Friends, I was interviewed this morning on MSNBC by Melissa Harris Perry and was incredibly impressed by her. Unlike most TV journalists, she had actually read the book.
She asked smart questions. She really gets it.
This was the best conversation I have yet participated in on national TV, including the panel that followed. No “Gotcha” questions, just a thoughtful effort to assess some important issues.
Here is the link: http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-perry/watch/the-case-against-school-privatization-57195587667
Diane
Diane Ravitch's blog 
She honored Kaya Henderson a few weeks ago for doing exactly what you recommend against…
LikeLike
She hadn’t read the book yet. Reign of Error must have really hit home for her!
LikeLike
Brava to you both! A true honest, academic discussion!
LikeLike
You were marvelous. MHP actually listened to your answers and responded with intelligent questions vs. following a script written by the MS in MSNBC.
I watched it live and the video as well. I have sent the link to many.
Bravo Diane, Melissa, Pedro and the other gentleman (sorry his name slips my mind).
LikeLike
What a great, intelligent discussion between 4 informed, sophisticated thinkers! Loved it!
Sent from my iPhone
>
LikeLike
Thank you Diane! Watched it live and yes, it was wonderful. One request…can you get on all of the stations? The media needs to be ‘blasted’ with the truth and what is happening to public education. By the way, your book is great and thank you for all you are doing.
LikeLike
I think contacting media outlets and asking them to have her on is our job!
LikeLike
Rumor has it you’re going to be on the Daily Show this Thursday… is that true!
LikeLike
Yes, I will be on The Daily Show on October 30
LikeLike
October 30 is a Wednesday. I’ll just watch it every night.
LikeLike
Awesome! My husband records it every night. Yippee! The conversation is shifting.
LikeLike
That’s great! The Daily show is archived and available for free streaming at The Daily Show website: http://www.thedailyshow.com/
I am wondering if you are going to be interviewed by Terry Gross on her NPR show called Fresh Air. I don’t know if you are familiar with her show, but she is known for her very thoughtful and informative interviews.
I emailed the NPR/Fresh Air website asking if you are scheduled…have not heard back yet.
LikeLike
Hi Diane, I saw this program live this morning in Nebraska. Beautiful. Well done. Phil Kaldahl Bellevue Nebraska
LikeLike
The other guest was Trymaine Lee.
It was a great segment.
LikeLike
Excellent! This is a must see!
Sent from my iPad
>
LikeLike
First of all, you look Marvelous!! Glad to see one journalist who wants the truth.
LikeLike
I agree. Diane was radiant!
LikeLike
I like the jacket.
LikeLike
I saw Part 1 from your above link, and found Part 2, but need the links to the rest of the discussion. A different topic follows each break.
LikeLike
Diane, it appears there is a commercial that you come back to discuss who is leading the privatization and why but does not continue on to do so on the link. Can you clarify or comment on what was said?
LikeLike
after the first segment, you then have to go to segment 15 and then to 14 in order to see the “after commercial” parts.
LikeLike
Thank you. That works.
LikeLike
Scroll on the right side to the video “How charter schools can lead to disparity” and click on it. Then watch “Poverty and its impact on education”
LikeLike
Dianne.. haha.. most never read anything besides their own stuff.
LikeLike
As I said in my comment to your earlier blog today concerning Paul Thomas and getting a seat at the table, how wonderful that you had a seat at MHPs table on MSNBC. Your comments and those of Mr. Lee made my wife smile, something not seen too often lately. She struggles with teaching a life skills K-2 class in a Philadelphia Public School which lost its Assistant Principal, one of two counselors, several teachers and many aides this year. Because of the lack of staff the kids have no outdoor recess, gym has been cut back, and there is no library (no librarian).
My wife agrees with the other bloggers too – she commented that you looked great.
I hope our President was watching.
LikeLike
Interesting viewing on Melissa Harris Perry this morning, with Diane Ravitch and a couple others. I’m actually a fan of MHP and #nerdland, but was fascinated to see how quickly TV talking heads sway with the wind, becoming enamored of who ever has written the latest book and thrown in a few statistics to argue their perspective. Diane made the usual points, you can’t solve education until you solve poverty, don’t worry about the schools until you pour billions into social programs to eradicate poverty, then pour billions into schools too. All we needed was Geoffrey Canada to join Ms. Ravitch, and we could have all enjoyed a spirited chicken-and-egg symphony. Of course MHP nodded her head in eager approval of all of Diane’s points, and declared towards the end of the interview that educating the poor was simple, we simply needed to follow the blue print that middle/upper class families/communities follow for education and all would be solved. So simple.
Of course there was no real discussion of what types of structural and systemic changes poor schools would need after we poured billions into anti-poverty programs and into the schools themselves. I suppose Diane would have made the usual references to providing prenatal care to all pregnant women, making early childhood education available to all, reducing class size, increasing staffing at poor schools, providing wrap-around medical services in poor communities similar to HCZ. All laudable goals, but those which require billions of dollars, would realistically take decades to implement. and ultimately leave Geoffrey Canada ‘Waiting for Superman”. The greatest consensus reached on her panel was simply repeal the majority of education reforms associated with high stakes testing, accountability, etc. that have been made in the last 20 years, reset the education landscape back to the early 90s, and continue hoping that someday the government will realign it’s fiscal priorities to focus on social programs. Somehow I didn’t come away very enlightened or optimistic about public education for impoverished neighborhoods.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Transparent Christina.
LikeLike
Diane, thank you so much for speaking so clearly about the issues. Thank you for your continuing and dogged efforts to educate the public. Now rest up!
LikeLike
I watched this and was soooo impressed with Melissa!! And, of course, Diane!! And the other 2 gentlemen – forgot their names!!!
LikeLike
wonderful, thoughtful interview!
LikeLike
Has MHP FINALLY found her voice?? This was amazing, and yes both segments MUST be watched!! It is my fervent hope that MHP continues to expose the lies of the “reformers” and “charters” and “standardization”!
LikeLike
Interesting viewing on Melissa Harris Perry this morning, with Diane Ravitch and a couple others. I’m actually a fan of MHP and #nerdland, but was fascinated to see how quickly TV talking heads sway with the wind, becoming enamored of whom ever has written the latest book and thrown in a few statistics to argue their perspective. Diane made the usual points, you can’t solve education until you solve poverty, don’t worry about the schools until you pour billions into social programs to eradicate poverty, then pour billions into schools too. All we needed was Geoffrey Canada to join Ms. Ravitch, and we could have all enjoyed a spirited chicken-and-egg symphony. Of course MHP nodded her head in eager approval of all of Diane’s points, and declared towards the end of the interview that educating the poor was simple, we simply needed to follow the blue print that middle/upper class families/communities follow for education and all would be solved. So simple.
Of course there was no real discussion of what types of structural and systemic changes poor schools would need after we poured billions into anti-poverty programs and into the schools themselves. I suppose Diane would have made the usual references to providing prenatal care to all pregnant women, making early childhood education available to all, reducing class size, increasing staffing at poor schools, providing wrap-around medical services in poor communities similar to HCZ. All laudable goals, but those which require billions of dollars, would realistically take decades to implement. and ultimately leave Geoffrey Canada ‘Waiting for Superman”. The greatest consensus reached on her panel was simply repeal the majority of education reforms associated with high stakes testing, accountability, etc. that have been made in the last 20 years, reset the education landscape back to the early 90s, and continue hoping that someday the government will realign it’s fiscal priorities to focus on social programs.
I thought the most enlightening point of the entire Ravitch-MHP exchange focused on the state of the education crisis in the U.S. Diane essentially stated we don’t have a crisis because the test scores for minority children have never been higher. Obviously Diane never taught in the Terrordome or Mumford High School or East St. Louis High School. I went to one, and now tutor and coach kids from another. Believe me, there is a crisis. I must admit, I didn’t come away very enlightened or optimistic about public education for impoverished neighborhoods from this dialogue.
LikeLike
Alharris161, I don’t think you listened to what was said. What is aid in my book and in the interview is that US public education is not failing or declining but there is definitely a crisis of low achievement where there is a combination of poverty and segregation. I did not say that all is well. I think the status quo of Hugh stakes testing and privatization does not address the root causes of low academic performance. Both society and schools must change or we will have the same discussion 20 years from now. Yes, it will be expensive but less expensive than mass incarceration and the other consequences of neglect.
LikeLike
That’s because he’s just a talker with absolutely no intention of listening.
LikeLike
I think the high performing charters prove your point. They spend significantly more per pupil (private & public funds combined) on wrap-around social services, reduced class sizes, arts & music, physical education, foreign language, etc. Seems to me Geoffrey Canada, Michael Milkie, and Dave Levin reinforce the point you’ve been arguing for years — sustained funding matters. And while many may applaud your efforts lobbying for sustained funding, many would also not refuse a high performing charter in their own neighborhood if those increased funds per pupil came through a combination of private & public dollars. Especially if their neighborhood zone school had been failing for decades.
LikeLike
Thoughtful and phenomenal! Thank you Diane
LikeLike
Yes! She was very informed and truly interested and concerned. I kept waiting for that moment when things would flip but it never happened! You, as always, did a beautiful job of cutting right to the chase. Excellent interview!
LikeLike
Great Interview! You looked wonderful! When can we get you on Ted Talks!
LikeLike
Wow! This was truly incredible! All four participants were well informed and very articulate. I only wish that it hadn’t just sort of fizzled out. I saw three segments that were disjointed and hard to find Was there more? A wrap up?
I’ve tweeted MPH regarding military style charter schools for poor children of color before and I just did so again. I would like to see at least ONE minority reporter from the mainstream media calling out those schools (run by mostly white people) for how racist they are. Requiring unquestioning obedience, uniform marching in single file on a line wherever they go and silence (and odd hand signals) throughout their extended school day is just too similar to chain gangs. But these caged birds don’t even get to sing of freedom.
LikeLike
Have you ever stepped foot in an a very poor inner city urban high school? They are absolute chaos — crazy, crazy, crazy. I went to one, and I work with one now. A lot of commenters feel insulted about efforts charters take to instill/maintain discipline, but have never stepped foot in an impoverished school. A good non-fiction read that accurately describes some of this is “Teaching in the Terrordome”. It gives very descriptive (and accurate from my experiences) examples of discipline and behavior issues faced in these poor schools. Although written by a TFA alum, it doesn’t really advocate for TFA but rather shows limitations (in part, due to lack of discipline) of what can be accomplished in our poor schools as they are structured now, whether you’re an alternatively certified teacher or a seasoned pro. Imagine trying to teach in a classroom where students set doors and desks on fire, students get into violent fist fights, drunken bums wander into the classroom periodically, local drug kingpins come into the classroom demanding proceeds from the latest drug sales from their runners which happen to be your students, etc. Pretty hard to teach in an environment like that.
Quite a few of the charter founders were public school teachers themselves before opening their own charters (and not all were TFA alums), and realize you can’t teach if you don’t have discipline and a quiet/calm classroom [see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vBlN1OQF18%5D. Discipline is one of the lacking skill sets that many poor children don’t get from their parent(s), their community, and the village that is supposed to be raising them but is often absent in poor communities. When discipline is demanded from kids that have never had any, it seems cruel and unusual (and maybe even racist) to them and their parents. If you want a good audio/visual experience to the adjustment poor kids face when trying to acclimatize to a more disciplined environment, watch the non-fiction movie “Boys of Baraka” which removes ~20 7th/8th grade poor black boys from inner city Baltimore and immerses them in a 2 year sparse/rural boarding school in Kenya. Whether you’re method is instilling discipline via financial incentives, credits/demerits for field trips, or full immersion in sparse conditions in a rural African boarding school, the very notion of discipline to those whom have never known it will seem degrading, racist, cruel, etc. Once the kids adjust, they ultimately come to understand the importance and beauty of discipline.
The nature of your statement I find indicative of the challenges teachers face in poor neighborhoods, both from students and parents — you perceive the following as racist, while many high performing middle class/upper class public schools and parents utilize some form of these tactics starting in pre-school years:
— requiring unquestioning obedience
— uniform marching in single file line
— hand signals
By the way, I’m minority, I grew up in the inner city, and I currently live in the inner city, so please don’t call me racist. I require unquestioning obedience from my own children when it comes to them brushing their teeth, washing their face, making their bed, getting themselves dressed, studying after school, attending athletics and music and scouting, performing weekly household chores, and going to bed at 9pm, so please don’t call me racist. I have used non-verbal communication skills with my children from the time they were toddlers, so please don’t call me racist.
This topic actually relates very much to my criticism above of the MHP/Ravitch interview, as well as the education traditionalists contribution to the discussion of the crisis of public education in poor neighborhoods. Although I’ve long been a fan of Diane and her traditionalist education colleagues work to advocate for more funding for anti-poverty social programs and more funding for public education, that’s a long-term strategic goal that will take decades to accomplish (if ever). I live in the hear and now, in a poor urban neighborhood, with a very low performing public school system. We desire proven solutions (to discipline, school leadership, pedagogy, etc.) that will save our communities now. I emphasize proven because we’ve tried the school uniforms, the metal detectors, reducing class sizes from 20 to 17, changing semesters to trimesters to reduce brain-drain, utilizing newer technology, hiring superintendents and principals with Ph.Ds and Ed.Ds with specialized degrees like “Urban Educational Leadership”, etc. and our schools are still as low-performing as ever. And we have mixed feelings regarding a proposed solution that several decades from now billions will have been poured into anti-poverty programs that might have a correlating effect on improving education — we know that advocacy is important and someone has to fight that fight, but we have a crisis in our neighborhoods now. I’ve not heard a lot of success stories in the media of traditionalist educators that have utilized innovative and transformational techniques to turn around failing public schools in severely impoverished neighborhoods. My neighborhood schools currently have <15% of kids proficient in math/reading, <50% graduation rate, 80% proficiency rates, >90% graduation rate, and >70% college/trade school attendance rate? This is what I’d love to see discussed by Diane or her colleagues on MHP, Education Nation, The Daily Show, CSPAN, Chris Matthews, or others. Most of my neighbors feel that if a proven charter like KIPP or Noble or BASIS wants to come in and open up shop, we’re all for it. If 30% of students that enter that new charter end up returning to the local public school, then at least those 70% that made it through will have an opportunity that never existed before — to be accepted to and attend a college or trade school and change the trajectory of their lives forever.
LikeLike
Yep, I attended an inner city high school myself and I’ve worked in many inner city schools. No insulation in my life. Just awareness of much more civilized approaches for working with children. And BTW, people are not rushing to fill “no excuses” charters in my area. They prefer equitable resources in their neighborhood schools.
LikeLike
“Charter schools losing struggling students to zoned schools”
http://www.wsmv.com/story/22277105/charter-schools-losing-struggling-students-to-zoned-schools
LikeLike
Correction/Edit to my post below:
“My neighborhood schools currently have <15% of kids proficient in math/reading, <50% graduation rate, 80% proficiency rates, >90% graduation rate, and >70% college/trade school attendance rate? “
LikeLike
If you want proven methods, read Diane’s book, “Reign of Error,” as well as “The U.S. Formula for Children and the Choices We Refuse to Make” by PaulThomas: http://www.publicschoolshakedown.org/us-formula-for-children-and-the-choices-we-refuse-to-make
LikeLike
Correction/Edit #2 to my post below (something weird about this blog; some special character in my input must be unintentionally parsing/garbling my inputs)
My neighborhood schools currently have:
— less then 15 percent proficiency rates in math/reading
— less then 50 percent graduation rate
— less than 5 percent college attendance rate
What PROVEN techniques have turned a school system like ours into one that has:
— greater than 80 percent proficiency rate
— greater than 90 percent graduation rate
— greater than 70 percent college/trade school attendance rate?
LikeLike
Their “proven” technique is to kick out the neediest kids and send them back to public schools –kids who have special needs, who are English Language Learners, who don’t obey and whose test scores are low. Many reports have indicated that often occurs just before testing time, too, such as in Nashville: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/05/21/1210512/-Nashville-charter-schools-lose-problem-students-to-public-schools-just-in-time-for-testing
LikeLike
“Agree to disagree” is a common ploy of those fighting to have the last last word. You may have gotten that final spot, but on-going support of segregated charter school boot camps that implement inhumane practices with minority children wins nothing but enmity in my book. because I attended a school like that myself and know all too well that “the ends don’t justify the means.”
LikeLike
Dolly — “Agree to disagree” is rather an acknowledgement that at some point in a discussion, there really isn’t anything more to discuss. Facts and viewpoints have been presented on both sides, and the interpretation of those facts and viewpoints have been considered on both sides. You may see discipline in charter schools as inhumane practices, I may see discipline as necessary for classroom instruction. You may see transferring 30% of student population back to public school at expense of 70% receiving excellent education as unconscionable, I may see it as an imperfect solution to be improved upon that at least saves 70% of the kids from hopelessness. When you reach the point that there really isn’t anything more to discuss, what else is there to say then let’s “Agree to disagree”. I respect your opinion, I’ve listened to them, I’ve considered them, and let’s both move on.
LikeLike
So here’s a great scenario for a “Ethics 101” class. A local public system/neighborhood exhibits the following performance data over a 50-year longitudinal study:
— less then 15 percent proficiency rates in math/reading
— less then 50 percent graduation rate
— less than 5 percent college/trade school attendance rate
— 95% students of free/reduced lunch
Options presented to your school board to address the education crisis are as follows:
Option #1: Continue status quo, understanding poverty affects education. Continue to advocate for increased funding for anti-poverty social programs at state/federal level.
Option #1 10-year expected performance data:
— less then 15 percent proficiency rates in math/reading
— less then 50 percent graduation rate
— less than 5 percent college/trade school attendance rate
Option #2: Open a new elementary/middle/high school charter school system, while keeping the existing public school in operation. Recognizing that not all charter schools outperform public schools, require the charter organization you select to have a proven record of raising math/reading proficiency rates, high school graduation rates, and college/trade school acceptance/attendance rates in poor neighborhood schools.
Option #2 10-year expected performance data:
— 30 percent attrition rate (back to public school)
— 80 percent proficiency rates in math/reading
— 90 percent graduation rate
— 70 percent college/trade school acceptance rate
Which option is more ethical?
LikeLike
Again, the data is based on charters not serving the most needy students. What would be more ethical would be to require that charter schools accept and retain all students regardless of their needs, just as public schools must do, not cream the highest performers and kick out the neediest just so they can look good.
LikeLike
You do recognize that those students who went to the charter and achieved significant increases in math/reading proficiency, graduate rates, and college/trade school acceptance rates were going to continue to flounder had the charter never opened at all? They were not “cream” while performing at their public school, and only became “cream” once they flourished in a new setting?
It appears to me what you’re saying (and what the entire anti-charter movement is saying) is that if a rising tide doesn’t lift all boats, but instead only lifts 70% of boats, you’d rather the tide not rise at all. For the sake of equity, keep all boats at their initial dismal level.
LikeLike
Charter promoters accept as collateral damage the starving of public schools of much needed resources, while funds are diverted to charter schools, as well as using public schools as dumping grounds for less desirable children. There’s nothing ethical about any of that.
LikeLike
Perhaps this becomes one key element of the debate. If we acknowledge that (a) a small percentage of children can not be educated in the public school traditional sense due to the severe trauma they’ve experienced in their life, or because their blindness or autism or some other organic dysfunction requires specialized education not affordable by just one school, and (b) their presence in a traditional public school severely impedes the learning of the majority of others, is it unethical to provide alternate public schooling with specialized services for this small percentage for the greater good of the majority who can flourish given the appropriate setting? Do you characterize that solution as collateral damage, or is that practical? Do you characterize that solution as a dumping ground, or does it prevent teaching to the lowest common denominator? Could it not be seen as more empathetic, where that small minority actually receives specialized services, especially if there is funding to provide highly qualified services?
I’m not advocating for all charters, many should be shut down. If anything, more pressure should be placed on State DOEs and Local School Districts to close them down if they’re not performing better than local public schools (yep, that means close down 5/6 of them). I’m not protesting against many of the things Diane supports. I’m all for many of her suggestions — providing prenatal care to all pregnant women, making early childhood education available to all, reducing class size, eliminating merit pay, increasing staffing at poor schools, providing wrap-around medical services in poor communities, diagnostic testing that shows where children need focused attention, ensuring all schools have a guidance counselor/psychologist/nurse, increasing arts and music and P.E., etc.
Because the public school system has generally shown no systemic or pedagogical answer to excellence for impoverished public schools, I’m looking to the high performing charters for my neighborhood. I don’t see Diane’s long term lobbying efforts for anti-poverty social and education programs contradictory to my immediate need for better schooling in my neighborhood. Her approach might gradually raise educational outcomes from dismal to marginally functional for 100% of the students in my community 50 years from now. A high performing charter might raise educational outcomes from dismal to highly performing for 70% of the students in my community 10 years from now.
LikeLike
Study the laws and learn how special education works. No student can be denied access to their neighborhood public school or the general education curriculum based on disability. Appropriate placements must be made on a case by case basis based upon the individual strengths and needs of the child, as determined by a multidisciplinary team and the parents, not based on the resources of the school.
LikeLike
Point taken, I worded that poorly. My broader point was to ask about the percentage of children that have difficulty in a highly effective, high discipline public charter that ultimately end up back in the public school system. (all charter attrition is not forced expulsion, some are parents who don’t like the workload/atmosphere, some are parents who are transient, some are parents who pull their kids out of school altogether, etc.). For those that are asked to leave because of their disruptive behavior, they’ve not been denied access to the public charter but have proven they’re not a good fit for that specific public school. In the case of the blind/autistic/etc., they’ve not been denied access to the public charter but parents often choose a local public school with more like students or more focused resources.
Do you characterize the above situation as collateral damage, or is that practical? Do you characterize the above situation as a dumping ground, or does it prevent teaching to the lowest common denominator? Could it not be seen as more empathetic, where that small minority actually receives specialized services (not in the legal definition sense of SPED, but in a practical sense) — in the case of the disruptive, the specialized services may equate to teachers who are better suited working with strong willed / disruptive children; in the case of blind/autistic/etc. it may equate to co-locating like students with focused resources.
LikeLike
Laws matter. Charter schools are public schools and as such they may not legally discriminate. If people want to run schools that serve specific populations, they should do it on their own dime and open up private schools, not siphon funds from public schools which must serve ALL children.
LikeLike
Interpretation of laws matter also. Expulsions happen frequently in the public school system, with the offending student often being placed in another public school. The legal right to a public education doesn’t equate to the absolute right to attend a specific public school.
I understand your perspective. Don’t totally agree with it, don’t totally disagree with it, but understand it. I think we can agree to disagree.
LikeLike
The expulsion rate for charter schools is MUCH higher than it is for neighborhood schools: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-05/local/36208283_1_charter-advocates-charter-schools-traditional-public-schools
And, unlike with neighborhood public schools, I have yet to hear about a charter chain that typically accepts expelled students at their other locations.
LikeLike
That article discusses all D.C. charters, not specifically high performance charters. I previously stated that most charters don’t outperform public schools, and 5/6 of them should be shut down. Diane Ravitch doesn’t call for all charters to be shutdown in her book. Many in your referenced article should be shut down. I don’t see advocating for great public education, and advocating for high performing charters as a mutually exclusive endeavor.
This is probably more germane to our discussion:
http://www.kipp.org/results/mathematica-study/mathematica-2013-report
“On average, students do not leave KIPP schools at unusually high rates prior to middle school completion. The proportion of entering students who transfer before 8th grade is identical at KIPP and non-KIPP district schools (37 percent). However, KIPP schools are consistently more likely than local district schools to have students repeat a grade.”
This can go on forever. You pull a study, I discredit some part of it. I pull a study, you discredit some part of it. We fundamentally disagree, and we can do so openly and freely because this we’re fortunate enough to live in our beautiful democracy. If a high performing charter comes to my neighborhood, I’ll stand at the mountain top and advocate for them to come. If a high performing charter comes to your neighborhood, you can stand at the mountain top and advocate for them to pound sand. We agree to disagree.
LikeLike
“KIPP On Trickin’ — looking at the raw data” by Gary Rubinstein
http://garyrubinstein.teachforus.org/2011/07/08/kipp-on-trickin-looking-at-the-raw-data/
LikeLike
As I said, we each cite studies to bolster our perspective, and then rebut each other’s studies with more additional studies. We then discredit each other’s rebuttals with even more studies. Of course I’ve read Gary’s rebuttal. And I’ve read the rebuttal to the rebuttal. Ed.Ds, Ph.Ds, and career teachers on both sides have weighed in on numerous books, studies, and blogs, and I’ve read a lot of that too. The only consensus is that there’s no consensus. Kind of like global warming.
Sometimes when I get so deep in the data I back away for perspective. In the poor Houston neighborhoods before KIPP arrived, there was no future for those kids. The kids that graduate from KIPP Houston High School have an incredible future now. In the poor Tucson neighborhoods before BASIS arrived, there was no future for those kids. The kids that graduate from BASIS Tucson have an incredible future now. Our neighborhood is in need of a KIPP or BASIS or Noble to save our kids, even if it’s only 70 or 80 percent of them to start with. We can’t wait 50 years for our schools to gradually move from dismal to marginally functional. That’s my perspective for my neighborhood, you have a voice for your own neighborhood.
LikeLike
Sacrificing this country’s entire system of public education to privatization because 1/6 of charters MIGHT help SOME kids is more costly and a lot riskier than investing in public schools. Across the country, education budgets have been slashed while the charters keep sending their unwanted kids back to public schools, so resources are needed there more than ever now. Meanwhile, instead of increasing resources, states are giving that money to charter schools, such as Illinois, which gave $98M to ONE charter operator.
I have known a lot of owners of private schools and those who are proud of their schools send their own kids to them. That’s not been the case with charters. If KIPP is so wonderful, then why don’t Richard Barth and Wendy Kopp send their own kids to their neighborhood KIPP? Boot camps are for other people’s children.
LikeLike
I have no problems with charters as long as they are not publically funded but still able to be run privately. I am disturbed that most charters are not subjected to the same teacher evals that public school teachers are, and that charters may expel a child for a learning disability or discipline problem while still taking taxpayer dollars.
If a charter is doing well, it better NOT be because they are counseling out students or using customized test prep materials. Until all charters are regulated, there will always be questions about the validity of their success.
LikeLike
You’re being an idealogue and extremist, rather than rational.
We have data that shows that 1/6 of charters outperform their neighborhood public schools. Not maybe, not might, but actually do. Shut down the other 5/6 and return all funding back to the local public schools, I’m all for it. Talk to a parent of one of those high performing charters, I’m sure they’re quite happy their life trajectory has changed.
We’re not sacrificing this country’s entire system of education if our State DOEs and local school districts use discretion when deciding whom to give a charter, and when to revoke it. Just like we’re not threatening our under resourced schools by allowing TFA to augment our hard to fill, high need areas like math or science, but not hire TFA to teach special education classrooms because they have no specific training in SPED. We may sacrifice the overall quality of public education if state legislators, state DOE, and local school districts see charters as the panacea to all education woes in poor communities and start to shape national education policy based on this faulty belief (which is part of the point of Diane’s book, that the trends are looking that way, and part of her message on MHP). They’re not the overall solution, just an augmenting tool for poor neighborhoods which need to be utilized with extreme discretion.
State education budgets are being slashed for political reasons unrelated to charter schools. I agree that our politicians need to rethink priorities, but if my U.S. or state congressman decides to invest more in ethanol production or subsidizing metal casting foundries and less in education I don’t blame the charter schools. I do expect those entities be extremely judicious with taxpayer dollars by only allowing charters to open that have a proven record of success, and closing ones that don’t pass high performance standards.
I don’t think we’re as far apart as you think. I may actually be closer to Diane than you are — she’s not for closing every charter, she’s not anti-charter completely. The benefit of having Ms. Ravitch on MHP or The Daily Show or Charlie Rose is that there is an increased dialogue about what charters can and can’t do, what TFA is good at and what they’re not, the importance of sustained funding for public education from a long-term historical perspective, etc.
My original comment to this blog was based in frustration at having watched the MHP yesterday, and hearing MHP say that educating in poor neighborhoods is easy and only requires implementing the simple cookie cutter approach to success from middle/upperclass neighborhoods, and hearing Diane say education of minority children has never been higher and thus there is no crisis. She corrected me on my misinterpretation of some of her statement, but I’ve yet to hear what systemic, leadership, or pedagogical ideas work in poor neighborhood schools other than “solve poverty first”.
My subsequent comment to your blog comment dealt with your perspective of discipline in charter schools as cruel and racist. I probed you as the discussion went on to learn more about your views and rationale for your anti-charter sentiments. I don’t see things quite as black-and-white as you do regarding charters. You see them as the downfall of the entire American public education system, I see them as a beneficial augmentation to public schools when implemented with discretion.
LikeLike
You’re looking in the mirror when you say “You’re being an idealogue and extremist, rather than rational.”
In Chicago, 50 neighborhood schools were closed this Spring in low income minority neighborhoods and there are plans to open 52 new charter schools. Then, last month, RFPs were issued for the addition of even more charter schools, but this time in neighborhoods populated by mostly middle and upper income white people –where annexes and more public schools are needed, not charter schools. It remains to be seen how many of those folks choose military style schooling for their kids –which most genuine educators find abhorrent, BTW.
You’re blind if you don’t recognize how privatization is being used to dismantle public education this country. I have no interest in reading any more verbose diatribes from the land of denial. BYE!
LikeLike
I’m not supporting what’s going on in Chicago… or New Orleans… you’re hatred of all charter schools has made it impossible to recognize they do serve a valuable purpose… you’re talking past me, not with me… and by refusing to acknowledge any of my points, you’ve even been arguing quite vehemently with Ms. Ravitch who supports implementing charters in limited circumstances. I am amused by your emotional tenor, I don’t think I’ve ever chatted with someone quite so rigid and inflexible in their thinking. Quite a fascinating experience.
There is some tremendous irony between your ultimate hatred of all charters and the fact that they’ve actually reinforced what Diane has been saying for years now (and actually reinforce the point you’re trying to argue; funny, you’re actually arguing against yourself!) The really successful ones spend more total per pupil (combined public and private dollars) than their local public schools. They’ve shown that sustained funding, and a significant amount more than is currently being spent, is necessary to elevate poor schools to excellence. Things that Diane talks about are really important, and especially important in poor communities — free pre-school for all, smaller class sizes, nurses and guidance counselors and psychologists in every school, expanded art and music programs, etc. These items cost money, and the really successful charter schools find a way to get the funding through a combination of public and private dollars. The really successful ones also find a way not to just throw money at the problem, but figure out how to most effectively use this money in a very targeted way. This should be a rallying cry for educational traditionalists when lobbying federal/state legislators — look at these successful charters, they spent more per pupil than their local public schools in these specific areas and got phenomenal results.
There is also some tremendous irony between your ultimate hatred of all charters, and the positive transformation they’re having on some public school districts. Kaya Henderson was on MHP not too long ago, and she talked about how extending school days for D.C. public schools, coupled with requiring teachers meet face-to-face with each child’s parent(s) out in the community was having a significant impact on education outcomes in DCPS. Sounds to me like innovations brought to the forefront by successful charters in poor neighborhoods.
I’m not for large scale privatization, I don’t see charters as the panacea to solve the plight of urban education… they do serve a purpose when utilized with discretion. My community is in dire circumstances, and a proven, highly successful one is welcome in my neighborhood anytime.
LikeLike
By the way, I tried several times in our discussion to end the conversation with “let’s agree to disagree”, but your pride just couldn’t take the notion that someone listened to your arguments and still had a different viewpoint. I appreciate your thoughts, and I do feel more informed having listened to your insight. Best of luck to you.
LikeLike
Thank you for sharing this intelligent interview, and kudos to Melissa Harrisa-Perry for doing her homework!
Ironically, after 40 years of teaching in public education, I was cleaning out my archives and found personal notes from NYSED curriculum departments concerning many aspects of state curriculum and testing in which I had been involved. The curriculum/standards were all created, tested, revised by educational specialists (who had actually taught in public schools) and by teachers from across NYS state who came together as ‘think tanks’ for an evolving statewide curriculum. Its goal was to asses schools’ performances and students’ progress; never a teacher evaluation.
I always came out of those summer work weeks refreshed, and ready to try new, creative ways of teaching relevant, age-appropriate content.
What a shame that excellent teachers are now being demoralized by a “core curriculum”
created by big business.
Diane, please continue to be the spokesperson advocating quality education for all!
LikeLike
Very good to see.
I like the part about creativity as our trump card. Striving to always be better, it is important to remember our strengths.
I spent a decade of my life with a scientist, and when I would talk to Chinese folks who worked in his lab they said freedom also was what they loved about the US. And while many folks who worked in the lab were technically brilliant, my scientist husband (the product of rural Nebraska public schools) said the foreign-trained workers did not know how to ask the questions that drive science. It takes both. But in my opinion being able to ask the questions gives one the “proverbial” leg up. In the global economy!!!!
LikeLike
Oh what joy I felt to hear her actually respond to you and LISTEN to you. I’ve been tweeting her for weeks now about the need to pick up on the destruction of public education. I am often so disappointed by these types of interviews because of their lack of depth. Even Chris Hayes kind of towed the line of the popular narrative. Today however, was different. Let’s hope someone was listening who can get through the thick skulls of those policy wonks at the DOE and the white house. Thank you Diane you were wonderful.
LikeLike
Excellent interview. It was cut short though, at the link provided. MHP said we will return after the break, then the video was over.
Is there a link where one can see/hear the entire interview?
LikeLike
Look to the right where more videos are displayed…look for 14 or 15… Charters, the word, is in the title.
LikeLike
I didn’t see the panel discussion either, at that link. Did I miss something?
LikeLike
The panel followed the interview
LikeLike
Mike, here’s the separate link to the panel discussion.
http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-perry/watch/how-charter-schools-can-lead-to-disparity-57194563769
LikeLike
Oh, and the discussion then continues into a third segment.
http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-perry/watch/poverty-and-its-impact-on-education-57196611701
LikeLike
I thought it was a very good interview, too. I just wish someone would give you the freedom and time to summarize Reign of Error, free from interrupting questions. Interviewers have a set of questions they want to get to, so they are unable to go with the flow of the conversation, so it is quite disjointed. Then they feel they need to let the other people into the conversation, often at inopportune moments. I guess I was left with wishing for more of YOU and less of THEM. But keep the interviews coming. Can not get enough!
LikeLike
Yes, it was a good interview. Amazing! I wonder why MSNBC allowed this to happen? Are the elites softening their stance on educational “reform?” Is the push back working? Did this reporter defy her superiors? Unlikely..The clip never would have been shown if she had disobeyed. I’m at a loss, but I am glad that it happened. Something has changed.
LikeLike
I saw the Chris Hayes interview on MSNBC..Short but ok…
I have yet to see the other channels interview Diane…
I think MSNBC is the best of the best and Meilissa is always so prepared for all of her interviews..
LikeLike
the show was an important one I am shocked by Obamas statement about Rahm opening schools? The truth has been unleashed how do we continue to get new evidence to the right people?
LikeLike
The interview and panel discussion were broken into three segments which do not follow one another sequentially online for some reason, so here are the direct links to all three parts.
Part 1) The Case Against School Privatization
http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-perry/watch/the-case-against-school-privatization-57195587667
Part 2) How Charter Schools Can Lead to Disparity
http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-perry/watch/how-charter-schools-can-lead-to-disparity-57194563769
Part 3) Poverty and Its Impact on Education
http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-perry/watch/poverty-and-its-impact-on-education-57196611701
LikeLike
Thank for taking the time to post all three links….very helpful. 🙂
LikeLike
I love Melissa Harris Perry and we watch MSNBC at my house…… as they have the most prepared and most intelligent news anchors of any of the channels ( other than the nightly CBS news)
I saw the first part and Melissa did do her hw..Have not been able to see the panel..
My computer loads the video but the video never appears..
The interview…(first part) is Spot On..
WOW….Great Stuff!!
Now ..I will try to watch the other two segments..
Thank You Diane…
LikeLike
I watched the interview. It was great! I also have read your book. (It is likely the only entire non-fiction book I’ve read since college, many years ago.) I learned so very much from it. I am a retired middle school math teacher (40 years), and I try to still keep up with what’s going on with public education. I must admit that it is very depressing to me. I never would have thought that I would look back on my 40 years as the “good old days”. Keep spreading the word.
LikeLike
The days when Teachers were Teachers and children really learned.
Didn’t we use that good old math to put the Men on the Moon?
LikeLike
I should have said where Children still Loved to Learn
LikeLike
Great interview–but we only got the first half
LikeLike
Finally., a shift in the narrative. Thank you, Mrs. Perry. The truth is finally becoming obvious in New Orleans and in cities across the nation. This gives me hope that the tide may be turning. But not in time to save countless children from the harmful effects of leaving no child untested.
We as a nation don’t mind spending trillions on weapons to wage wars in other countries, yet we are loathe to spend tax dollars on education and social support systems for children in poverty. Mrs. Perry said a mouthful when she pointed out that we already know what works in education. It is the kind of education that the children of our president, and Bill Gates, and countless other wealthy children receive. It is not a great mystery. I wish she had spent more time discussing that hypocrisy of the Reformers. That children of poverty don’t deserve the same kind of education as their own children. A great place to start is early childhood education that isn’t driven by test scores.
LikeLike
Excellent…I do believe the tide is turning — in no small part because you are leading the charge while changing the narrative.
LikeLike
I really liked the 3rd part of the interview (panel discussion).
LikeLike