A friend who works for a major education association attended the EdWeek sponsored event about the Common Core express in Indianapolis (you know, get on it now before it leaves the station). He was aware of my concern that Education Week, which is supposed to be a nonpartisan source of news and information, has become a cheerleader for Common Core and has failed to give equal time to those who have doubts about its wisdom or efficacy. To be sure, Education Week has some excellent reporters, who maintain the highest standards of journalistic integrity, but the corporate entity is on board the corporate reform train.
He sent this report from Indianapolis:
I can now say without reservation that EdWeek is not neutral.  In fact, the entire event was dripping with subtle yet unmistakable references to pro-corporate reform propaganda.  Below is a list of references to corporate reform that I noticed as the day unfolded:
  1. The event was sponsored by Wireless Generation, a division of Rupert Murdoch’s Amplify.  The backdrop of the stage was literally covered in the logos of EdWeek and Wireless Generation.
  2. Cari Miller, policy advisor for Jeb Bush’s FEE, was in the audience.  Several TFA’ers also were on the roster.
  3. The Superintendent from Hillsboro County Schools in FL, MaryEllen Elia, was one of the keynote speakers. During her presentation,During another discussion, there was heavy promotion of A-F grading and the parent trigger in OH being tied to CCSS.  I didn’t make the connection between CCSS and those two issues, but the fact that it was discussed was puzzling to me.
    1. She devoted a significant portion of her talk to the ways they have incorporated CCSS into their teacher evaluation system, including the upcoming assessments.
    2. She bragged about recruiting parents to promote pro-CCSS materials to the PTAs within the district.  Brainwashing parents through “moles” among PTAs.
    3. She said that she discourages teachers from advancing to administration so that they can become “teacher leaders” while staying in the classroom.  And while I appreciate the sentiment, my cynicism lead me to believe that this discouragement was based on a desire to leave room in administration for Broad-trained folks.
    4. She bragged about her ability to get the business community in her county (corporate involvement) to stand behind CCSS.  “If business supports the CCSS, it takes the pressure of educators…”
    5. In response to a question from the audience regarding teacher training, she openly criticized teacher ed programs saying (paraphrase), “I question if higher ed is where it needs to be.  Professors simply aren’t engaged in what is happening in schools.  FL is putting stress on grading the Depts of Education in our state.
  4. During another discussion, there was heavy promotion of A-F grading and the parent trigger in OH being tied to CCSS.  I didn’t make the connection between CCSS and those two issues, but the fact that it was discussed was puzzling to me.
  5. There was promotion of personalized learning from a RTTT-d winner in the audience.  I don’t disagree with personalized learning per se, but in the context of corporate reform, it almost always means the promotion of digital education.
  6. During a lunch discussion, a renegade school administrator spoke out against CCSS during a Q&A session.  As she bemoaned decades of “the latest and greatest innovation,” the EdWeek staffers looked panicked.  It tells you something when those who are putting on an event become concerned when someone shares candid remarks.
  7. Virginia Edwards, EdWeek’s editor, lost all credibility with me as she wrapped up the lunchtime Q&A.  She spoke in reference to the “renegade” I just wrote about and said to the audience (paraphrasing), “I’m not trying to be a supporter of the CCSS, but if you’re not going to support CCSS now, then when?  Journalism had to change or we would have died.  In the same way, teachers have to get hip or die…but I still remain agnostic toward the CCSS.”
Diane, I had to leave after that.  I couldn’t take it anymore.  It was so blatantly pro-corporate reform that I had to get out.  I have made the decision that I will no longer renew my membership to EdWeek.  My hope is that your new Network for Public Ed will develop a strong enough voice to counteract the forces driving this corporate agenda.