It was bound to happen.
Teach for America recruits thousands of very smart young men and women and trains them to think like members of TFA, believing that high expectations and high energy will suffice to close the achievement gap.
With so many well-educated TFA corps members, there was bound to be a movement to think differently about TFA’s methods, its claims, and its ambitions.
On July 14, dissident members of Teach for America will gather to debate the role and future of TFA.
As this article in The American Prospect explains,
“Despite the endless outcry, no one has ever staged a coordinated, national effort to overhaul, or put the brakes on, TFA—let alone anyone from within the TFA rank-and-file. On July 14, in a summit at the annual Free Minds/Free People education conference in Chicago, a group of alumni and corps members will be the first to do so.
The summit, billed as “Organizing Resistance Against Teach for America and its Role in Privatization,” is being organized by a committee of scholars, parents, activists, and current corps members. Its mission is to challenge the organization’s centrality in the corporate-backed, market-driven, testing-oriented movement in urban education.
“The goal is to help attendees identify the resources they have as activists and educators to advocate for real, just reform in their communities,” says co-coordinator Beth Sondel, a 2004 TFA alum who is now a PhD student in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Wisconsin. Though the organizers don’t have pre-set goals, possible outcomes range from a push for school districts not to contract with TFA to counter-recruitment of potential corps members away from the program.”
TFA attracts bright, idealistic young people with the promise that they can be agents of social justice and that their future leadership role in other sectors will change attitudes towards education. But these same bright, idealistic young people have noticed that the leaders trained by Teach for America are key proponents of union-busting and privatization. They have observed TFA alums like John White, the advocate for Bobby Jindal’s extreme reactionary agenda in Louisiana, the goal of which is privatization. They have noted that Kevin Huffman is faithfully serving the far-right governor of Tennessee in his efforts to strip teachers of collective bargaining rights, eliminate tenure, and remove any pay increases for advanced degrees and years of experience. They are no doubt uncomfortable being in league with Michelle Rhee, now raising money for Republican candidates in state races and pro-voucher Democrats.
Where will the internal dissent go? Will it matter? Will TFA listen?
This conference shows how hard it is to create a corps of young people who will obey and conform, when their education has encouraged them to think for themselves.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
While I personally think that TFA cannot be reformed, and should have it’s mouth stuffed with garlic, a crucifix placed on ts chest, and a stake driven through its heart (like any other vampire) it’s encouraging to see current members and alumni become active in opposing the destructive fraud and racket that is TFA.
This is especially so because there is something particularly despicable about manipulating the idealism of young people, and dishonestly using the language of progressive politics, in the service of union busting and further expanding the wealth and power of those who already have unimaginable amounts of both, and of turning an irreplaceable public resource over to them for their own venal purposes.
And you are not out for yourself?
Argumentum ad hominem, H.
TFA is an organization, so to question the person describing an organization by attacking them personally is ad hominem and lacks merit in debating issues.
I wonder whether that’s really true, Joanna. Michael, and almost everyone else here, writes as if their motives were pure and the motives of the reformers were debased, greed, meanness and so forth. To inquire whether Michael himself is moved by self interest is merely to raise a question of psychology. It is hardly an ad hominem attack. So much of the rhetoric on this blog seems to be of the type: “We in public education are the good guys, the victims, and see what those mean old Koch brothers capitalists and money motivated men are doing to us, shrinking our student base for their own interests, when we in the public schools are concerned only with the welfare of our students, and now our own pecuniary advantage.”
I am saying that possibly we ALL are looking out for ourselves, and that perhaps the argument might be conducted on grounds other than Hobbits vs. Orcs.
I was reacting to Michael’s phrase “their own venal purposes.” Even priests have to make a living. I don’t exempt anyone from the charge that they are looking after their own pay and profit. Who is disinterested when it comes to his or her own pay and benefits. We do the best we can for ourselves.
“…perhaps the argument might be conducted on grounds other than Hobbits vs. Orcs.”
Oh, Mister Underhill…
It’s one thing to take care of oneself, a completely different thing to be an avaricious bastard (and I don’t include you, HU, in that category unless you tell me otherwise).
I tend to think the distinction’s mainly one of motivation and energy. There’s no question that I’m avaricious, at least at heart. I want a lot of things. But who has the energy and motivation to devote one’s life to getting them? It’s exhausting!
HU: I prefer philosophy over psychology. Otherwise there are never any answers.
Do you point out to a judge that he or she is just looking out for self?
Obviously humans look out for themselves. Now, let’s take it to next level and determine how best to pool resources, model community, structure mutual respect, compensate those in service to their society, etc. obviously there can be different views on how that looks and that is the purpose if this blog, I do believe. There certainly does seem to be a trend in particular persuasions by regular readers–and that’s OK. Eventually in decision-making, consensus does need to be met, but I think that is what we elect leaders for. The trend I most take away from this blog is that leadership is not reflecting the consensus of many (most?) who have studied the pursuit of educating children in a public format.
Very well put, Ms. Best. How we organize our common services is always a matter of legitimate public debate. Compromise and consensus are also desiderata. Do you find much spirit of compromise among those on this blog experienced in educating children? Fiorello? Swacker? Linda? Who wields the moralistic stiletto first? In spite of being accused of being a Randian, I have never read Atlas Shrugged. She advertises herself as a philosopher, and an atheistic one too. I don’t know whether she ever said anything about education. I suspect she has about our mutually beneficial relationships. Should I invest the time in finding out nature of what I’m being accused of espousing? Perhaps the more germane question is what’s wrong with her philosophy? Or for me, what IS her philosophy of society? I suspect it is anti-socialist and anti-communist and that that is why it is so loathed by public school teachers, who seem to believe the state should take over the duties of the family, and subject anyone who even questions that assumption to roaring ridicule. The structure of the black family combined with failing inner city schools has turned out into society a generation of young people useless to themselves and to society. That’s a sad fact. One possible response might be to try different models of education. Do you agree, Joanna Best?
Joanna,
I don’t know that there are any more “real” answers to be found in philosophy than in psychology. What is philosophy? (that’s a rhetorical, sardonic question, but try reading Deleuze and Guattari on that question).
Duane
Harlan, why don’t you put down “Atlas Shrugged” for ten minutes, and come back when you’ve taken the time to comprehend the difference between self interest and greed.
I agree!
Michael Fiorillo: well-expressed, short, on topic.
“Much wisdom often goes with fewest words.” [Sophocles]
🙂
Diane, it is not only ex-TFA members. I am also one of the presenters at the conference, representing traditionally trained teachers in New Orleans who now struggle to find employment. We also have parents, students, and community members who have suffered from the corporatization of public education presenting at the conference. We are an inclusive group that has come together to work against the takeover of our schools and communities, because we all must unite in order to defeat the privatization agenda.
This is exactly why they want to dumb down education (and limit internet access) – so people can’t learn critical thinking. My hope is on the youth for the future. This younger generation quickly sees through b.s. even if they can’t articulate it in academic journals. This student loan travesty is going to blow up I think. History has shown that when you have a whole generation or two of young, single, energetic and at least somewhat educated people with no hope for the future… it doesn’t work out so well for the 1%.
Here’s a question: Why are a significant number of TFA corps members and alumni holding a conference on “Organizing Resistance Against Teach for America and its Role in Privatization” if TFA isn’t playing a role in the privatization of public schools? If, indeed, there IS no organized push for privatization in the first place? It would seem that these TFA people are wasting their time on this — unless…
…and it is the ‘unless’ that really has me thinking about TFA.
And another question jumps into my mind at his point. “What is wrong with privatizing schooling?”