G.F. Brandenburg writes one of the best education blogs on the planet. Follow him.
He has a deep intolerance for fraud, cheating, and misrepresentation.
Here he explains in a few hundred words what is wrong with corporate reform.
G.F. Brandenburg writes one of the best education blogs on the planet. Follow him.
He has a deep intolerance for fraud, cheating, and misrepresentation.
Here he explains in a few hundred words what is wrong with corporate reform.
As readers of this blog know, the corporate titans in Los Angeles have raised a huge fund to beat Steve Zimmer in his race for re-election to the LA school board. Eli Broad and his allies have raised over $1.5 million. NYC Mayor Bloomberg has tossed in $1 million to support the pro-privatization candidates.
Zimmer is the main target. It is all-hands-on-deck to defeat this good man.
This letter arrived from a parent in the Los Angeles school system. You might be interested in reading her comments on how charter schools are increasing segregation in the district:
;
An open letter to my fellow, locally-politically engaged neighbors:
I’m writing because many of us Mar Vistans have lived and worked alongside Kate Anderson these past few years on local political issues and I see that her list of endorsing co-volunteers is lengthy, in many cases replete with a yard sign. I’m writing because I feel that supporting her in this school board election against Steve Zimmer is a mistake. I hope you will hear me out. This is a mostly personal argument and plea; but the personal is always political and this decision matters as deeply as anything can. I am heartsick to witness the slow-motion undermining of Steve Zimmer’s incumbency.
Just for some anchoring perspective, my family comes to the public school educational game from private school. My two girls attended the well-regarded private lab school at UCLA alongside some stratospherically rich and famous folks. It was an education indeed. For middle school they rolled back down the hill to Palms Middle School, a really interesting educational setup with a high proportion of relatively scholastically advanced kids learning alongside kids not thus-identified. Our experience in this school has been overwhelmingly positive for its superior academics and true, deep opportunity for integration of socioeconomic status, class, color, nationality, learning skills, social skills – this public school in the heart of our community educates a mixture of children so diverse that I never really thought it could be possible to address such disparate needs adequately. It is an existential breath of fresh air to interact with teachers and administrators steeped in professionalism and competence.
At the same time the deprivation in our academic (and social) system is breath-taking. Comprehending the why, how and ramifications of all this provides its own well-spring of educational learning. At some point I was so upset with the Los Angeles Unified School District I even thought of running for the school board myself. I really know next to nothing about the complicated nexus of academics and politics, but it seemed that there was a need for some practical eyewitness experience.
The relevant question in addressing this step was: who is our school board member; the system may be broken but is our explicit contribution to it as well? And the answer is: no. It is not only “no”, but it turns out the man representing us, Steve Zimmer, is uncommonly good at this thankless job of LAUSD school board member (salary: +/- 47K, district, ~ 300 square miles? Š that’s a guess; it is vast for sure). He is extremely thoughtful and knowledgeable, well-versed in a vast ocean of issues and quite frankly a deep, independent thinker. One with whom I might not even agree on some of the vast panoply of hot issues. But one I can trust to have considered very carefully an issue from all sides and developed a morally-anchored, reasoned opinion. Committing to binary yeah-nay decisions on such complex issues – never mind how many there are – is not easy. It is in fact monumentally difficult to choose yes or no about a complicated question come the end of the day. Steve Zimmer is a principled thinker and he comes to decisions through a circuitous route that includes priorities that are aligned properly: with kids – ALL kids, independent of color, class, even educational achievement. He is weighing a multitude of complex, competing interests toward an end of maximizing fairness and educational excellence for the whole community. This is huge.
And I very much fear it is not the case for his opponent. She is on record and takes money from big, deep-pocketed individuals and organizations, supporting a fractious system that would divide the education of our children into “separate but equal” camps. We have done that experiment, it did not and does not work and it was even ruled illegal, a long time ago now. Charter schools and providing “choice” to parents turn out to be just another way – in practice at least – to segregate and sequester resources for one sector of society at the expense of the rest. This is no way to engage in building and sustaining community, it is divisive and simply put: unfair. It is a repudiation, to my mind, of what makes our country great: the open and available opportunity for all. Without a good, publicly-supported education, young people stand no chance of securing a satisfying place for themselves in the social hierarchy. Closing the doors on certain classes of society to schools where the most resources are husbanded, does exactly that: it dooms those on the outside to inferior opportunities.
Please make no mistake that this is exactly and precisely what the charter schools are doing in reality. They are excluding the hard-to-educate, the needy, the resource-intensive pupils in ghettos of inferior quality. Conversely, the white-lining of certain schools where only a certain slice of society is allowed to matriculate, is quite simply hiding all the cookies in a drawer to which you control access, countenancing only your own. That is the narrow solution proposed by Kate Anderson and the lock-step corporate bloc that supports her.
And it is unnecessary. It is my personal experience at least, that it is possible to educate huge swathes of amazingly disparate people excellently. They do it at Palms MS. It’s the teachers, quite frankly, though I personally define the term “teachers” to include the entire community of adults in my children’s school. They all work together as a team toward educating their charges, my children and I wish yours: librarians, vice-principals, bathroom cleaners. I couldn’t learn without all these separate needs attended to and neither can your children: they are all ‘teachers’ in a learning community as far as I am concerned.
So I am writing to my fellow local stakeholders, because it has not been my impression, working alongside many of you in various neighborhood issues, that any of us is really in the business of excluding some. All the more reason, then, that supporting Kate Anderson seems misplaced for the values it was my impression that most of us do hold. We currently have a person working tremendously hard to steer a fair line through a very complicated field of competing interests. The solutions proposed by Ms Anderson are not fair, are not reasoned, are not democratic. They are not supportable. Why, therefore, would any support her?
Thanks for hearing me out. I am of course more than willing to communicate privately about this; I really, really hope you will reconsider any hastily made or incompletely understood endorsement. I do not think non-content-driven endorsements does anyone any credit but in fairness, I think it is easy to be insufficiently familiar with the reality of the code being bantered about regarding all of this. My own experience with children in public schools has opened my eyes to some fairly ugly truths about what is happening silently, in practice. It may not be what any of us would subscribe to knowingly, but that is the point: reality happens regardless of the words ascribed to it. Roses smell the same no matter what they are named. Please do not throw any weight behind a faction that intends to exclude another from their fair share of public education resources.
Please note as well that those of us near the 405 happen to live on an LAUSD district dividing line. Palms MS happens to be outside of Steve Zimmer’s district; my older child’s local school, Venice High School, is in his district. Because we are new to this school my own personal knowledge of it is more limited. But it is clear that Steve Zimmer has thrown his weight and support behind this local High School and is very, very well-liked by parents there; it is equally clear that he offers this sort of support indiscriminately – his support and weight goes to students, all over. While I understand he has “helped out” Venice High School, it is not my impression that he has done so in a way that means any other High School has not been “helped out”. And that is (my definition of) the meaning of democracy for the people; all the people.
In short, Steve Zimmer’s incumbency is not broken: this school board member is not the problem. Electing Kate Anderson would – to coin words she uses in a slightly different context – be a ‘solution in search of a problem’. Yet our current school board representative is not a problem. He happens to have done a fine job last term. IMHO.
Please feel free to email me.
But please, most of all, please take the time to watch this debate between Zimmer and Anderson in which he demonstrates superior familiarity with educational issues, experience, a laudable, morality-driven motivation and true, deep engagement with the needs of all members of our local community:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dShAAODskKA
– Sara Roos, roos@biology.ucla.edu
;
http://venice.patch.com/articles/letter-to-the-editor-lausd-school-board-elections
A reader recently wrote what it is like to work for a for-profit tutoring company:
I am a teacher in a Catholic school and I work for one of these for profit tutoring companies in Chicago. I provide small group instruction to children in math and reading.
Although I feel that I am conscientious and try my best to provide the best services I can for my students, the company I work for pays teachers very low salaries and forces them to teach extremely unreasonable number of hours per day with almost no preparation time. I, for example, teach nine, 40 minute classes per day with a 20 minute lunch.
The company is squeezing teachers more and more so that the company makes lots of money for their shareholders (because they are paid by the head).
The company cares only about paperwork, and does not care one iota about whether the children learn anything at all. I love the school I work at and the children I teach, but the many, many layers of management add no value whatsover to the end product and provide zero professional development to their teachers.
If more people understood what these companies are doing, they would be outraged!
The Tennessee Legislature is rushing to pass legislation that would allow charters to apply to the state to get authorization, instead of the local school board. As noted in an earlier post, the legislation would apply only to Nashville and Memphis.
Note the rationale for targeting these two districts: they already have the most charter schools, so they of course need many more and the state must do it, not the local board.
This legislation–gutting local control–comes right out of the ALEC playbook, which considers privatization to be a higher value than local control. This is evidence not of conservatism–which respects local control–but of radicalism in the service of corporate interests.
ALEC pushed through the same idea as a constitutional amendment in Georgia, and big-money came from the Waltons and others interested in increasing privatization while claiming they are doing it “for the children.”
Who is the miracle reformer of Colorado? Who wrote its law to evaluate teachers by their test scores? Who claimed that his high school graduated 100% of its seniors and sent them to college? Who so lauded by President Obama and DFER? Whose legislation became a model for ALEC? Why, Michael Johnston, of course.
Mercedes Schneider continues her portrait of the board of NCTQ by looking into Johnston’s history. NCTQ is the organization that tells the nation how to get high-quality teachers.
Previous posts by Schneider have included Wendy Kopp, Michelle Rhee, and Joel Klein, who have a cumulative teaching experience of three years among them (Rhee’s).
The Republican super-majority in the Tennessee legislature introduced legislation to strip away the the power of the school boards in Memphis (Shelby County) and Nashville to authorize charter schools.
The power would be moved to a state authority.
This move is retaliation against the Metro Nashville school board, which rejected an application from the Great Hearts charter school academy of Arizona. The school board rejected Great Hearts four times! The problem was that Great Hearts wanted to open in a mostly white, affluent neighborhood and had inadequate plans for student diversity.
In an exposé in the Arizona Republic a few months ago, Great Hearts was singled out for dubious financial self-dealing. See here and here. Arizona blogger David Safier reported last fall that Great Hearts expects each family to make a contribution of at least $1500 to defray costs.
Metro Nashville decided it didn’t want Great Hearts to open in its district.
Nashville’s insistence on turning down this particular application infuriated State Commissioner Kevin Huffman (whose prior experience is limited solely to TFA). Huffman withheld $3.4 million that the state owed to Nashville. The governor and legislators were angry too that Nashville acted to exercise local control. They are now talking about vouchers.
Huffman and the state’s far-right Governor and legislature are determined to privatize as many schools as possible as quickly as possible in Memphis and Nashville.
Local control be damned!
Question: why are the Republicans in Tennessee so determined to destroy public education in their state? Has anyone in the state read the research on charters and vouchers? Or are they taking marching orders from ALEC?
I received the following sincere request for advice. I replied that I would ask readers to share their views. My own view is that RTTT is promoting privatization and standardization and offers little that will enrich education or improve the teaching profession. But I think the reader should hear from you.
She writes:
Diane. I read your blog and other resources about education because I earnestly want to understand all that is going on in education. I read things that make it seem as if education around us is blowing up and yet I see leadership going about equally as earnestly trying to do what I imagine they have interpreted to be appropriate for education. I don’t know what to make if it all yet, except that I know my contributions to education will need to be building back up what is blown up, if that is what is happening, and bring on board with what leadership points me towards as an educator. I am interested in the opinions of people more experienced than I am. I guess so I can be prepared to lead myself one day (since chance favors the prepared mind). So I wonder what do you have to say about the reports states who have adopted RttT share with their education work force. For example,
These links:
2. Dr. Atkinson Talks About the Common Core in Her Latest Blog
In her blog post for Feb. 7, State Superintendent June Atkinson talks about the Common Core State Standards and what they mean for educators and students in North Carolina. This blog post and earlier entries are available at http://www.ncpublicschools.org/statesuperintendent/blog/.
3. Updated Timeline for Measures of Student Learning on the Web
The Measures of Student Learning timeline has been updated and is available on the Educator Effectiveness website at http://www.ncpublicschools.org/educatoreffect/measures/. The Measures of Student Learning are common exams in selected subjects and grades that are not part of the state testing program, or assessments used in promotion decisions for students. The Measures of Student Learning are tools for school districts and charter schools to utilize as one part of the evaluation process for teachers.
——-
When I read these links they seem nebulous enough for a certain comfort level and forward-thinking optimism. Am I missing something? What is it I don’t see that has many of your frequent readers fired up? Anything? Trends towards anything? Or is it possible for a state to make the best of RttT? To churn out something productive and lasting even where other states might be set back? I genuinely want to hear viewpoints. I don’t know what to think except that I want to be a good educator and a good employee and a responsible citizen.
Yesterday, 72 business corporations published a full-page advertisement in the New York Times supporting the Common Core State Standards.
The ad asserts that the CCSS will prepare all children “to be successful in a competitive global economy.” How do they know that since the standards are only now being implemented and have never been demonstrated to be successful?
The ad says that “the need for a strong employer voice is greater than ever.” Why would that be? Is it because so many educators are concerned that the Common Core standards will bust the budgets of their district?
The ad says that the big corporations support “these new, tougher academic standards that are currently being rolled out in classrooms across the country.” Are they concerned that tougher standards might widen the achievement gap?
The ad gives no indication that any of its signatories has ever read the CCSS.
This ad is very curious.
Why would business leaders take out a full-page ad to urge support for something that 46 states and the District of Columbia have already agreed to do?
I am reminded of the wacky report from a task force of the Council on Foreign Relations a year ago (co-chaired by Joel Klein and Condoleeza Rice), which claimed that the public schools posed a “very grave threat to national security.” Its three recommendations: 1) open more charters and vouchers; 2) adopt the Common Core standards; and 3) create a “national security readiness audit” for every school. Thus: privatization and the Common Core are necessary for our survival as a nation.
All very puzzling. How will the Common Core standards protect our national security?
Why are 72 corporations lined up to pledge support for standards that are already adopted but never field-tested?
Do they sell products that have never had a trial?
What gives?
EduShyster wants to help promote Rick Hess’ new book, Cage Busters….or does she?
It is a ritual. Every author of a public policy book must launch it with a panel discussion at a think tank in DC. It’s a way of showcasing the book and branding it
Hess runs the education program at the American Enterprise Institute so he chose his panel. Hess branded his book by offering the views of people he sees as cage busters: Michelle Rhee, Kaya Henderson, Deborah Gist, Chris Barbic, and a little known principal from New York.
EduShyster deconstructs the cage busting concept. In the end, we are left to wonder who is in the cage, why it needs busting, and where these cage busters are taking the children and teachers of this nation.
This is an astonishing development.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City, a multibillionaire, is giving $1 million to support three candidates in the Los Angeles school board election.
The candidates he is backing are in favor of privately managed charter schools and are generally anti-union.
The people of Los Angeles will decide in next month’s election whether the super-rich elite can buy control of the public school system and impose their pet project of privatization.
This bold effort to buy the school board is an affront to democracy.
Are the public schools of Los Angeles for sale to the highest bidder?