This post is offered in honor of school choice week.
We are accustomed to hearing economists lecture on the virtues of markets and choice.
Here is an economist who sees choice differently.
Here is the money quote:
“Today institutions of higher education, public and private, remain largely segregated by race, religion and economic condition. White colleges and universities remain primarily white, Black institutions remain primarily black, and denominational institutions remain even more religiously identifiable.
“Such segregation is sanctified with tons of federal and state money in the forms of tuition vouchers, tax credits and government subsidized loans. The Obama administration has been largely foreclosed from remedying the situation for fear of offending powerful political forces representing the investors and private institutions. The higher education voucher/loan dilemma portends a probable scenario for the future of tuition vouchers and charter schools at the primary and secondary levels.
“Stiglitz quotes Alexis de Tocqueville who said that the main element of the “peculiar genius of American society” is “self-interest properly understood.” The last two words, “properly understood,” are the key, says Stiglitz. According to Stiglitz, everyone possesses self-interest in the “narrow sense.” This “narrow sense” with regard to educational choice is usually exercised for reasons other than educational quality, the chief reasons being race, religion, economic and social status, and similarity with persons with comparable information, biases and prejudices. But Stiglitz interprets Tocqueville’s “properly understood” to mean a much broader and more desirable and moral objective, that of “appreciating” and paying attention to everyone else’s self-interest. In other words, the common welfare is, in fact, “a precondition for one’s own ultimate well being.”17 Such commonality in the advancement of the public good is lost by the narrow self-interest. School tuition vouchers and charter schools are the operational models for implementation of the “narrow self-interest.” It is easy to recognize, but difficult to justify. “
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Other ways to think about public school choice are
a. It is part of the democratic ideal that people will be able to make choices, rather than being told this is what you must accept. We have different political parties in part because the founders of the nation wanted citizens to be able to select among different options, viewing that as a wiser form of government.
b. Choice allows educators to create distinctive programs from which families can select. This is part of what happened, for example in East Harlem.
At its core, the argument that Diane posted above says that parents don’t know what’s good for them or for society. Here’s a quote she did not post from that same article,
“With regard to Friedman, Stiglitz renders Friedman’s parental choice and voucher stuff nonsensical because parents are generally poorly informed about the quality of schools and, worse, parents normally exercise a school choice based on information that has little or nothing to do with quality schooling.”
Is that what Diane and others who follow here want to assert? Parents don’t know enough to make wise decisions about which school their children can attend?
I’m also trying to figure out what Diane believes about public school choice. Recently she said she was ok with magnet schools that screened out kids who could not pass admissions tests, so long as an elected school board approved this. Is that true, or are parents not able to figure out whether such schools offer quality schooling.
Recently she also said she was supported charters as long as they were not connected to a profit making company. Is that true?
Or really, is Diane’s fundamental idea – choice is not a good idea in public education – but we can’t do much about it if rich and wealthy (mostly white) families exercise it by sending their children to affluent suburban schools where the vast majority of housing requires a very significant impact.
In other words, we can’t do anything about choice for the 1 or 2%, but we should prevent it for the rest of the folks because they really don’t know what’s good for them or their children or society as a whole?
LikeLike
I think part of it is the idea that the public is being hoodwinked about the quality of charter schools, which certainly assumes that the public lacks the information and/or intelligence to make choices that are in their own self-interest. But another part of it is the idea of the “tragedy of the commons,” which assumes that people make choices that are rational and self-beneficial, but that those choices lead to the depletion of common goods. In this context, “goods” can mean things as varied as tax revenue, smart/motivated students, and workers rights. These two ideas aren’t necessarily incompatible — choices don’t have to be rational expressions of self-interest in order to destroy the commons, depending on how you’re defining “the commons” in a given argument — but they often in tension.
I don’t have the sense that Diane’s particularly concerned about reconciling the tension in these two ideas, though.
LikeLike
Diane and many others have done a great job of insuring that the public knows that a variety of students (using various standardized tests that Diane otherwise criticizes) show mixed results among charter schools. And that will be true forever. Charter, like district public schools vary. So I think we should be learning from the most effective district & charter public schools, serving a vast array of students.
LikeLike
flerper,
I am not seeing a common resource problem in school choice, but perhaps I am wrong. Usually people here argue that the more capable and competent student will be better off by choosing the selective charter option, and the student left behind will lose. The sort of prisoners dilemma situation of the tragedy of the commons requires both the student choosing the charter and the student remaining in the public school to lose because of the interaction of their choices. Perhaps you could spell it out more?
LikeLike
TE: I think it depends on how you define what the “resource” is. Sometimes Diane and others here often define it “money” — i.e., the amount of money available or to find public education. Other times the resource is motivated or smarter students, or students with engaged parents — this is the skimming argument. The more charters skim, the worse the student pool that remains for the rest of the public schools. Some of these arguments are better thought-out than others, and much if not most of the times they’re not much more than opportunistic potshots (the finance-based arguments are particularly bad — which is frustrating because I’m not convinced there aren’t good arguments to be made). But I absolutely think these are all based on the idea that charters are subverting a ideal of public education that relies on common resources.
LikeLike
TE: I may be making this point sloppily. It’s been a while since I’ve read the academic stuff, and you are the one with “Economist” in your username, so I’ll defer to you.
LikeLike
I don’t think Diane is asserting anything of the sort by sharing this post. As I read the article, my first reaction to the quote about parents being poorly informed was not very positive either. (“With regard to Friedman, Stiglitz renders Friedman’s parental choice and voucher stuff nonsensical because parents are generally poorly informed about the quality of schools and, worse, parents normally exercise a school choice based on information that has little or nothing to do with quality schooling.”) As I read further, I realized that the point was not that parents were not capable and therefore should not be able to, but it was that they tend to make choices based on other things like convenience, race, affluence, etc and therefore the desired effects sought after by the free market will not improve schools, but will actually make the situation worse.
LikeLike
Given that an overwhelming majority of students, at least in two-year colleges, are absolutely and totally convinced that learning means memorizing a number of “facts/procedures” to be returned/used on the exam, can one really wonder where they got the idea and what they will do when choosing a school for their children?
LikeLike
Schremmer, where did you find the study reporting, an overwhelming majority of students, at least in two-year colleges, are absolutely and totally convinced that learning means memorizing a number of “facts/procedures” to be returned/used on the exam”?”
It sounds like you don’t have much faith in families to make good decisions. I’ve heard that one for decades. It was one of the principal arguments used in the south by those who opposed allowing “those people” (ie African Americans), to vote. Before that, the argument was used by those who opposed allowing women to vote.
LikeLike
(1) I don’t know about any “study” but you can ask students at my school, community college of philadelphia and in fact, from what I know, in any two-year school.
(2) I don’t know about “that one” but I know where they got the idea: from the secondary school system.
(3) I don’t know what the “argument” was. So, I cannot respond.
In any case, you seem more interested in casting me as racist-sexist than in the facts of the matter. But, if it makes you happy, be my guest.
LikeLike
Schremmer, I didn’t say anything about racism. I did ask for evidence for your assertion, “Given that an overwhelming majority of students, at least in two-year colleges, are absolutely and totally convinced that learning means memorizing a number of “facts/procedures”.
You tell me that this is your impression based on your work. In most places, such an assertion requires more evidence.
LikeLike
(1) No, you “didn’t say anything about racism”–nor about sexism. You just implied it.
(2) Re. “evidence”. Currently, at my school, there are about a thousand students a semester in so-called basic algebra (developmental). Plus quite a few in arithmetic (even more developmental). You should really talk to developmental students—anywhere. You might then see students who have been utterly brainwashed into thinking that they too dumb to think and should “just” memorize how to do the stuff that’s going to be on the exam. And, in fact, most of these students are parents.
(3) Better yet, you should take a look at the textbooks available for developmental mathematics.
(4) I don’t seem to have the time and energy you have, so you will have to forgive me as this is going to my last post here.
(5) Should you be interested in what I do, you may want to check freemathtexts.org
LikeLike
Yes. Choice as it is used to support charter schools and vouchers is about giving more individuals a competitive edge in the struggle for limited opportunity, resources and jobs. It is not about the common good.
The Wobblies and Rabbi Hillel both nailed it:
Wobblies: “An injury to one is an injury to all.”
Rabbi Hillel: “If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And if I only for myself, then what am I? And if not, when?
LikeLike
Arthur, I know Hillel quote well. So are you saying that families should not be able to
a. Choose among district public schools?
b. DIstrict and charter public schools?
If only a, why is it ok to let families choose among district schools but not among district or charters?
LikeLike
Ah, the problem of multiple choice questions! I dont want to choose between a and b. My point is that choice sounds good because it appears to give people autonomy and sounds democratic, whether it is between schools in a district or between district and charter schools or between public and private. However, choice is often the opposite of democratic. Parents ability to choose is frequently constrained by all sorts or variables related to inequality. In addition, I think the society should place a premium on reducing racial and economic segregation in schools. So, in the delicate balance between individual autonomy and superordinate values like promoting equity and diversity I come down on the side of the latter.
LikeLike
Ok, Arthur, no multiple choice. Am I correct that you oppose allowing families to choose among public schools?
For what it’s worth, I think society benefits when more students succeed. And one of the strategies to help more students succeed is to offer different kinds of schools, since there is no single best way to organize a school. So I think society benefits from strong school choice programs.
LikeLike
In that sense, I am for choice. Schools can certainly have multiple special emphases or ways of approaching teaching and giving parents choice is fine, even an advantage. I just don’t want choice to exacerbate current inequities.
LikeLike
Ah, the problem of multiple choice questions. I don’t want to choose between a and b. My point is that choice sounds good because it appears to give people autonomy and sounds democratic, whether it is between schools in a district or between district and charter schools or between public and private. However, choice is often the opposite of democratic. Parents’ ability to choose is frequently constrained by all sorts or variables related to inequality. In addition, I think the society should place a premium on reducing racial and economic segregation in schools. So, in the delicate balance between individual autonomy and superordinate values like promoting equity and diversity I come down on the side of the latter.
LikeLike
Describing some parents as “poorly informed” does not imply that they are somehow incapable of making wise decisions with the accurate information. It is very difficult to get at the truth when the “reformers” bend it beyond recognition. Parents and students are victims of this type of propaganda.
I know some teachers who formerly taught in charter schools and their first hand accounts are quite different from the spin on the same charter schools’ websites.
They feel that if the public really knew about what was happening in charter schools, they would take a less narrow, self-interest view and work to strengthen the public schools we have.
LikeLike
Reading exchange, I know some teacher who formerly taught in charters who had bad experiences. I also know some former district teachers who lov working with charters.
The facts are clear about one thing – the number of families attending charters is growing. Many of those attending charters are from low income and families of color.
Some charters and some district schools do a great job of serving youngsters. Others don’t .
That’s why I think we should be learning from the most effective of each. And that’s part of the work we do. Literally tomorrow we will be bringing district and charter math teachers together to learn from eachother and from a wonderful Univ of Mn prof.
LikeLike
Joe Nathan, I think you are trying to kick up a lot of dust but, unfortunately, the wind is blowing in your direction. That is not healthy.
If charters and vouchers could lead the way to better education for all, it would have happened by now. The tide is turning. More and more people are becoming aware about the devastating effects of school choice.
LikeLike
To Jim and Reading Exchange – many (certainly not all, but many) of the people involved with district and charter public schools, including me, oppose vouchers.
It’s not clear when reading exchange writes “More and more people are becoming ware of the devastating effects of school choice,” whether she/he opposes all forms of school choice, or just vouchers and charters.
Kern Alexander has for years, opposed the charter idea. That’s his right. The fact is that more and more low and moderate income families are seeking options in public education – just as wealthy people have done since the beginning of this country.
I get that many of you don’t like charters. Some of you don’t like the idea that families will get any choice. I get that. My sense is that families WILL have more and more choices, even if you don’t like that. My work, in part is to help improve the quality of public school choices that they will have.
LikeLike
All of your posts could be boiled down to what YOU are doing…if it wasn’t for YOU. Do you notice that?
You say you sent me articles highlighting great public school teachers (I read one), but all you do here is beat the charter drum.
You sure do have a lot of time during the school day, much more than the lowly classroom teacher, that’s for sure.
Why don’t you write about the charters that are fraudulent? Just wondering.
LikeLike
After doing a brief bit of research about the author of the article, Kern Alexander, I learned that this man’s opinion is about as expert as one might get. Google Kern Alexander University of Illinois and check it out.
LikeLike
Just sort of a technical question here: is the quoted passage (“Today institutions…) the words of Joe Stiglitz (the economist) or Kern Alexander (the education professor)?
LikeLike
Ravitch quotes Alexander quotes Stiglitz quotes De Tocqueville.
LikeLike
That section of the article has no quotation marks, so I think it is Kern Alexander’s words, not Stiglitz.
LikeLike
Correct. I’m just trying to be funny. Frankly I usually have trouble telling who’s speaking in the posts here.
LikeLike
Actually, Linda, posts I’ve done have cited the work of people like Paul Wellstone, Bill Clinton and Rosa Parks, to name a few.
But it’s not clear how this arguing back and forth is helping students, which is what I think you and I both are interested in. What do you think?
LikeLike
I think I give 90% of my energies to the kids: planning, differentiating, grading, reading, talking, consoling, guiding, counseling, motivating, calling home, offering extra help, etc and 10% of my time here.
I KNOW I am helping students because I see 125 a day, 181 days a year for the past 26 years, so I have no worries.
I wish you would display some respect here for ALL teachers.
I just don’t get that vibe from you. I feel respect from Diane though.
I guess this is my sanctuary, so maybe I will chill and not get so upset.
LikeLike
Thanks helpful, Linda. What do you teach those 125 students a day(subject? area?)
If you were going to design a school with a group of your friends and other teachers you respect, would it be any different than the one where you work? If so, how would it be different?
LikeLike
English/language arts…reading, writing, thinking, speaking..they are very good at speaking. I have close to 2,500 books in my classroom and I can tell you which book, author, genre, etc would best match each student.
I would get rid of the endless testing and test prep. I would engage them in more interdisciplinary projects with cross over to all subject areas…we lost this with NCLB and the race to the trough. I would have less adminstration and coaches and more professionals working directly with kids. I would continue full inclusion as much as possible, but supplement or support those students with direct services in their deficit area and that should be mandatory. I would keep guidance, the arts (music, art, cooking, wood/metal, CAD, technology, drama, clubs, sports, health, etc).
Much of what we have lost is not due to incompetence but due to unfunded mandates and a lack of respect for our profession. Too many dictating to us have never stepped into a classroom nor have they ever been responsible for educating children. They are politically connected and believe they are smarter.
They don’t even know what they don’t know. Have a good weekend.
LikeLike
Linda, I agree with all you’ve just said, all the administrators doing their walk throughs at whim just leaves teachers on edge. It’s not productive or inspiring.
We had a local education professor come and speak to us during a rare training, he spoke in a nonjudgemental way about what he’s doing that works with the children he works with in the campus school. It was so energizing. This is what works, teachers are inherently thinkers and learners themselves so to be treated that way was so refreshing for a change.
I love the idea of mentors coming in, no clipboards no rating scale, just freedom to teach and learn at the same time.
LikeLike
I would like to pick out another section of the article, where the author is clearly quoting Stiglitz: “Stiglitz argues that while market forces help contribute to inequality, it is actually anti-egalitarian government policies that shape those “market forces.” “Much of the inequality that exists today is a result of government policy steered by the self-interest of private factions.” ”
I along with some others who post here, argue that the use of geographically determined school admission along with local funding is “..government policy steered by the self-interest of private factions”. I’m I wrong?
LikeLike
Yes, teaching economist. But I am not sure what real work impact there is with discussions here.
LikeLike
For every comment that is made there are many more eyes reading.
LikeLike
Joe said
” So I think we should be learning from the most effective district & charter public schools, serving a vast array of students.”
But Charter Schools have been going for 20 years so why haven’t all their good ideas crossed over? Because
a) there “good ideas” are actually old ideas discredited years ago (rote learning, intense disipline),
b) there “good ideas” are to manipulate the student population so that teaching is cheap and easier (or other things that Public School can’t do),
c) there “good ideas” don’t work for the type of kids left behind in Public Schools or sent back to Public School from Charter Schools – it only works for kids who have motivated parents and will conform (but then any school system will work for them as any teacher will tell you) and
d) there “good ideas” are actually not that good anyway because only a smallish proportion of Charter Schools are better than the local Public School.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Transparent Christina.
LikeLike
TE said
” Usually people here argue that the more capable and competent student will be better off by choosing the selective charter option, and the student left behind will lose. ”
I don’t think people would argue that at all. Since Charter Schools are usually no better than the local public school, I think most people here would recommend a capable and competent student (or any student for that matter) would be more likely to be better off in their local public school.
A capable and competent student (with motivated parents) is likely to do well in any school system anyway. Which makes it really unfathomable how badly Charter Schools do when the kids that come to them have so many great attributes compared to the kids left behind.
I guess that just proves how assymetrical information is about education quality and the power of advertising and special interest groups.
LikeLike
Well perhaps I can quote Dr. Ravitch in an earlier post: “The more charters open, the more the public schools decline, especially when they lose their most motivated families and students. This is not simply a matter of transferring money from Peter to Paul, but crippling Peter to enrich Paul.” (Link:https://dianeravitch.net/2012/11/14/charters-expand-despite-lack-of-evidence-for-their-success/). Perhaps you think Dr. Ravitch is ill informed?
My son found it necessary to leave the public school system in order to find appropriate courses, as had others in his High school. Without the chance to leave the public school, I am not sure he would have been able to deal well enough with high school to graduate. I know that was an issue for some of his fellow college classmates.
LikeLike
Megan..in the NY Times today.
More Lessons About Charter Schools
Published: February 1, 2013
The charter school movement gained a foothold in American education two decades ago partly by asserting that independently run, publicly financed schools would outperform traditional public schools if they were exempted from onerous regulations. The charter advocates also promised that unlike traditional schools, which were allowed to fail without consequence, charter schools would be rigorously reviewed and shut down when they failed to perform.
LikeLike
Let’s keep it real.
Colorado State Senator Michael Johnston, on the Board of External Advisors of America Achieves—a distinction also shared with Wendy Kopp of TFA—proudly advertises on his America Achieves profile [his photo is very appealing] that he was a co-founder and principal of MESA. What is MESA? A “redesigned urban high school” that “made Colorado history by becoming the first public high school in which 100 percent of seniors were admitted to four-year colleges.” All 44 of them!
Irrefutable proof—yes?—that I am sure would powerfully sway any parent who might consider a charter over a public school. On a nicely designed website, a glossy brochure, a snazzy handout: a firm-handshake deal-clincher. An absolutely crushing endorsement of charters.
Enter reality. While Gary Rubinstein is appreciate of any effort on behalf of disadvantaged students, he has pointed that there were “actually 73 tenth graders who had dwindled to 44 seniors—a pretty relevant detail.” Fly in the ointment? Beam in the eye? I guess it all depends on whether you are a charterite/privatizer who forgets the 29 students who didn’t make it to MESA graduation or you take a stand for “a better education for all.”
For those who spend their time on blogs like this and in a myriad of other ways independently verify or disprove claims by anyone [I literally mean: anyone] concerning education, this sort of information is not hard to come by. But most people don’t go to all that trouble. Just consider how shocked most people would be to know that the above statement by Michael Johnston was [to put it charitably] an ill-chosen misleading factoid, or [to put it in the worst light] self-serving spin and market-driven hyperbole.
Lots of people love the theory of education. What I treasure about many of the postings on this website is talking about what happens when the rubber hits the road.
LikeLike
Furthermore, getting into a four-year college is just the beginning. Even if I were willing to overlook the 29 dropouts, I’d still want to know how those 44 fared once they got to college. How many of them make it past their first year of college? How many graduate?
LikeLike
I believe they do not want to reveal that data to the public.
LikeLike
A few things:
First, I’ve been in high schools where many students have their pictures up on the way in the entrance. I’ve asked why they are posted and been told that they are all conference in sports. One of the things we advocate is to put up pictures who do well in music, or painting or math, chemistry, history day, etc. That helps show the school values various forms of accomplishment, not just sports. One of the videos that Duane cited points this out.
We have worked with a variety of educators to encourage newspapers and radio stations to give more attention to students who excell in artistic and academic competitions. Students who excell in sports already receive a lot of attention. I’m not opposed to that, but I would like to see broader appreciation of academic and artistic accomplishment.
On % of students who not only enter, but graduate from some form of higher education. We think this should be available for families for all schools, district and charter.
LikeLike
I don’t know charter figures, but at my not very selective university (93% acceptance rate), the overall first year retention rate is around 80%.
LikeLike
My children’s high school used to post paint the names of national merit finalists in a corner of the common room, but it stopped the practice five or six years ago. It does have two Siemens AP prize banners prominently displayed in the common room, however.
LikeLike
Honoring academic and artistic accomplishment is good, right? Athletes get plenty of attention.
LikeLike
I definitely think so, but it is the exception rather than the rule. The academically gifted are often forced to choose between revealing their intellectual abilities and social acceptance. Athletes don’t have to make those choices.
LikeLike
Folks,
Joe Nathan has been doing a lot of posting recently and at times raising legitimate concerns about public education. But there is also a not so subtle undertone through his use of various anecdotes about “bad” public school employees, practices, etc. . . , I think mainly as a way of pointing out that we public school defenders do the same thing with charter schools (with which he is heavily involved, see below). I agree with him that there can be many things changed in public education but not in the sense that he does. His “reforms” are a marriage of charterism KIPP style command and control of the teaching and learning process with business principles to “increase student achievement” (see below also).
On another post I asked him the following (and he had mentioned on another reply to someone that he had been having trouble posting his responses so I will give him the benefit of the doubt as to why he hadn’t responded to my request): “Joe, What is the name of your “small group”. What exactly does this group do? Are you the owner of that group? How much does your group take in dollar wise? I can understand why you would be a conciliator between the seemingly two apposing (and opposing) forces of the public sector vs the deformers (and yes that is what most of these schemes are, deforms) since your current lively hood depends on both sectors.” So I did a little digging to find out. All quotations are from his site Center for School Change (CSC). Here is my take on his “business” (and I don’t know if it is a non-profit or for profit venture, I don’t know how to get that information.) I also don’t know what its or his annual dollar income are (again someone more computer savvy than me might be able to get that information or maybe Joe will enlighten us).
Here are sources of funding: “Cargill, Gates, Annenberg, Blandin, General Mills, St. Paul, St. Paul Companies, Peters, Minneapolis, TCF, Joyce, Bradley and Rockefeller Foundations, the U.S. Department of Education, the University of Minnesota, the Minnesota Initiative Funds, Best Buy, Pohlad, and Wallin Foundation.” I’ll let you decide on the “bent” of those funders.
As for CSC’s mission: “The Center for School Change works with educators, parents, business people, students, policy-makers and other concerned people throughout the United States to:
Increase student achievement.
Raise high school and post-secondary graduation rates.
Improve student attitudes toward learning, their schools, and being positive, active, contributing members of their community.
Strengthen communities through building stronger working relationships among educators, parents, students and other community members.”
Well, when one’s top mission is to “increase student achievement” which really means raise test scores we can see why he writes what he writes here. “Improve student attitudes”, i.e., make the students into compliant, diligent test takers a la KIPP (see below*). Nothing about the teaching and learning process, eh?
He’s a strong promoter of “business ethics” (if that isn’t an oxymoron I don’t know what is other than military intelligence) and practices to guide educational “leaders”. From his site: “As of the school year 2012-13, the Leadership Academy is welcoming its fifth cohort of approximately 10 educators, representing both district and charter public schools. The year-long Leadership Academy has several key features: Each participant has an education and a business mentor, each participant visits outstanding public schools in another city, each participant has a year long project designed to help improve achievement in her/his school, and each participant attends approximately 6 workshops throughout the year. The overall goal is to help develop much stronger skills and knowledge, leading to measurable improvement in schools led by leadership academy participants.” Notice the “leading to ‘measurable improvement'” meme. In other words learn how to become a slave driver to your teachers and students in order to placate the testing/measuring gods for you will be dead sure when you finish the academy you will have what it takes to be the Master.
*Leadership Academy videos
KIPP School Houston, TX
KIPP test prep and college readiness
KIPP teachers are available in the evenings
KIPP heritage and lineage
KIPP’s goals 2yr, 4yr and other options
KIPP – Big Literary Lessons
Leadership development at KIPP
KIPP through college (grades 6-16)
KIPP Shine PREP (PreK – elementary)
How does KIPP improve its faculty
KIPP gratitude wall and KIPP SHINE Manifesto
KIPP adminstrators help teachers achieve their goals
How special ed works at KIPP
KIPP – graduation ceremony at the end of the year
How KIPP keeps teachers happy
KIPP wall of honor
What’s the KIPP leader reading?
Teachers’ dress code issues at KIPP
Yes Prep School, Houston, TX
YES Prep history of the campus
YES Prep focus on college
YES Prep – Middle School Pathways
YES Prep – middle school students research to show there is a place for you on higher ed
YES Prep focus on colleges and universities is unique
YES Prep – College Counseling is our Meat and Potatoes
College Corner at YES Prep
YES Prep posts all college acceptance letters
YES Prep importance of individual school goals
YES Prep number of college students and graduates
YES Prep seminar classes help prepare students for higher education
YES Prep – college themed homerooms
YES Prep students own their own path for post-secondary education
So now we know where ol Joe is coming from!
Duane
LikeLike
Duane…when you have time read this oped (they usually don’t reveal the attrition rates, staff and students) at the charter chains or the relentless test prep. I wonder if they have creative ways of “coaching” during the high stakes testing days or weeks.
More Lessons About Charter Schools
Published: February 1, 2013
The charter school movement gained a foothold in American education two decades ago partly by asserting that independently run, publicly financed schools would outperform traditional public schools if they were exempted from onerous regulations. The charter advocates also promised that unlike traditional schools, which were allowed to fail without consequence, charter schools would be rigorously reviewed and shut down when they failed to perform.
LikeLike
Linda,
I think the best person to answer your query about “if they have creative ways of ‘coaching’ during the high stakes testing days or weeks” would be Joe Nathan as his organization’s first listed mission is to “increase student achievement”. But I would not expect him to give up the “secret sauce recipe*” without at least some enhanced interrogation techniques being applied by the CIA, you know maybe sleep deprivation with cold bathings while being held in a 4’x4’x6′ cell naked with no windows having Slim Whitman alternating with Neil Sedaka playing at 125 decibels the whole time-HA HA!! But I wouldn’t expect him to “crack”, right Joe?.
From the article: “In fact, the study notes, it is pretty clear after just three years which schools are going to be high performers and which of them will be mediocre. By that time, the charter authorizers should be putting troubled schools on notice that they might soon be closed. As the study notes: “For the majority of schools, poor first year performance will give way to poor second year performance.”
If that’s the case then they should be immediately shut down. Either that or all charters should not be able to receive public funding and should have to stand on their own. I wonder how many would survive or even how many could get started.
*Thanks to Edushyster for that one!
LikeLike
Duane,
In a rush this morning, but this is also the robotic response we get here in CT when “reformers” are questioned. They do have their talking points memorized:
“We support the measures that close the Achievement Gap while raising academic outcomes for all students.”
LikeLike
Thanks for the extensive description of our website. Unfortunately you left out some things. For example:
* You tube Videos produced by students featuring district and charter students of various races encouraging students to participate in Advanced Placement, Intl Bac, College inthe Schools or Post Sec. Options. Doing this helps students save thousands of dollars and be better prepared for college. Perhaps you think this is a bad idea, but low income parents and parents of color around the country have thanked us for doing this.
* Newspaper columns describing outstanding practices of district & charter schools, including, for example, how schools are using recess to help youngsters to play together in a constructive way, and not to bully eachother
* In the Leadership Academy each participant also has an outstanding educator mentor. Again, many district educators say they love learning from more experienced people, and it’s not just learning about how to boost achievement. It’s how to work more effectively with adults – something many teachers on this list serve have right complained their school leaders don’t know how to do.
LikeLike
Joe,
You’re welcome but it wasn’t meant to be an “extensive description” of the site but an expose on where you are coming from in the charter/voucher/public/private education debate since I have felt that you have been a little less than candid about your intentions (see your list of donors/backers). I have no problem with you defending what you do, and if I were you I would probably tell me to “Eat shit and die” but that’s my crude way of being and thinking.
But you marketers and politicos, and that is part of what you are at this point in time, are slick with words and deflect and obfuscate by throwing all kinds of other talking points (see above three points that contain a multitude of problem areas-IB, pure BS, AP, pure BS, Advanced Credit I have no problem with as long as the class is aligned with a specific university course) out there to continue to attempt to hide the fact that indeed, you are one of the edudeformers in my mind-a good and slick one at that.
Again I ask, how much does your group take in each year from these various sources? How much do you pay yourself? Handsomely? Six Figures?
And to be a “leader” and show that I’m not afraid to put my meager income out there for all to see here you go:
Line 5 of my 2012 W2 which comes the closest to my “contracted salary” (which I don’t have with me here) is 51789.28 with line 1 being 43385.64. And that’s for 18 years experience with MA and other post grad hours.
Lay it out there, Joe. Hell, I’m helping to pay your salary since one of your funders is the USDOE. How much do you get from them? So I would like to think I have the right to know what you make just as you have the right to know what a local public district pays its employees.
LikeLike
Several points for Duane and others. Duane refesr to Advanced Placement and Int. Bac as “B.S’
I respectfully disagree, especially on IB. That program has helped many kids all over the country and in other parts of the world. I’m also a big fan of helping young people save dollars by being better prepared for college.
Re my salary – If I was a district public school assistant principal or program director in St. Paul, (which I was for a few years), I would be earning 15-30K more than I am. I earn less than $100K/year.
Of course you are welcome to your view of my work. We are helping district and charter educators carry out their ideas all over the country. You can call it “deform” if you’d like.
People in a variety of schools have picked up on the idea of students creating You-Tube Videos that encourage certain behaviors. Of course we are not the only ones who’ve had the idea. But we have provided examples that some people find useful.
There are lots of teachers in district public schools who like the idea they have been able to create the kinds of schools they think make sense, in part because of our work.
LikeLike
Joe,
Thanks for the reply. One final new question. How much does your group take in in annual grants, donations, etc. . . . And who then do those funds belong to?
LikeLike
Varies from year to year, Duane, both in terms of how much we receive, and how $ are distributed. For example, we received $50K in 2012 from USDE/MDE to help inform low income and limited English speaking families about the value of taking Dual High School/College credit courses. We used some of that to create you-tube videos and a booklet with students essays, written from district & charter schools.
We received about $20K from the St. Paul Schools to work with district & charters, helping them build stronger connections with community, families and other groups. We received $65K from a local foundation to work with district & charters to encourage more students to take dual credit courses, and help more families understand.
We had a 3 year grant of $1.2 million grant several years ago to help district and charters increase family involvement and improve reading & math skills. Some of that money went directly to schools to help them carry out work plans that they developed. On average, we’ve brought in $4-500,000 over the last 5 years.
Are you going to ask others in this group what their salaries are, and how much their organizations bring in?
LikeLike
Duane, thanks for the legwork on behalf of all the readers. We have disagreed in discourse here before, and I will add one more point. Military Intelligence as an oxymoron is only true above the level of enlisted men. Officers get delusional, NCO’s are thoroughly grounded in reality and are all to aware of what is going on around them. I will concede as part of a Hostage Rescue Team, we were likely just out of our minds. If I weren’t pursuing an M.A. in Special Education I’d be doing some of the research you are doing. Keep up the fight and thanks for all you do.
LikeLike
Old Teacher: My very first job brought me in contact with many veterans, from WWII and Korea to Vietnam. It’s where I heard for the first time the classic “There are three ways to do everything: the right way, the wrong way, and the army way.” This from guys who spanned the political spectrum, all sorts of backgrounds and colors and beliefs, but nobody above an NCO.
Almost to a person they earned my respect and sometimes my admiration. One of my supervisors was such a fellow. He commented privately to me one day, on one of the rare occasions that I wore an peace [in Vietnam] button to work, that while he didn’t agree with the slogan I was sporting [“Bring Our Troops Home Now!”] that he and his friends who died in WWII had fought precisely to defend my freedom as an American to have a dissenting opinion. He said this without a trace of sarcasm or ridicule, in a soft but matter-of-fact and proud way. I was quite moved and simply said, “Thank you.” And I said it, and meant it, in the same way.
So with all due respect to Duane, who does a lot of the heavy lifting on this blog, from my limited perspective I agree with you that “Military Intelligence as an oxymoron is only true above the level of enlisted men.”
🙂
LikeLike
Thanks for the kind words. I used the military intelligence as a tongue in cheek reference that I thought most would recognize, as it is one of those “catch phrases” that was very much part of the political scene in the sixties and early seventies. Not ever having been part of the military but having known many “grunts” over the years (my dad was a marine in WW2) who generally were very “grounded in reality” and knew exactly the insanities to which they were being exposed. Unfortunately this country believes it has the right to militarily dictate to other countries how their country should be governed/run and those who have read my posts know I am staunchly anti-military in those cases (and all of our “wars” since WW2 fall into that category.) I’m sure that you as a former “grunt” knows better than I that it’s not the politician’s sons and daughters who are put in harms way.
Good luck with your M.A. and then I hope you enjoy working with the students who truly need a public school teacher to help them through life. I have a couple of good friends who are Sped teachers and from the stories I hear I say that they should be paid the most out of all teachers.
Me, I have plenty of time to do some research as it’s just me and my chocolab and Maine coon cat out here in the woods and they get tired of talking with me and tell me to “go do some research won’t you?”
LikeLike
Thanks, Duane! In that same, earlier post, after Joe replied to almost everything you’d asked him, I again asked him to answer you RE:specifics about his “small group” (which I then looked up,
finding some of the info. you mention above).
Still waiting for Joe’s answers as to the other questions you could not find answers to.
LikeLike
Retired, I replied to the question about salary (less than $100K, less than I would earn if I had stayed in the district as a school leader). What other questions would you like answers to.
Also, what do you think of the Boston Pilot School program, which gives classroom teachers the chance to create district public schools that they think make sense?
LikeLike
Duane & Linda: your postings are much appreciated.
For the last several days I have been following more closely than usual the comments, questions and responses/”responses” that have been posted on this website. It has become very clear that some of the most damaging evidence against the charterites/privatizers comes from their very own mouths/pens/keyboards. And yet, when some of the damning evidence provided by leading players [e.g., Michelle Rhee, Michael Johnston, Michael J Petrilli] is raised here, the best answer by their tacit defenders is [drum roll, please] the NON-reply.
If for no other reason than to salvage some personal dignity, the NON-reply is a NON-starter on this website. I spent several years on the BRIDGING DIFFERENCES website reading every comment by every poster. I very slowly came to agree with most of what Diane and Deborah had to say because a), Diane and Deborah made some good points and b), their most vociferous critics were so determined to make their own one or two or three points over and over again that they either forgot to reply or having nothing convincing to say, they figured the best approach was to permanently engage their rhetorical gear in the NON-reply mode.
To make it perfectly clear: I am sure that at least some small players in the charter movement are ethical and effective. It’s the big players, though, that receive careful scrutiny on this website and for good reason: they’re the ones setting the tone and pace and moral standing of the charterite/privatizer movement.
LikeLike
(Not So)Krazy TA–Good point! I find, too, when reading “The Answer Sheet” that the pro-reform/pro-charter or argumentative commenters/comments go round and round, creating lots of time & space-wasting. So, many times, it’s best for us to not even answer or debate.So little time, so many comments…
LikeLike
This isn’t a reply to myself, but to Joe Nathan above (sorry I couldn’t fit it in under your response to me, Joe). Yes–I see where you answered the ? about your salary (my comment was a minute after your reply, so I guess it hadn’t yet been posted-?). Anyway, thanks for answering. Since you read Diane & participate in our conversations, you understand our curiosity & cynicism!
LikeLike
The reason Eisenhower only want those who had played team sports on his team for the invasion is he understood that they understood that you only win when you play as a team and team sports makes this very obvious. The hero is only a hero if the grunt does their job so that they can look like a hero when the fact is that it took everyone for the group to obtain its solution and win with the proper “Outcome.” If we forget this we will certainly lose. This is how Alexander the Great and other great leaders have won many times against great odds.
LikeLike
You are spot on George. Football is really a simple game that is won at the line. The “skills” players get the glory, but without a line they get carried off the field on a stretcher.
LikeLike
George,
I’m not quite sure what you are getting at with this comment and how it relates to the topic.
But to address the whole team concept, I’ve felt the sting of not being considered a “good team player” when I was asked (and refused) to do things because it was what the team was doing even though what was being done was wrong. Sorry but I don’t like the team analogy and I’ve been a sports nut all my life.
Please help me understand what you are trying to say.
Thanks,
Duane
LikeLike
Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list post that was stimulated by the Ravitch’s blog entry:
Hake, R.R. 2013. “Economist Kern Alexander Explains the Problem with School Choice,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/WIdRH5. Post of 02 Feb 2013 13:00:30-0800 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists and are also on my blog “Hake’sEdStuff” at http://bit.ly/We8IrV with a provision for comments.
LikeLike
An interesting example of how information chnges with repetition. Kern Alexander is not an economist, but does have a Ed.D and is a distinguished expert on educational policy. Kern Alexander does quote an economist in the paper, Joeseph Stiglitz, but the quote Dr. Ravitch picked out was not a quote from Dr.Stiglitz.
LikeLike
Two points:
(1) “teachingeconomisot” comments: “Kern Alexander is not an economist, but does have a Ed.D and is a distinguished expert on educational policy.”
That Kern Alexander Wikipedia has an “Ed.D and is a distinguished expert on educational policy” is consistent with Wikipedia’s entry at http://bit.ly/VCD4V4 . However, in my view, that information doesn’t necessarily disqualifyAlexander from being regarded as an “economist.” My online dictionary tells me that an economist “an expert in economics,” and that economics is “the branch of knowledge concerned with the production, consumption, and transfer of wealth.” Amazon.com lists at http://amzn.to/11ikQ0V six books by Alexander with titles suggesting that they concern “the production, consumption, and transfer of wealth.” So, at least in my book, Alexander qualifies to be classed as an economist, even though he “has an Ed.D and is a distinguished expert on educational policy.”
(2) “teachingeconomisot” comments: “Kern Alexander does quote an economist in the paper, Joeseph Stiglitz, but the quote Dr. Ravitch picked out was not a quote from Dr.Stiglitz.”
Diane Ravitch wrote [bracketed by lines “RRRRRR. . . .”]:
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Here is an economist Kern Alexander]who sees choice differently.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
“Stiglitz quotes Alexis de Tocqueville who said that the main element of the “peculiar genius of American society” is “self-interest properly understood.” The last two words, “properly understood,” are the key, says Stiglitz. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
The last paragraph above is Alexander quoting Stiglitz quoting Alexis de Tocqueville’s statement that “the main element of the ‘peculiar genius of American society’ is ‘self-interest properly understood.’ ”
Contrary to “teachingeconomisot,” the above “the main element of the ‘peculiar genius of American society’ is ‘self-interest properly understood’ ” is, in fact, a quote from Dr. Stiglitz.
LikeLike
You are welcome to refer to anyone you wish as an economist.
I am still confused as to whose voice we are hearing. The last lines of the essay are “School tuition vouchers and charter schools are the operational models for implementation of the “narrow self-interest.” It is easy to recognize, but difficult to justify.” Is that Stiglitz? Is it Alexander?
LikeLike
To all,
If you have time please read and watch the video posted at the end:
From Daily Censored posted on January 29, 2013
By Steve Zeltzer with Kathleen Carroll
CA State Whistleblower’s Lawsuit Exposes Web of Corruption and Deceit At The Commission On Teacher Credentialing (CTC)
LikeLike
Here’s a link to the final decision. Have you read this? The Commission ruled that the Ms. Carroll lied, pursued a romantic relationship with a Commission member after being told repeatedly to stop, “breached the trust given to her,” neglected her duties and “pursued a romantic relationship with a Committee member, despite knowing that she should not do so; “made dishonest statements to supervisors and co-workers; and encouraged Committee members to violate CTC policies. Thus, she breached the trust placed in her and undermined her effectiveness as an attorney.”
Does this describe someone you would want working at your school?
http://www.upwa.info/documents/Carroll-v.-CTC.pdf
LikeLike
She wasn’t working at a school. She is a lawyer and what does that have to do with what was happening to the teachers? It doesn’t take away from the injustices committed by the CTC. Why are you always willing to defend those who want to take teachers down? That’s why I don’t trust you.
LikeLike
The Commission found that she was constantly dishonest, breached the trust given to her given to her and on and on, continued an inappropriate romantic relationship after being told to stop, and on and on. Not the kind of person I would believe.
LikeLike
And you believe Michelle Rhee, Duncan, Bloomberg, White, etc. etc….let’s hold ALL of the shysters to the same high standards Joe. They spin, obfuscate and lie all the time. You must be very upset about that, too.
There is still proof of violations against teachers. Read it all carefully.
You still defend those trying to destroy a profession. That’s what I will remember.
LikeLike
Actually I strongly disagree with much of what Rhee proposes.
LikeLike
Read this, too..closing and link:
The California Teachers Association CTA/NEA and the California Federation of Teachers CFT/AFT must be aware of these financial conflicts of interests, the corporate connections and the legal violations against teachers but have to this date refused either to educate their members about these connections or engage in a political education campaign to expose those who are demolishing the public education system. They are also silent about any demand that the State Attorney Kamala Harris investigate and prosecute these systemic financial conflicts of interests. Is it because the unions have taken money from Gates and other privatizers? The fact that the leadership of the NEA and AFT have taken millions from these billionaire funded foundations and even advertise for their locals to apply for money from these operations raise serious question even about conflicts of interests by the top union officials of these education unions.
A growing number of teachers and education workers are asking where their unions have been as this wrecking operation has escalated? Is Gates using the divide and conquer method to cause dissent within the union by tempting union officials with big bucks? According to Dr. Diane Ravitch’s book, The Death and Life of The Great American School System, Gates has given money to NEA. The rank and file of education unions around the country are beginning to connect the dots of the attack on education and draw the lessons that these attacks are not only coming from the profiteers but are taking place with the complicity and silence of their union leadership.
http://www.dailycensored.com/ca-state-whistleblowers-lawsuit-exposes-web-of-corruption-and-deceit-at-the-commission-on-teacher-credentialing-ctc/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Dailycensored+%28Daily+Censored%29
LikeLike
“teachingeconomisot” commented [bracketed by lines “TE-TE-TE- . . . . “; my insert at “. . . . . . [[insert]] . . . . “]:
TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE
I am still confused as to whose voice we are hearing. The last lines of the essay. . . . . . [[“Asymmetric Information, Parental Choice, Vouchers, Charter Schools and Stiglitz” (Alexander, 2012)]] . . . . .are:
“School tuition vouchers and charter schools are the operational models for implementation of the ‘narrow self-interest.’ It is easy to recognize, but difficult to justify.”
Is that Stiglitz? Is it Alexander?”
TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE-TE
The above: “School tuition vouchers and charter schools are the operational models for implementation of the ‘narrow self-interest.’ It is easy to recognize, but difficult to justify” is the voice of Kern Alexander.
To see this, read *carefully* the following passage from Kern Alexander (2012) at http://bit.ly/XuBB2u [bracketed by lines “AAAAA. . . . .”; references converted to APA style; my inserts at “. . . .[[insert]]. . . . . ; the above quote is in CAPS ]:
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
. . . . . . . . Stiglitz. . . . . .[[ http://bit.ly/YL4xrV%5D%5D. . . quotes Alexis de Tocqueville who said that the main element of the “peculiar genius of American society” is “self-interest properly understood.” The last two words, “properly understood,” are the key, says Stiglitz. According to Stiglitz, everyone possesses self-interest in the “narrow sense.” This “narrow sense” with regard to educational choice is usually exercised for reasons other than educational quality, the chief reasons being race, religion, economic and social status, and similarity with persons with comparable information, biases and prejudices. But Stiglitz interprets Tocqueville’s “properly understood” to mean a much broader and more desirable and moral objective, that of “appreciating” and paying attention to everyone else’s self-interest. In other words, the common welfare is, in fact, “a precondition for one’s own ultimate well being” [Stiglitz (2012, p. 288] Such commonality in the advancement of the public good is lost by the narrow self-interest. SCHOOL TUITION VOUCHERS AND CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE THE OPERATIONAL MODELS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE “NARROW SELF-INTEREST.” IT IS EASY TO RECOGNIZE, BUT DIFFICULT TO JUSTIFY.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Richard Hake
REFERENCES
Alexander, K. 2012. “Asymmetric Information, Parental Choice, Vouchers, Charter Schools and Stiglitz,” Journal of Education Finance, Fall; online at http://bit.ly/XuBB2u.
LikeLike