Julian Vasquez Heilig has been doing research about charter schools.
He is interested is an Arizona charter chain called Great Hearts, because it just won authorization to open new charters in San Antonio.
Somehow he came into possession of a book written by a dissident employee, but Great Hearts went to court to demand that the book be quashed. Great Hearts said the book contained untruths. Furthermore, writing about the school violated the former employee’s agreement.
You can read about the controversy on Heilig’s website, where you will find a link to the banned book.
Don’t read that book! It is illegal!
As readers of this blog know, Great Hearts is at the center of a controversy in Nashville, because the Metro Nashville school board rejected its application on four different occasions and was punished by the state commissioner of education for doing so. TFA commissioner Kevin Huffman withheld $3.4 million from the Nashville public schools because of the school board’s refusal to okay a Great Hearts charter.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Was super excited to read this “banned book”… was super disappointed when I started. It reads like an 80-page youtube comment. It’s full of ad hominen attacks, the author cites Wikipedia while at the same time disparaging it as a source, and even uses the little readability tool that comes with Microsoft Word to make what is supposed to be a serious point about the communication methods of Great Hearts. The tone is that of a bitter ex-employee and the arguments are not well reasoned, well written, or competently explained.
We have to do better than this guys! The corporate Ed Reformers are paying big money to very well-spoken and effective PR and Marketing types to make their case for them. Coming back at them with the kind of schlock linked to in the article will get us laughed out of the room by policymakers and parents.
Which makes you wonder why Great Hearts is so eager to ban it, doesn’t it?
My impression as well. As superficially satisfying as a good old, vitriolic rant can be, an accessible, rational martialing of facts is what will be effective.
Michael. I agree with you. The point is not about the quality of the book. It is the democratic control of our schools. There is clearly much higher quality work on Great Hearts out there. The interesting nuggets are few and far between, but at least you had the information to make the decision. From my experience in Texas, charters are often very resistant to sharing information with the public. Or in the case of KIPP, being totally honest about the data.
Thank you for the reply Dr. Heilig, I follow your work with great interest and admiration. I understand the need for transparency but my fear is that by promoting bad work, the risk is run of tarnishing the argument against charters or degrading the dialogue for public education.
There are some good points in the book, but unfortunately it is of such sub-standard quality that they appear specious at best. Pearls kept in a pigpen make stinky necklaces. Against the Rhees, Kopps, and Bloombergs of the world (who are so scary precisely because they’re so smart, persuasive, and driven) I don’t feel that such unpolished and sloppy work is worth the rather ho-hum findings presented.
democratic control of our schools … charters are often very resistant to sharing information
Suddenly some (doomed-to-be-ignored) FOIA requests of US Ed come to mind.
Horace Mann’s view of “democratic control” was citizens “withdrawing their proper proportion of the public stock of funds.”
Oops. Not a Horace Mann quote. Here’s the 1848 Mann quote I was thinking of:
“If parents find that their children are indoctrinated into what they call political heresies, will they not withdraw them from the school? and, if they withdraw them from the school, will they not resist all appropriations to support a school from which they derive no benefit?”
So how does “democratic control of our schools” work when the state and federal government call the shots and private schools are too costly for most parents seeking alternatives?
As I said, don’t read the book. If it is trash, trust the free marketplace to ignore it.
Why ban a bad book?
Agree, don’t read it. Got about a third of the way through it. I have the same concerns as the above posters. But just because it’s a diatribe doesn’t mean that there aren’t a few good and pertinent points made by the author.
Hell, if I were Great Hearts (sic) I would want that out there just to point out that it is a diatribe.
“Don’t read that book! It is illegal!”
Oh, my goodness! Oh, my goodness! The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
Seriously? The BOOK is “illegal” because the self-serving educrats at Great Hearts say it is, and because you believe everything that self-serving educrats like the people at Great Hearts tell you?
“Great Hearts said the book contained untruths.” Well, if Great Hearts says so, it must be true. The self-serving educrats at Great Hearts wouldn’t lie, would they? Of course not.
“Marketplace”? Is the book for sale? Where? I couldn’t find it for sale anywhere.
“Why ban a bad book?” Good question. Why are you telling people not to read it? Isn’t that kinda the same thing? Do we still ban books in this country? I thought we didn’t do that anymore.
What’s a “dissident” employee? Is “dissident” the right word? Do you mean “disgruntled” employee? And do you mean to say that a “dissident ” (or “disgruntled”) employee has no right to his/her opinions, or that nobody should read them? Do you mean to say that a “dissident” (or “disgruntled”) employee’s opinions are any less valid, or less truthful, or more biased than, say, a self-serving Great Hearts’ educrat’s opinions?
I’m also wondering if the author of the Great Hearts-wishes-it-was-banned-so-nobody-would-read-it book intended it to be part of the great American charter school debate, or if he/she was just letting off steam.
And what does it say about Great Hearts that they’re still concerned about the book, no matter how dated it is, and no matter how poorly written people seem to think it is?
Should we perhaps hold Great Hearts to the same standards to which we hold a “dissident” (or “disgruntled”) employee? Or would that upset your double standard too much?
Julian Vasquez Heilig: The interesting nuggets are few and far between
The best part of the post was Dr. Heilig’s legal disclaimer. As to the book, my stomach wasn’t strong enough. This is as far as I got:
Claim: Great Hearts infringed on truth goodness and beauty.
Fact: Great Hearts embraces classic goals of education
FWIW: “Each summer since 1951, Mortimer J. Adler conducted a seminar at The Aspen Institute in Colorado. At the 1981 seminar, fifteen leaders from the worlds of business, literature, education, and the arts joined him in an in-depth consideration of the six great ideas that are the subject of this book: Truth, Goodness, and Beauty–the ideas we judge by; and Liberty Equality and Justice–the ideas we act on.”
Claim: Great Heats uses “a whole lot of words to say almost nothing,” as in:
“The schools value character and leadership highly, recognizing at the same time that these good habits of virtue cannot simply be taught, but must be modeled, reflected upon, and experienced through immersion.”
Translation: Great Heats fosters a school climate conducive to good citizenship that educators have traditionally valued.
Comment: What the heck does “maieutic” mean …
Definition of MAIEUTIC (at merriam-webster.com): relating to or resembling the Socratic method of eliciting new ideas from another. First Known Use: 1655
Note: the term was used in a self-defining context.
I’m going to read this book. Charters are very shady when it comes to truth, honesty, and transparency.
There’s nothing about David Alberts on the internet, not a CV, not a resume, except mentions of this book. The lawsuit doesn’t ban the book so much as it sues him for defamation and for contacting parents and faculty with allegations against the school, and trying to operate under one of the school’s charters. The lawsuit uses the title Dr. for Daniel Scoggins but not for David Alberts. All of this just adds to the speciousness of his claims. I’m tempted to use excerpts from him book in my freshman comp class to teach how not to write. I found myself thinking Mr. Alberts could benefit from a classical education. He’s making the case for charter schools.