David Sirota, Denver journalist and talk show host, has
been trying to figure out the push for privatization. He thinks he
has it: profits. He recounts the tawdry Tony Bennett scandal, in
which he rigged school grades to protect a political donor, then
moved on to Florida, where his wife was hired by a for-profit
charter corporation that Bennett favored in Indiana. And he recites
a few more chapters and verses in the privatization story. He
concludes: You could consider that the most prolific
fundraiser in the education “reform” movement is not someone with a
stellar record of education policy success, but instead Michelle
Rhee, the former Washington, D.C., schools chief whose tenure was
defined by a massive cheating scandal. But
maybe the best way to see that profit is the motive of the
education “reform” movement is to note that no matter how many kids
they harm or how many scandals they create, Bennett, Bush, Rhee and
other privatizers continue getting jobs, continue being touted as
education “experts” and continue raising huge money for their
cause. Thanks to that dynamic, education
politics is spotlighting a fact that should be taught in every
civics class. It is a fact that contradicts the pervasive rhetoric
about meritocracy, but it is, alas, a fact: If you are backed by
enough money, you will almost always retain your status in America
— no matter how wrong you are and how many lives you
ruin.

Did you intend to include a link to the original post?
Sirota makes a lot of sense. Pro-public school activists should consider looking for wealthy and celebrity patrons to fight fire with fire.
LikeLike
I’m looking for a fire brigade of maybe a few million people, bringing their own trucks, hoses, and buckets.
Wealthy and celebrity fire fighters among them is okay, if they can pass a bucket.
LikeLike
I have tried this, with no luck. I believe some who are on tv shows are worried about sponsorship ties.
LikeLike
Here’s a link to one of the papers that ran it. I can’t find the one I saw it in yesterday.
http://expressmilwaukee.com/article-21635-a-civics-lesson-from-americas-education-debate.html
LikeLike
There was a man by the name of Edward Bernays who is said to have “founded” public relations.
His ideas on subconscious manipulation (see his book, “Propaganda”) could partially explain why education politics here has its present trajectory.
Walter Lippman was another person who believed that the “public” was not to be trusted with discerning information with alacrity and thought that the public needed to be protected from itself.
A new poll, by AP-Norc and funded by the Joyce Foundation, has surfaced claiming that parents support high stakes standardized testing. It seems as though these kinds of polls give credibility to the edu-reformers rhetoric. Read the poll and decide for yourself.
I think most of us who read this blog disagree that the current emphasis on high stakes standardized testing is a good thing.
My point is that this new poll is possibly another example of how the education debate has been, and is being, framed in America.
Is this the marketing of education in America, and is it succeeding because we don’t know the real rules of the game?
LikeLike
So you’re saying that polls are being manipulated to promote the reform for profit agenda? I would agree that while the media is controlled by the for profit powerful lies become truths.
LikeLike
I think we already know that the number one rule of the game is having connections to very deep pockets.
We haven’t been able to play that game because we’ve been unable to find any millionaires or billionaires who don’t have the agenda to profit off the backs of America’s children (disguised as altruism).
LikeLike
Let’s look deeper at this “game”. It’s not necessarily succeeding anymore, is it? We have a book tour coming up, as the new year commences, that will draw on other reservoirs of power.
Their game runs on celebrity noise and money, media manipulation, and hired pundits planting incoherence and popular confusion across all the outlets money can buy. We can’t let it win, and we have to beat it in an entirely different game. Not noise and shallow celebrity spin, not corruption or the psychological science of big lies.
The worst outcome possible is if they convince aware and articulate people to just imitate their methods. We can build this movement on the consciousness, reason, integrity, coherent thought, creativity and courage of our people. Their truth is written with a small “t”, in a million separate instances.
This blog raised a banner, and people responded. Powerful analysis and determined resistance have rolled in, and are summarized in an incandescent new book with solid and compelling scholarship. We can use that to crowd-source our movement some more.
LikeLike
Unfortunately, there’s more ammunition coming in from the other side. Check out this appearance on the Diane Rehm Show (WAMU radio) by Amanda Ripley, author of The Smartest Kids in the World: http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2013-08-19/amanda-ripley-smartest-kids-world
Ripley extols Teach for America and doesn’t acknowledge that low-poverty US schools’ PISA scores rank very high. And of course she takes high PISA scores as a proxy for educational excellence, a dubious concept at best. She also believes that three to four hours of homework per night for a third grader is a good thing.
Diane Rehm has a great show, but for some reason she seems mesmerized by biased “reporters” like Steven Brill and Ms. Ripley. I’m hoping she will give Diane’s new book a fair hearing, but if her positive response to the Ripley book is any indication, we have a lot of work to do.
LikeLike
I read Sirota’s article here: “A Civics Lesson From America’s Education Debate”
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/a_civics_lesson_from_americas_education_debate_20130815/
LikeLike
Diane:
David Sirota seems to have misrepresented the Stanford Study reults. The report notes:
In the aggregate, both reading and math results show improvement compared to the results reported in Multiple Choice. The analysis of the pooled 27 states shows that charter schools now advance the learning gains of their students’ more than traditional public schools in reading. Improvement is seen in the academic growth of charter students in math, which is now comparable to the learning gains in traditional public schools. On average, students attending charter schools have eight additional days of learning in reading and the same days of learning in math per year compared to their peers in traditional public schools. In both subjects, the trend since 2009 is on an upward trajectory, with the relative performance of the charter sector improving each year. Related results for different student groups indicate that black students, students in poverty, and English language learners benefit from attending charter schools. However, charter school quality is uneven across the states and across schools. These findings are supported by a number of related analyses, including the update on the 16 states first studied in 2009.
Emphasis added
Click to access NCSS%202013%20Final%20Draft.pdf
I have to look at the report more closely before I say any more. I would welcome any comments or insights you have on the Stanford Study.
LikeLike
Bernie,
All charter studies, including CREDO, show uneven results. Bottom line: is it worth destroying public education to pick up a few points for some kids on standardized tests of dubious value?
LikeLike
Diane:
Well if it destroys public education then clearly not. If it leads to improvements in public education – which I grant has yet to be demonstrated – then obviously yes.
Pointing to corrupt practices of some of those involved in Charter schools is simply not a compelling argument, given the number of equivalent scandals in public schools.
There is much merit to the argument that the current reforms are ill-planned, overly disruptive and amount to over-reach. Personally I would have pushed for a more incremental and targeted approach. Peterson et al’s Globally Challenged article includes a number of interesting charts of individual States’ PISA results. Not withstanding some of the sampling issues in the US PISA data, it seems to me that the place to start improving education practices would have been those States that already fall far below other States, namely DC, New Mexico, Mississippi, Louisiana, Hawaii, Alabama, California and Oklahoma.
You can’t beat something with nothing unless you are arguing that there are no systemic issues with US Education.
LikeLike
It is a business plan to destroy public education. See Diane’s article, “The People Behind the Lawmakers Out to Destroy Public Education: A Primer, What You Need To Know About ALEC”
https://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/05/02-0
LikeLike
Sirota was referring to the 2009 CREDO study, not the 2013 study. The 2013 study suffered from survivorship bias, since the worst performing charters had been closed and stated, “charters… have made modest progress in raising student performance in both reading and mathematics, caused in part by the closure of 8 percent of the charters..”
For info on survivorship bias, see: http://edushyster.com/?p=2878
LikeLike
Bernie and Diane,
I think you’re both right depending on your perspective. I’ll stick my head out and call myself a conservative; certainly not a progressive/socialist liberal and I hold to no political party except that of common sense and “show me” what you can do. With that said, I’ve never aligned my thinking with big business when they stick their noses into things that don’t concern them, especially Gates and his money minions.
Big money doesn’t make you an educator anymore than standing in a meat locker makes you a rump roast.
Washington state has several districts, close to Big Bill, who are in lock step to whatever his foundation wants. Hey, they want the money and technology to keep coming.
So, I agree, there’s money to be made, so, the capitalists, whether they are Elephants or Donkeys, or Elekeys (Donphants if you like) are lined up at the gravy train named CCS. Textbook publishers are foaming at the mouth. I noted that even the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics has CCS materials available, aligned to each grade level.
I’ve studied the CCS and compared them to typical state math standards prior to CCS. They are ramped up, especially at the 4-6 grade level. Kids caught in the current tidal wave will be trying to catch up with the standards, probably until they graduate HS. As we’ve discussed on this blog, I believe this to be part of the big plan. Create a need; fill the need with money. Will the cream rise to the top?
I’ve taught at public, private and CHARTER schools. Regarding Charters, most of the more well known schools are very selective in their enrollment. Or I should say, were very selective. They may be less so as more charters open and public schools are closed.
There will remain though, the more selective schools that are very RIGID in their educational philosophy, assign hours of homework each night and in most cases have mandatory Saturday school for poor performing students. Parents don’t argue with the schools because they sign a letter of understanding that outlines the hows and whys. If they or their children won’t / don’t comply they are booted out and then will go to a private school if their parents can afford it, or return to a public school with less expectations.
Here in Tucson, many charters have a high teacher turnover, especially at the middle school level where the teacher is expected to teach the entire MS curriculum aligned to the standards (usually grades 6-8, sometimes 5-8, or 6-9, etc.). Since newly credentialed teachers are at the bottom of the pay scale, they are often hired first, with little to no experience with classroom management. And students turn over frequently as well, some playing ping pong between the local charter and the local public school.
When public school districts tire of a severe behavior problem student, where do they go? Usually to a charter, because they’re a FTE worth some bucks for budget. This further exacerbates the classroom control issue.
Now enter CCS. Holy mackerel! New teachers may or may not have been trained on the standards, let alone have much experience teaching them. Let’s not even get into PK-5 or HS.
Note that when I say “teacher” or “new teacher” in the following scenario, that could mean any credentialed teacher with or without experience.
The new Charter school teacher, or experienced teacher wants/needs a job (gotta pay off those student loans) so they’ll agree to almost anything during the interview, including “having the opportunity to develop curriculum to integrate the new CCS”. There’s no mentoring, other than being shown where the lunchroom is, the restroom, being given a before and after school extra duty schedule, a lunch duty schedule, etc. They find out quickly that there’s no “canned” curriculum because their predecessor bailed before he/she completed a CCS alignment/curriculum.
The administrator, may or may not be a credentialed. They were hired because they said they could do the job and get the school “turned around”. So, this administrator pops in the first week of school to “monitor” the teacher, for 3-5 minutes. The administrator may not even have taught at all, or certainly not in the last several years, prior to CCS.
The teacher has his/her first performance evaluation, after the administrator observes them once, maybe teaching part of lesson, and the administrator gives the teacher their comments. There probably are only expectations but little to no encouragement. They are reminded that state testing is just around the corner and the students need to be ready, and that as the classroom teacher, they are responsible for maintaining discipline and a safe learning environment, etc. ad infinitum, ad nauseum.
Not too long after this, the teacher is still working 70 hours a week, grading every piece of paper they see (because they don’t know any better), can’t get in touch with parents of problem students, can’t get the students to turn in homework, study for tests/quizzes, and usually can’t get many of them to pay attention in class. They don’t really yet have a grasp of how their students are performing or their current grade level based on standardized tests.
Oh, and there’s usually no extra paid time. Any staff meetings, etc. after school part of the contract (not always but normally). Their classroom of 25 students per period is now up to 30. The remodeled storefront that serves as the school was designed to have 15-20 students per classroom. Desks are now end to end and students have to sit or stand in shifts to prevent stampedes.
The teacher is by now, very frustrated, wants to quit and looks around for a new position. They realize that CCS is like the black plague and they can’t run from it unless they go to a state like Texas that hasn’t adopted CCS as yet, but even then there’s no guarantee that the other 5 states won’t eventually roll over. The public schools are closing buildings and laying off experienced teachers who are now in the pool looking for jobs, taking sub positions as they can find them, and maybe even consider teaching at a charter school.
Now with the emphasis on CCS and the defanging of teacher’s unions/bargaining units there will continue to be an exodus of experienced teachers who can retire at some level, maybe not stick around for a better high 3 or high 5 years because their pay raises are gone. There are no “continuing” contracts. Year to year is the best you can get and you can be fired anytime in between for just about any reason.
I wonder if the teacher attrition rate is increasing since many states deregulated the teacher bargaining units, cut extra pay for MA/MEd/PhD degrees, cut back on TRI hours? How many newer teachers are not in teaching any longer?
With these caveats, the data reapers must be very selective in the charters they choose to analyze against the public sector in CCS testing, if they are surmising that the charters are faring BETTER than the public schools. From my experience in two Tucson charters, the students were from 2-3 grade levels behind the OLD standards. With hard work and consistency I usually saw a bit of an increase the first year.
Is it all doom and gloom and saying the glass is 1/2 empty and headed to the bottom? All that encourages me these days is seeing that a body of educators is standing against the tide. I equate it to the depiction of the mouse, standing on the mountain ledge with his little dagger in hand, with the eagle barring down on him, with the mouse giving the eagle the middle finger and saying, “Go ahead and try to eat me you SOB!”
Cheers
Jim
LikeLike
Jim:
I appreciate the first hand account of what is happening in Tuscon. Are there any data on the performance of Charter schools in your area?
I am surprised that these schools have survived if they are falling multiple grade levels behind.
In terms of your review of the Core Curriculum, did you find any formal assessments? My own take was restricted to 6-8 Grade Math, which seemed totally unremarkable.
I do think textbooks cost far more than they should given current publishing technologies. Some of this the publishers attribute to a need to align with different State curricula – but I remain skeptical. However, it seems to me that any increase in textbook costs will be at the margin since textbooks have a limited half-life due to wear and tear.
LikeLike
Hi Bernie,
Other than going to the AZ DOE website and crunching some numbers it’s pretty much smoke and mirrors. I did a quick look through the state, at both charter schools and public, and I can only restate what I pointed out previously, so I won’t go into that detail again. I will say that the number of charters has gone up to over 5,000.
Let’s look at one charter school organization, BASIS schools.
http://basisschools.org/arizona-schools-1
They started in 1998 with one school in Tucson, and have grown to 10 schools in Tucson and have expanded to San Antonio Texas and DC.
I actually interviewed for a teaching position at one of the Tucson Basis schools, was hired and then before I started training was told that they found someone with a better “fit”. Basically they reconsidered, thinking I was too old a dog to teach new tricks to. If you look at their teachers they are mostly younger, mostly without teacher’s certification, but who are quite knowledgeable in their field of expertise. Often these are folks from outside the country.
Basis’ philosophy is that they can take a very competent person with the technical knowledge and using their methods can make that person a successful teacher. Their curriculum is scripted, including the homework. Students will do the homework, or else.
If you look at BASIS’ performance, what they do works. Teachers are paid based on their students performance, which may seem like a stick, but with the students they get it’s really a carrot. All the schools have long waiting lists. New students in their first term will either get with the program or get washed out.
They have an excellent support system for their staff and students with ongoing training-tutoring and their curriculum directors are always fine tuning things. They’ve really never worried about state tests or standards because their own standards hit the moon.
Now, for every BASIS school there are 200 other charters that struggle like most of the public schools. Thus comparing data is really more like apples and aardvarks.
In looking at the performance of several charter and public schools I taught in or was otherwise familiar, their performance has slid by a few percent each year up through 2013.
Take care
Jim
LikeLike
Bernie,
The National Education Policy Center publishes peer reviews of studies in the field of education. They have a review of the current Stanford Credo study here: http://nepc.colorado.edu/thinktank/review-credo-2013
The peer review of the Stanford study concludes by stating that: “With a very large sample size, nearly any effect will be statistically significant, but in practical terms these effects are so small as to be regarded, without hyperbole, as trivial.”
I found this review to be credible and informative, and I recommend it.
LikeLike
Jonathan:
Thanks I will take a look. Effect sizes are obviously far more important than simply statistical significance.
LikeLike
I think David nailed this one. Money makes ignorant, morally corrupt people like those he mentioned powerful and dangerous. The apathetic public only adds to the problem in public education.
LikeLike
The Koch brothers, ALEC, Stands for Children, Teach for America, Bill Gates are all behind the push to privatize education. Here in Chicago we call it the school to prison pipeline. Basically they want little Walmart workers so they can continue to make huge profits at the expense of the people. The push for a living minimum wage is growing. The charter schools do no better and they’ve deprived our public schools of resources to make them fail. Art, music, PE, librarians all things we took for granted as kids are being eliminated. There is a push in Chicago to privatize the arts. Rahm is beginning to wake a sleeping giant. Destroying La Casita yesterday was a way to destroy the community. However, the community is more than a building and we all must unite and educate the masses to stop the madness.
LikeLike
Kati:
It seems to me that the Chicago PS system was already a “school to prison” pipeline long before the current reform movement. You cannot beat something with nothing unless you are arguing that there is no systemic problem with Education in Chicago.
LikeLike
But Chicago was reformed by Vallas and then reformed by Arne…this is their claim to fame. This is the white horse they ride on.
Can you simultaneously claim you reformed a school system that is crumbling while carrying your reform circus from city for city?
All it created was a revolving door of “reformers” reforming each others’ reforms….$student$: the new ca$h crop for corporation$.
LikeLike
Bernie, you are missing the bigger picture. The problem with big city public schools across the country is the overwhelming effects of poverty on children, and the reluctance of “we, the people” to say, “Enough”, as well as the billionaires who don’t want to share their pot.
Blaming teachers and school districts for the failure of inner city schools is like saying, “It’s THEIR problem, not mine.” But it IS the problem of all of us. On this blog and others, it has been reported that if you disaggregate the data from the results of the PISA, it turns out that our suburban students from upper middle-class districts actually out-performed the students from the nations at the top of the list.
So what brought US scores down? The overwhelming percentage of our students who live in poverty in our urban districts. Let me also include the growing number of students living in poverty in our suburbs…a huge problem that is being swept under the rug.
I tell anyone who is willing to listen, that I live a modern-day “Tales of Two Cities” existence. I live in one of those upper-class school districts where my children attend school. But I teach in a neighboring suburban district with an astonishing percentage of students living in poverty. Hands-down, the quality of teaching in the school district in which I teach is superior to what I have observed in the district in which I live. (My oldest will be a senior in high school so my family has experienced it from K-5. I have been teaching for a total of 21 years, 18 in my current district.).
Consistently, the students in the district I live in outperform the students in the district in which I teach. It is NOT the quality of teaching that is the biggest problem, it IS the effects of poverty.
LikeLike
Well, profit first. And after that the glee that comes from contempt of all things public, union, and little people. Oh, not to forget, the sadistic pleasure resulting from destruction. Children are just a “value-neutral” factor in their minds, until asked to make a public statement about their intentions.
LikeLike
When I Googled for this, I found another story that references Sirota. Elspeth Reeve at Atlantic quotes Sirota in
“Liberals Un-Endorse Cory Booker Just as He Becomes a Shoo-in for Senate”:
“David Sirota, is appalled that Booker’s cultivation of that crowd is seen as political savvy, not corruption. Sirota writes:
“… Booker did not just raise massive amounts of campaign money from the thieves on Wall Street and then attack President Obama on behalf of those thieves. He did not just orchestrate a secret $100 million deal with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg that the Washington Post notes was designed to help those donors circumvent the public and “remake (Newark) public schools in the way they want to.”
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/08/liberals-un-endorse-cory-booker-just-he-becomes-shoo-senate/68278/
LikeLike
Glen Ford of The Black Agenda Report described the conservative Bradley Foundation’s involvement in Cory Booker’s rise:
http://blackagendareport.com/content/glen-ford-corporate-assault-public-education
LikeLike
Diane:
I have another thought on this. I do not know Joe Nathan beyond what I have seen here and on his web site. He seems to be a highly committed and passionate believer in the need to improve education. I detect no selfish or monetary motivation. Do you? Are there folks here who want to impugn Joe’s motives? If so, what is the evidence.
David Sirota’s piece lacks facts and, by not being specific, uses gross generalizations about the motivations of folks like Joe Nathan. He nails nothing except to spout truism. Yes, some people are pushing reform to make a buck but are they really displaying any more self interest than those in the public sector? But in case folks have not noticed, Bill Gates does not need to make a buck. He is a genuine philanthropist. SIrota’s piece does nothing to move the discussion forward. It is more pot banging. It nails nothing.
LikeLike
You’re not a philanthropist if your “donations” come with rules, strings attached, do it my way, send me your data, etc or you don’t get my money. You are seriously misinformed.
Read up:
OP-ED | A Window Into the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Dystopia
http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/ctnj.php/archives/entry/a_window_into_the_bill_and_melinda_gates_foundation_dystopia/
LikeLike
Linda:
I am not misinformed at all. Foundations are in fact required to attach strings to their donations in terms of selection criteria and reporting requirements. The IRS has requirements that must be followed. The NYT is currently running an expose of the Clinton Foundation on this very subject.
You are making up your own definition of what qualifies as a Philanthropy. Of course, everyone is free to assess the merits and demerits of a Foundations programs but whether it is in fact a philanthropy.
LikeLike
Me thinks thou doth protest too much.
Actually, Linda is right. You are misinformed on many issues and have distinguished yourself as being among the few here who are intensely opinionated while having very little background knowledge. You would be wise to refrain from making judgements until you learn a lot more about matters.
Asking questions here is fine, if you really want to learn. However, be aware that educators, who have been under a microscope and publicly castigated for years by people who do not even know them, are very alert to loaded questions and don’t respond well to being set-up or attacked. (And you’re very likely to be ignored if that continues.)
LikeLike
Elder Wise:
I assume your comment was addressed at me.
You say “You are misinformed on many issues and have distinguished yourself as being among the few here who are intensely opinionated while having very little background knowledge.
Can you point out where I have been misinformed? Have I stated facts that are inaccurate? Have I provided references that are not on point? Have I used examples that are not germane? I am truly interested in hearing other viewpoints.
As to opinionated, well perhaps. But then folks here are full of opinions. Some base their opinions on facts, others not so much.
As to background knowledge, well that depends on the area. I spent 30 years designing and analyzing survey and assessment instruments. I spent the same period of time evaluating, designing and implementing performance evaluation systems. I understand the strengths and limitations of most kinds of measurement systems. Years ago, I spent several years teaching teachers at a Graduate School of Education. Microsoft was a client for six or seven years as was the NSF. I and my wife have educated 3 children. My wife was a foreign language teacher for 10 years and now teaches at a University. What additional background does one need?
Does David Sirota have more of a background in Education than do I or is it that his opinion is more aligned to yours? When folks say things without empirical basis or misrepresent the available evidence, is it opinionated to point that out. What do you do? Again, basic rational discourse is based on constructing arguments based on verifiable facts. Some here do a very good job doing that. Others less so.
You say “educators…are very alert to loaded questions and don’t respond well to being set-up or attacked.
Again, what loaded questions have I asked? Who exactly have I “attacked”?
From my perspective, your comments epitomize some here who make assertions without facts or evidence. The arguments are frequently ad hominem or arguments from authority. When I see such arguments I tend to call them what they are.
LikeLike
Too kind. Should have included holier than thou know-it-all. Definitely ignore.
LikeLike
Victorino Verboten:
I am open to any actual evidence you have that Gates and/or the Gates Foundation is in Education Reform for profits.
LikeLike
The Gates Foundation – spending billions to make my creative writing students’ dystopia a reality
This evening during my creative writing workshop we talked about setting and world building. I had the kids do one of my favorite brainstorming exercises for this topic: EXTRAPOLATING INTO THE FUTURE.
I ask the students to make two columns. In column one, they write a current law, issues or technology. In the second column, I ask them to extrapolate what they have written in column one, imagining it in a future society. Is it being taken to an extreme? Is it being used for good or not so good purposes?
http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_posts/4589892-the-gates-foundation—spending-billions-to-make-my-creative-writing-stu
LikeLike
The Gates Foundation’s Leveraged Philanthropy: Corporate Profit Versus Humanity on Three Fronts
By Anthony Cody on July 4, 2012 11:47 AM
Philanthropy wonk Lucy Bernholz defines the buzzword leverage
as “the idea that you can use a little money to access a lot of money.”
It’s hard to think of the Gates Foundation’s $26 billion leverage effort
as “a little money”, especially since it’s been spread over the globe to gain access to vastly more resources than it contributes, including U.S. tax dollars, the foreign exchange of emerging African nations, and United Nations funds for international development and world health.
Gates’ leveraged philanthropy model is a public-private partnership
to improve the world, partly through targeted research support but principally through public advocacy and tax-free lobbying to influence government policy. The goal of these policies is often to explicitly support profitability for corporate investors, whose enterprises are seen by the Gates Foundation as advancing human good. However, maximum corporate profit and public good often clash when its projects are implemented.
http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/07/the_gates_foundations_leverage.html
LikeLike
The Gates Foundation’s Education Philanthropy: Are Profit Seeking and Market Domination a Public Service?
The Gates Foundation favors a charitable model known as a public-private partnership, which appears at first to be an enlightened model for corporate engagement. For-profit ventures are “partnered” with the government for funding, to drive positive social change.
The problem is that apparent charities are actually spending public funds, often without our knowledge or consent, and public private partnerships in education have shown themselves to be vulnerable to outright fraud as well as wasteful insider dealing. There’s no open or democratic mechanism to determine public benefit, or regulation to protect public education funding from financial pillage for services it doesn’t want or need.
Some for-profit corporations directly set up their own non-profit intermediary to divert government funding. For example, the Pearson Education Foundation is a philanthropy which is under investigation for its work as an intermediary on behalf of its parent corporation, global giant Pearson Education, whose 2010 US sales totaled £2.6 billion (British pounds).
In April 2011, the Gates Foundation announced a partnership with the Pearson Foundation to produce resources for its Common Core State Standards project, and Pearson simultaneously announced it was developing a complete digital curriculum to support the proposed standards. The alliance was described in this NY Times story, Foundations Join to Offer Online Courses for Schools.
http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/07/the_gates_foundations_educatio.html
LikeLike
Funding for Joe Nathan’s center for school change:
Funding for the Center has come from 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.
LikeLike
Linda:
Are you saying that Joe Nathan is driven by a profit motive? He reads this blog. Ask him directly.
The fact that foundations are the source of some of his funding is evidence of precisely nothing. The Gates Foundation has given $500 million to the Rotary Foundation to help eliminate Polio. There is no profit motive in such giving and there is no reason to believe that the money given for Education is driven by profit. You can legitimately argue that the policies supported by such monies are not effective, but you and Sirota have no basis whatsoever for assigning a profit motive for all those funding the various reform initiatives.
LikeLike
I posted the donors listed on his site.
You made your own conclusions….don’t hyperventilate Bernie.
Please work your way through the four article about Gates and his “philanthropy” re-coined by Mike F, NYC teacher: malanthropy.
See here:
Michael Fiorillo
Saying they’re searching for excuses is too kind, and it’s far worse than that: they’re looking for other, tax-free vehicles for their infinite greed and will to power.
What other conclusion is possible, given the existence of something as transparently self-interested as “venture philanthropy?”
The proper term for this phenomena is “Malanthropy,” deceptively using the rhetoric and apparatus of “non-profit” to advance one’s interests, to the detriment of society.
LikeLike
“He is a genuine philanthropist.’
Stop, stop..my sides are splitting.
LikeLike
Ang:
Do you have any evidence that suggests otherwise? Or are you engaged in pot banging like David Sirota?
LikeLike
Do you have any evidence that says he is? Or are you engaged in keeping your head in the sand like so many others who fawn over Gates?
The Gates Foundations’ “benevolent” work in supplying African farmers with Monsanto genetically engineered seeds is not without its controversies either. Besides the environmental and health concerns, Gates bought 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock valued at $27.6M and stands to profit from farmer dependence on Monsanto’s seeds and herbicide.
“Gates Foundation ties with Monsanto under fire from activists”
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2012751169_gatesmonsanto29m.html
LikeLike
A lot of people have connected the dots. Evidence was provided in the articles Linda provided, too, including the info about how corporations use non-profit foundations as fronts to benefit their corporations, including Pearson. (I worked for a non-profit that was a front for a for-profit education corporation, so I experienced this personally.)
“Microsoft also unveiled its own $15 million research and development effort for “Next Generation” products, aligned to the new standards. Possible return on that investment is staggering, and almost every feature of the Gates Foundation’s program will create a dramatically favorable business climate for the data industry.”
“The Gates Foundation’s Education Philanthropy: Are Profit Seeking and Market Domination a Public Service?”
http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/07/the_gates_foundations_educatio.html
LikeLike
Dolly:
The article you pointed to is essentially filled with innuendo and reads like a giant conspiracy theory. Are you arguing that all philanthropists who made their money in business are some how suspect? Chemtchr, the author of the articles, provides no evidence whatsoever that Gates is directing the activities of his foundation in ways that personally enrich one of the richest men in the world. The paranoia is palpable. It is fine to disagree with Gates’ educational theories and initiatives, but please the charges of personal self-dealing are right out of the Alinsky playbook. Sure there are foundations that are essentially crooked and self-dealing – see the NYT expose of the Clinton Foundation. The Pearson Foundation would be advised to stay out of education, for example. But many are what they say they are.
The Gates Foundation has given the Rotary Foundation over $500 million to help in the eradication of polio. Polio has been eliminated from all but Afghanistan, the tribal regions in Pakistan and northern Nigeria because local Rotary Volunteers cannot get into some of these areas. Far more effective than the WHO initiative, when the WHO tried to do it on its own. The partnership between Rotary and the WHO has worked because Rotary provided the local volunteers to give the vaccines. It is over a year since the last polio case in India. Are you saying that this donation was also self-serving because it involved polio vaccines that were made by a profit-oriented pharmaceutical company?
I understand that those involved in education are upset with many of the changes but this type of vitriol is likely to backfire.
LikeLike
Right, and there is no such thing as global warming or climate change.
LikeLike
Chemtchr provided links to sources, such as this one to Microsoft itself proclaiming, “Microsoft announces $15M R&D focus on next-generation learning models, plus resources for students & teachers” http://blogs.msdn.com/b/microsoftuseducation/archive/2011/07/17/microsoft-announces-15m-r-amp-d-focus-on-next-generation-learning-models-plus-resources-for-students-amp-teachers.aspx
You’re kidding yourself if you think Gates isn’t planning for Microsoft to profit from education “reform,” just like his investment in Monsanto profits from his foundation’s work in Africa.
LikeLike
Chi-Town Res:
First, Bill Gates retired over 5 years ago from an active management role at Microsoft. Second, in 2012 Microsoft’s R&D Budget was $9.8 billion. This means that $15 million is 0.153% of their R&D budget. This means the exact opposite of what you and others imply. Third, I would bet you that even though Apple’s R&D budget is a fraction Microsoft’s they devote appreciably more than Microsoft to developing tools and software for the Education Market.
Again, you can question the education policy suggestions that Gates is championing but these types of personal attacks detract mightily from your arguments.
LikeLike
Bill Gates is still Chairman of the Board of Microsoft. He owns 461 million shares of Microsoft stock, as of the Sept. 2012 proxy statement, and he remains the largest individual shareholder. Microsoft has been facing a number of struggles, such as with Surface and Windows 8, and Gates is no disinterested party.
LikeLike
Other Spaces:
Of course he is not disinterested. The question is how much interest is shown by a $15 million R&D project when the total R&D budget is $9.6 billion?
LikeLike
Could just be the frontend. Who knows what kind of R&D was involved on the backend before Gates put up funding for the Shared Learning Collaborative, which is now known as “Inbloom, Inc.,” the controversial student database project that parents are so concerned about:
http://www.classsizematters.org/inbloom-fact-sheets/ny-inbloom-fact-sheet/
LikeLike
Kati is right, the community is more than a building and that is not a slogan. It is a historical fact. A movement is building and James Meredith’s interest is just one indicator. The destruction of La Casita has a creepy feel to it, as does the scene in Philly…..just a little too obvious. Diane’s last sentence, “no matter how many lives you ruin,” is an important focus. Enough of those ruined lives are out there now with a story to tell. This money machine has rolled over enough once bright futures that I think America might look up and get interested in the human narrative behind the NCLB, CC, Pearson, Gates privatization pyramid.
LikeLike
Anyone catch Bill Moyers this week, “How People Power Generates Change”?
http://billmoyers.com/episode/encore-how-people-power-generates-change/
LikeLike
We’re getting closer to stopping them, but it’s still going to take patience and organization. The notion that only “entrepreneurs” can help create a better USA has always been nonsense. Most business ideas and business models fail, and there is always a need, despite the Ayn Rand economics still being pushed by the crazies, for a large public service sector.
For some reason, every time I see Michelle Rhee hyping her wares, I have memories of those toxic tampons that were on the market until they began killing women about 30 years ago — advertised by an Olympian whose name I’ve forgotten. “Remember they named it Rely…” was the TV ad.
The facts — or the growing mountain of scandals like the most recent one with Tony Bennett — are not going to stop these crooks. And given the current state of the judiciary and law enforcement, wealthy crooks are getting away with lots. More and more.
But in the long run, democracy and the truth does win out, although too many people hyping wrong have utilized that “arc of justice…” quote to use it this morning. Chicago didn’t have a hundreds thousand dollars to fix up a small piece of a working class community that was being utilized as a library and community center…
But less than a year ago, Chicago found more than $200,000 (pay of $160,000 plus benefits) to create a bureaucratic position in the Barbara Byrd Bennett “cabinet” for a guy whose title, I couldn’t make this up, is
“Chief Officer for Innovation and Incubation.”
LikeLike
Everything, or almost everything, in our society has been monetized.
Education is just the latest “profit center” up for exploration and exploitation.
Question is: can we stop the madness?
LikeLike
There are still many citizens and parents who are not aware of the corporate education reform movements intention to destroy public education in order to make millions of dollars in profits. Privatization to make a profit…this is their agenda.
MSM , especially TV, is silent, so we need to keep writing and discussing and sharing what is really happening.
David Sirota continues to be a voice that represents the truth about the corporate Ed reform movement and its plan to destroy public education.
……………
Here is a detailed article about the corporate education reformers who want to privatize urban public education for the $$$$$$, the millions of dollars they are making.
http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/got-dough-how-billionaires-rule-our-schools
LikeLike
The Barkan article in no way indicates that those funding various education reform initiatives are doing it for personal gain. It is fair enough to say that the initiatives they fund are wrong-headed, destructive, misguided, or ideologically driven – assuming, of course, you have the data to support the assertions. But to charge profiteering and greed without any evidence is simply dirty politics.
That some of those involved are greedy, self-interested or unethical is undoubtedly true. But then any large enterprise including traditional public schools and unions also include those who are greedy, self-interested and unethical.
LikeLike
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) promotes Milton Friedman’s neo-liberal agenda to privatize public education in states across America. Microsoft has been a member of ALEC and the Gates Foundation has also contributed to it.
Watch Bill Moyers’ “The United States of ALEC”
http://billmoyers.com/segment/united-states-of-alec/
LikeLike
I am tired of Bill Gates and the likes. We CAN and we MUST stop the reform madness, but it is going to take EVEYONE of us to do it! EVERY little thing that someone does to help adds up, whether we educate ourselves and pass on what we have learned to others, write letters to the editor of papers, encourage an education friendly person to run for office and support them or even run for office ourselves, opt children out of high stakes testing, or politely but insistently demand to see a copy of the high stakes test that our children have taken. We must unite and act!
LikeLike
For anyone who missed it, here’s David Sirota describing Education “Reform” after out-of-state “reformers,” like NY Mayor Bloomberg, poured money into supporting school board candidates in the Los Angeles election this spring:
LikeLike