Julian Vasquez Heilig has a scintillating new post on one of the most interesting questions of our age:
Why do hedge fund managers adore charters?
Many sit on charter boards.
They have their own PAC called Democrats for Education Reform to spread campaign cash to charter-friendly candidates.
What is the connection between hedge fund managers and charters?
Some of their friends think they are kind philanthropists with big hearts.
Some think they have a profit motive.
Some think it is a really fun hobby (“my charter has higher test scores than your charter”).
Some believe that they look down on public schools because they went to elite private schools.
Others opine that it is the old colonialist impulse, taking up the “white man’s burden” to care for children of color.
What do you think?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
There’s lots of money to made in privatization… and sitting on the Board of a growing enterprise COULD get them in on the ground floor…
Maybe all of the above? Plus, the big boys see this as an opportunity to influence the ideology of the next generation and soften the electorate towards candidates favorable to their privatization efforts. I read somewhere (can’t find the article) that Margaret Spellings said she was looking forward to public schools teaching about the benefits of a “free market.” Education money is chump change to many of these guys in the short term.
I agree. I have found that questioning the motives of people you disagree with to be an unproductive activity.
What do you mean by “unproductive activity”. If questioning the motives shows that the motives are for making fast money off the backs of the taxpayers and not because they are “so worried” about “the children” wouldn’t that be productive as it serves to inform the public about nefarious motives and suspect practices that occur with charter and voucher programs?
Motives have everything to do with it. If these billionaires were truly in it for the good of the children, they’d be open to seeing the actual impact their “reforms” have had. The fact that they obviously couldn’t care less makes it very clear that philanthropy is not their motive.
Motive is also important because it can possibly show how to appeal to these people to change their minds. If, for instance, they are motivated by “my charter school scores higher than yours” hobby sort of mentality, they might be open to research which shows how broader and deeper curriculum actually improves test scores over straight test prep. But if they’re in it for the money, test prep is profitable, so there’s not a lot of hope there, unless we can somehow make good education more profitable than their model, which isn’t likely.
Well said. Let’s put it another way: the edubullies are quite pleased when the general public buys into the default assumption that grumpy millionaires and billionaires are for charters and privatization because they are as selfless as the driven snow and that teachers and other school staff are in the “ed biz” because they are lazy, incompetent, uncaring and won’t take personal responsibility for the quality of their work.
They question our motives; we question theirs. Even steven. Or —inquiring minds want to know— are charterites afraid of an honest discussion in which a full, thoughtful discussion is the norm, not slick one-sided pr campaigns pushing eduproducts? *Think Diane Ravitch outnumbered three or four to one on media forums.*
If they can’t take the heat, they should get out of the kitchen.
So you believe jcgrim is just mistaken about his/her friend in the post below or that his/her friend?
Don’t have an opinion if jcgrim is mistaken except that, obviously not if that is what he/she wrote.
White man’s burden???
Greed
One of the most underreported aspect of this is the use of New Market Tax Credits to help finance charter school construction:
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-05-07/local/29438011_1_charter-law-albany-charter-state-aid
For some reason, there has been little follow up on Juan Gonzalez’s original piece from 2010. Of course, there is also the business of for-profit charter management, particularly virtual and blended charters:
http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2012/07/virtual-cronies.html
I, too, often wonder why Juan Gonzalez’s stories about the New Market Tax Credits never got traction in the major media markets? Maybe it’s because media corporations are investors, too?
There may be a money motive involved in my area; I am not sure. But I do think the most recent charter approved, which will start in the next year or so, was (also?) an effort to meet the needs of minorities in my area. Our district’s inflationary grading practices have crippled low performing students, most of whom are minorities. We have a double standard for behavior as well, and once again, certain minorities are suffering for it. Unless things change drastically, our district does need an alternative. It is unfortunate that public disgust with the system isn’t enough to effect change here; the school board, superintendent , and principals are all aligned and too powerful. I’d love some suggestions for viable alternatives that preserve the public schools, but if teachers speak out, they lose their positions and jobs–this has been made very clear. I have written my letter to the local paper, but parents seem complacent. What else can be done?
Buying elections is a sure way for the billionaire boys club to guarantee hegemony in our governing system. These guys have a deep contempt for democracy. If you wanted to control the world, how would you do it? It’s not going to happen in the US with a military coup but it is possible if you keep the electorate fighting over evolution, climate change, corrupt unions, or “crappy” teachers.
That said, an individual’s motives are hard to identify. One of the true believers in corporate edu- reforms is an old friend of mine. He’s an ordained minister, a brilliant lawyer, a Democrat, has worked for liberal causes for years, and his wife was a teacher. He truly believes what he is doing is for a social good that will save poor kids in TN. He was hired by the Knoxville Chamber Partnership to sell support for Race to the Top mandates.
It breaks my heart.
“He truly believes what he is doing is for a social good that will save poor kids in TN. He was HIRED by the Knoxville Chamber Partnership to SELL support for Race to the Top mandates.”
I think you already have your answer, jcgrim; the key words from your quote are “HIRED” and “SELL”.
Whether the sum is large or small—at least by hedge fund standards—as always, just “follow the money”. It will usually explain everything.
I have pondered this a lot. On the one hand they see education from their childhood point of view: it looks easy to teach. On the other hand they see education from their professional point of view: I know how to run things. These two angles block out their massive blind spot: they have no idea what it means to put in the hours in the classroom. Not all of them are greedy, but they see how much money is spent on education and they respect money.
It’s also this selfish philosophy that if I don’t use it, why should I pay taxes for it.
There is also the blindspot of content knowledge…something else we seem to be devaluing in today’s schools.
Hedge fund managers care about test scores, not content knowledge. I have never heard them complain when time was dropped for the arts or history or civics or science to make time for more test prep.
Consider where most of the hedge fund boys get educated- in business schools. B-schools in general have a contempt for liberal arts majors and their students receive a relatively narrow education experience. They graduate with a BS in spreadsheet-management. Smartness is measured by the amount of money you make.
I may be mistaken, but don’t many (or perhaps most) teachers have degrees from a professional school rather than a liberal arts degree?
No, most from a “college” or “division” of education of a university. It is probably more like a liberal arts degree than most degrees.
Well, I guess it depends on your subject and grade level. I wouldn’t teach in middle or high school without a degree or minor in my subject area myself. Things are different for elementary teachers, of course, but surely high school and middle school teachers have a significant amount of content knowledge of their subject and not just an education degree. I took education courses for my teaching license, but got a 4 year undergraduate degree for my subject area.
No doubt that every graduate from a professional school takes some courses in the liberal arts, but a liberal arts degree is no more required of teachers than it is for hedge fund managers.
Hedge fund managers turn out to be a very interesting group. I just looked the three wealthiest: one has an undergraduate degree in philosophy from Princeton, later dropping out of medical school, one has an undergraduate degree from LSE where he worked with the philosopher of science Karl Popper, and the third has a Ph.D. in mathematics from UC Berkeley.
Look from the perspective of the charter school – who would you want on your Board? If you have access to a hedge fund manager who in turn deals with others with $$ wouldn’t you seek them out? Charter school boards also have attorneys and other professionals … the “educators” run the school, the Board supports the school – a reasonable model.
From the perspective of the money man the board composition makes sense. From the perspective of this educator it doesn’t necessarily make sense.
Educators usually don’t run charter schools. Board members do, and they often exercise their power to inflict uninformed educational policies on the school(s) they control. This is why so many charters do worse than, or barely manage to match public school performance despite larger budgets.
In the old days the super rich gave money to universities, ballet, theaters,hospitals and settlement centers and other social welfare initiatives. Their wives sat on boards and it was part of civic culture. Now their ruling ideology is that education will end poverty. Guys like Howard Fuller (BAOE) and Joe Williams (DFER) give them license to shift the blame for the lousy chances for low-income students to poor school performance in public schools.
I know a local real estate developer who is part of this (not near a billionaire, but pretty rich). He says he has $100,000/year to give away a year and wants to give it to education. Giving to social welfare projects is seen as creating dependency whereas charter/voucher schools are entrepreneurial.
I am not sure when this ideological transformation took place, but it clearly now in place. I think it is now aligned with sucking up education money and creating deep wedge issues among progressive communities–both of which the Republicans love. However, I do think it is a separate phenomena.
Most of it relates back to Bill and Melinda Gates and their bizarre, quasi-religious belief in all of this.
If you’re worth several hundred million or even a billion or two, you still hold Bill and Melinda Gates in awe, almost as much as we median income earners.
They’re the stuff of fantasy.
So…when they talk, everyone listens. And then they go play “Follow The Leader”.
Until the Gates get bored…and/or don’t want their names associated with “failure”. Then they’ll move on to the next thing.
Who will the “reformers” blame then, when the scores are the same or lower, and when our school communities have split in a sea of acrimony, in badly maintained buildings, with non-union teachers who are burned out before they turn 30.
Meanwhile the Elite Kids will be acting, singing, painting, dancing and discussing great literature in a class of 15, with no standardized tests until the SAT’s.
Thanks, privatizers.
Power, money and control is what they want.
Would a hedge fund manager financially support a charter school started by teacher’s that belong to a union organized as a non-profit in rural West Virginia? Is their any demographics on the charter schools that hedge fund managers financially support in terms of for-profit vs. non-profit, pedagogies, geographic distribution, etc.
Why do bank robbers love to rob banks?
The hedge fund crooks belong in prison, not stealing more money from taxpayers.
Why do hedge fund managers do anything??
Sent from my iPhone
As long as I can remember in Cleveland there it has been part of the established civic culture to be a public-private partnership, holding fast to the assertion that community, non-profit and public service organization had to function more like a business.
I never seemed to be understood that they had different functions and environments in which to operate that might required skills and values not common in at least large corporations. The examples given to illustrate the failing of non-business organizations weren’t the norm nor what these sectors advocated as good practice. And the suggested techniques that when adopted would reflect the conversion to a business model didn’t appear that foreign to service practice or that unique to business practice.
It was always a puzzle until I began to realize that what it meant to be more like a business was a need in the business world for the attitudes, behavior and culture of the community to affirm the righteousness of what modern business was and did. We all had to reflect the personhood of businesses and the social norms of consumer society. Competing frameworks for human and social good was just another market to be captured and not a foundational feature of a free and democratic society.
So I think that is the behavior of hedge fund functionaries are reflected of the same need or impulse. This has been a useful perspective in making sense of deep engagement we currently witness. There are clearly other motives, but I think this need for the world to affirm their way of being is primary as well as unacknowledged.
If you read this month’s Forbes cover story about Sal Khan, it’s profit motive all the way with a tiny side of tax-deductible philanthropy.
_________________________ Heidi Reich
“It was always a puzzle until I began to realize that what it meant to be more like a business was a need in the business world for the attitudes, behavior and culture of the community to affirm the righteousness of what modern business was and did….”
I have been thinking this for some time but never put it into words quite so well. ‘Bad’ is an adjective that better describes business practice than it does teachers in today’s world. Many business types, regardless of their accumulated wealth, do not deserve admiration and respect for the role they play in our economy or in our society.
Betsy Marshall, Reading your comment quoting me reminded me that I needed to edit my original statement of November 7th. Hopefully the following is easier to follow.
.
James Pelikan says: November 7, 2012 at 2:21 pm Rev. 11.24 .’12 As long as I can remember in Cleveland it has been part of our established civic culture to value a social model of public-private partnership, holding fast to the assertion that community, non-profit and public service organizations had to function more like a business.
It never seemed to be understood that these non-business sectors had different functions and environments in which to operate that required skills and values not in common with at least those of large business corporations. The examples usually given to illustrate the failing of non-business organizations weren’t the norm nor what these sectors advocated as good practices. And the suggested techniques proposed for conversion to a business model didn’t appear that foreign to service practices nor that unique to business practice.
It was always a puzzle until I began to realize that what it meant to be more like a business was a need in the business world for the attitudes, behavior and culture of the community to affirm the righteousness of what modern business was and did. We all had to reflect the person-hood of businesses and the social norms of consumer society. Competing frameworks for human and social good was just another market to be captured and not a foundational feature of a free and democratic society.
So I think that the behavior of hedge fund functionaries are reflected of the same need or impulse. For me this perspective has been a useful in making sense of the deep engagement we currently witness. There are clearly other motives, but I think this need for the world to affirm their way of being is primary as well as unacknowledged.
Just because you got an education doesn’t mean you can fix education.
More income, or course!
Check out the Schools To Watch visit “Guidelines” & prompts.