new Trump directives within 10 days. On Monday morning, per Vermont Public’s Lola Duffort, “the associations representing Vermont’s school boards, principals, and superintendents, alongside the Vermont-NEA, released an open letter [saying] the agency’s guidance was ‘unworkable.'”

On Monday afternoon, Saunders and Clark issued a statement blasting the “political rhetoric around this federal directive” for fomenting “outrage” and “confusion,” not mentioning Saunders’ own role in that same fomentation. But the joint statement did not specifically let the districts off the hook which, Duffort reported, “left many educators scratching their heads.”

GET ME REWRITE!

Two hours later, Duffort says, the Agency of Education sent out a new message clearly stating that it would provide an attestation on behalf of the entire Vermont public school system.

You know, I used to call Saunders’ predecessor Dan French “the Inspector Clouseau of the Scott cabinet.” This entire passage, from Friday through Monday, is right out of the Dan French playbook. It calls into question the quality of Saunders’ leadership, which is not a good thing when the Scott administration intends a thorough reform effort in the public school system.Like it or not, Saunders is the leader of the system. Scott is loath to eject his top officials even when their performance might warrant a quick defenestration.

Saunders is here for the duration, or until she gets a nice fat job offer from the Heritage Foundation or some such. In the meantime, educators and school administrators will have to work with her and look to her for clear leadership. In this instance, she provided the exact opposite.