Wendy Lecker shows in this important article how corporate reformers impose “disruptive innovation” on struggling schools and communities. They close schools, take over schools, and fire staff instead of making needed improvements.
The reformers are following the advice of a writer who argues that disruptive innovation works in the business world. But, she says, it doesn’t work in the business world or in education. The goals of education are not the same as the goals of business.
“Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has received millions of dollars in campaign contributions from charter school promoters. The result is his embrace of “disruptive innovation” in education.
“Disruption is bad for schools and for children — especially for vulnerable children, who experience daily turbulence in their lives outside school. Teacher and administrator turnover hurts student achievement, as does student mobility. The turnaround strategy has proven unsuccessful.
“Recent shocking developments involving Jumoke/FUSE charter school illustrate the harm caused by Malloy’s “disruptive innovation.”
“Hartford’s Milner elementary school was the first target of charter chain founder and Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor’s commissioner’s network. The commissioner’s network to “turnaround” struggling schools was a key feature of Malloy’s 2012 education reform legislation.
“Milner suffered from a chronic shortage in staff serving its large population of English Language Learners and students with disabilities. Its building required major repairs. The school also already underwent an unsuccessful redesign in 2008. Rather than provide Milner with necessary additional resources, Pryor announced a takeover of the school by Jumoke — a charter school in Hartford with no ELL students and few students with disabilities.
“Only after the takeover did Milner receive additional funding, including an annual $345,000 management fee to Jumoke. Curiously, after the takeover, roughly 20 percent of the students disappeared from the school.
“Michael Sharpe promised that his “Jumoke model” would help Milner. However, after two years under Jumoke management, Milner’s scores have dropped precipitously and are now “rock bottom.” Hartford accuses Jumoke of nepotism, and of hiring an ex-convict. Sharpe admitted that there was no plan for Milner — they were “winging it.”
“As part of the commissioner’s network, Milner/Jumoke was supposed to be subject to heightened accountability by Pryor. Yet, despite this ongoing failure, since 2012, Pryor and the State Board of Education awarded Jumoke another commissioner’s network school, Bridgeport’s Dunbar elementary, and another charter school in New Haven.
“This week, it was revealed that Sharpe falsified his academic credentials. Even worse, he spent several years in federal prison for embezzling public funds and conspiracy to commit fraud, and has two forgery convictions….It is unconscionable that neither Pryor nor Malloy bothered to discover Sharpe’s lies or his felony convictions.
“The damage done to Milner’s children cannot be undone. They have lost years of learning. They are forced to build new relationships with staff that has been replaced twice in six years. Instead of necessary resources, the state has given these families only empty promises.
“Unlike business disruptors, Malloy’s failed education ventures will not disappear. His callous “disruptive” education policies cause lasting damage to Connecticut’s children and their communities.”
May this chilling and brilliant analysis go far and wide. We must expose these people as the moral monsters that they are.
Please read all comments here. Malloy, Pryor, the CT BOE are willing to look the other way until this was all exposed by the Hartford Courant. They would be doing nothing if it wasn’t revealed to the public and they knew.
http://jonathanpelto.com/2014/07/01/battle-corporate-education-reform-industry-takes-center-stage/
Please see this article as well and I will cut and paste two very important comments posted by an informed parent.
posted by: Parent and educator | June 30, 2014 6:42pm
The State Board of Education and the Commissioner have demonstrated a very serious dereliction of duty with regard to FUSE, and, by extension, all charter schools. Now we find out that the SBE never verified the credentials of Michael Sharpe? Never cared that his daughter Michelle, his brother or relation Joseph Dickerson, his niece (as named in a previous article) have all been employed by the charters? Not to mention the daughter of Andrea Comer, who, until Thursday last, was COO of FUSE! Background checks for those who work with children are somehow optional? SBE members today demonstrated a callous disregard for the law in claiming that they did not realize the true situation with FUSE (there were warning flags about Jumoke/Milner, by the way—and many members of the public have requested information about that partnership)—yet the SBE renewed their contract and gave them more schools! Jumoke is a pipeline for the new Achievement First high school that opened shortly after Stefan Pryor resigned from that charter school management organization he helped to found in order to be the State Commissioner of Education! In addition (and any journalist can find more egregious info about this, if they are willing to look and listen), Stefan Pryor hand-picked Jumoke/Fuse to present a workshop on the Commissioner’s Network Turnaround process—with the implication that having the newly incorporated FUSE as “lead partner” would fast-track an application to the Commissioner’s Network—which was obviously the case with Dunbar and now Booker T. Washington—a plan that simply cannot go forward, as per CT law.
http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/archives/entry/state_board_of_education_launches_investigation_requires_background_checks_/
One more, same article:
posted by: Parent and educator | July 1, 2014 11:29am
State Rep. and Ed. Commission member Andy Fleischmann and other officials show themselves to be woefully misinformed when they say that Sharpe has been “tremendously successful”—based on what? how many students were at Jumoke then? Is it possible to find this out? also, I think the curriculum, student numbers (at the beginning of the year and again at the end), test scores, all need to be examined for each year of Jumoke’s existence. When they were discussing the Achievement First Hartford high school in 2012, and how it would automatically admit Jumoke 8th graders, that year there were 42 graduating 8th graders! and that was after years of Adamowski’s bolstering charters and increasing funding by means of his “money follows the child”.
Also, how can SBE member Estela Lopez say she didn’t know about the problems at Milner, when last year’s CMTs were published and were shown to be falling? Why is she saying that, having rubber-stamped Pryor’s orders, she didn’t know what she had signed and voted for? She probably pays more attention to her cell phone plan than to legislation affecting hundreds, even thousands (7000 attend charter schools in CT) of children in CT.
Shouldn’t the citizens of Connecticut file an ethics complaint against the SBE? for dereliction of duty and gross malfeasance? This board is all about accountability and teacher evals, student rigor, yada yada, and look at what a bunch of toadies they are! The state legislature is not much better, by the way; witness Fleischmann’s “unknowingness” and embrace of policies he would never inflict on the affluent schools of West Hartford.
Two more, very important:
posted by: Castles Burning | July 1, 2014 11:38am
If “[New Haven’s] decision to sever ties with the embattled charter school management group ‘shows strong leadership and good judgment,’ [according to] Morgan Barth, division director of the Education Department’s Turnaround Department,” then why would this recommendation not be made for Bridgeport?
I understand that Ms. Rabinowitz wishes to conduct her own investigation, but what she can uncover seems limited when FUSE refuses to release its records, a clear indication of the “troubles with charters” under current state practice.
The question of who is in charge (as in determining what administrative training Jumoke administrators should be attending—FUSE’s or Bridgeport’s) is one raised by Ms. Rabinowitz. The fact that this rather simple question cannot now be answered is troublesome and suggests that she may not get the answers that she needs to make an informed-enough decision.
“Barth said that [New Haven’s] plan will be scrutinized with a ‘great deal of rigor’ [awkward phrasing] and the state Board of Education will have another opportunity to vote on the plan presented during a special meeting this summer.” But what credibility does the present BOE, especially given that they are the source of this non-accountability; have to make such a determination? What will be done to “clean their own house,” which has not been paying sufficient attention to these turnaround models and charter school management companies. In fact, if anything, the record suggests that they have been busier promoting Jumoke than overseeing them.
posted by: Parent and educator | July 1, 2014 11:47am
Commissioner Pryor, the State Board of Education, the legislators, and, perhaps, the Governor should re-read the laws they passed regarding charter schools and the Commissioner’s Network. There is no way that the Booker T. Washington state charter can “go forward” (not that it ever should have been approved!)—the Reverend and his wife (?nepotism?) do not appear to have education degrees—what gives them the right to open a school? The legislation Stefan Pryor and Governor Malloy were so anxious to pass (with the spineless complicity of the state legislature) outlines in some detail the process for opening a charter school. After submitting the application, the Commissioner and State Board of Education are supposed to read and evaluate it—and its clauses about Lead Partnerships, terminations, legal proceedings, etc. It is utterly ridiculous for Turnaround Specialist (and former Achievement First principal) Morgan Barth to call severing the partnership with FUSE an example of “strong leadership”—too bad it’s not legal. I would recommend that the State Board of Education, the Commissioner, the Governor, and the legislators take a long look at what they are doing to children (no background checks? only 30% certified teachers? no curriculum, as at Milner?). To view the Booker T. Washington charter school application and its lengthy sections explaining the “Jumoke philosophy” is to realize, first of all, that this is a fantasy world in which facts, such as the dire situation of children at Milner must be suppressed, and second, that the Rev. Morrison swallowed the Sharpe sales pitch as easily as Pryor and the SBE did.
And if we’re looking at family relationships in hiring, don’t forget an examination of the Rev. Moales in Bridgeport and his family’s daycares and pre-schools.
“Disruptive Innovation” as far as I could tell in an article I read, really holds that success is “finding that holy grail” because “it is out there” and when you find it, everything else just pales by comparison so everything else becomes “extinct. The assumption is always that your “holy grail” is my holy grail – a rather arrogant self-centered myopic attitude. The theory seems to promote “crash and burn”… fly by night” protocol. It is okay to try something out large-scale in your holy grail search (thinking RTTT, NCLB etc…) and if it is not “the holy grail” just go onto the next. “Holy grailing” and implementing of it is a lucrative career if you play your cards right. Bill Gates is the poster child. Maybe this works or maybe it doesn’t. There is no accounting for the damage done to lives effected by “crash and burn” while searching for that ONE HOLY GRAIL. Thinking of turn-around schools or charterization! And attached to the “holy grail” is the rags to riches American dream of becoming not just “middle class or rich” anymore but becoming an instant MEGABILLIONAIRE. Original ideals even get trampled by “megabillionaires disease” defined as “using a holy grail philosophy as an excuse to get uber rich”… So crooks earn 6 figure salaries to run charters.
Here is a Christensen quote from the Harvard Alumni Magazine that really shows myopic arrogance… the kind that leads Bill Gates to think his views are “it” and seems to be a prevalent gangrenous “disease”in the business community … the kind that makes believers SEARCH HARD for the “holy grail” and make claims “they have it” while getting very very rich or famous enforcing their “brand” of holy grail!
Christensen who had fought serious illness was asked how he would measure his life. Instead of responding with something like…”by how much my actions help people”, he “guru-izes” his own profession in the process of denigrating another. He responded, “…for the first time in my life, I realized that I had always wanted to help other people. Until then, I’d framed it as, ‘If you really want to help other people, you should study sociology’. But I realized sociologists just talk. If you really want to change people’s lives, be a manager. You have an opportunity, for 10 hours each day, to structure their work so that when they come home, they have a higher degree of self-esteem because they accomplished something that matters to people.”…
Public school teachers are not coming home these days feeling “self-esteem” under the holy grail “education trifecta”… NCLB/RTTT/CC! And for that matter… nor are their students!!!!!!!! A current and relevant example of failed but implemented “holy grail” policy might be how the education business community has co-opted Charlotte Danielson’s ideas or David Coleman’s….
Gee that very kind of myopic Christensen thinking is what is making corporate “paternalism” lead so many non corporate entities into the ground (like the very democratic ideals of our government or public education). Arne Duncan has this “guru”ization” disease! His brand of “guri-ization” is “for-proft-education”!
What paternalistic claptrap Christensen is spewing. As if those of us who have known all our lives that we wanted to help people, and we have done it, don’t help anyone. And only if Christensen sails in and “organizes” our work so that we really help people. This is what all of these “reformers” think, but Christensen is the first to really spout it out (that I’ve seen).
The simple truth is good teaching is hard and demanding work. It is a skill set that not everyone has and it is always improved with experience. There is not an app for it or a computer program or a magic formula – a good teacher could teach in the bush with a chalkboard. Forget seeking for the holy grail in education. Pay us what we deserve, respect us, and do those basics that we know work – smaller class size, preschool, tutoring, study groups for middle and high school, wrap around services, enrichment, and a full curriculum.
Both Lecker’s article and the New Yorker’s take down of Christensen’s work are great. I really encourage readers to look at the New Yorker article, which exposes Christensen’s work as either rank incompetence or a true sham.
I spent nearly 20 years working as a patent attorney in Silicon Valley. Unlike Christensen (and the vast majority of B-school “experts”), I actually could understand the technology and science that the companies he described do. As a patent attorney, I also learned the history of these technologies (how else can you understand what’s “new” if you don’t know what’s “old”). The whole idea of “disruptive” is nonsense, since very few—if any—technologies springe from the heads of inventors like Athena bursting from the skull of Zeus. Nearly all technological advances are incremental and often reflect an exchange of ideas between users and inventors. When certain parameters are reached there may be a strong move to buy certain technologies, but most people can see that coming. And many companies pushing wares simply fail.
Instead, “disruptive” is just another buzzword that business types and investors like to use to hype stock prices and make managers look more important than engineers and scientists. I think it also reflects the basic ignorance of economists and business school professors regarding science and technology. As perhaps a corollary to one of Arthur C. Clarke’s famous “laws”: Any technology is indistinguishable from magic to highly ignorant observers.
In short, Christensen’s work reflects a lot of cherrypicking and myth-making. Just like Frederick Taylor’s phony “scientific management”, it only shows that most of what passes for brilliance in business schools and economics departments is nothing but chicanery.
Great insights. Harvard has never stinted on bogus science and research to support the causes of empire, colonialism, and capitalism–and they are all connected.
Jill Lapore in the June 23 issue of The New Yorker in an article entitled “The Disruption Machine: What the gospel of innovation gets wrong” completely destroys the premises and research of Christensen’s ideas. She shows that many of his examples he used in his writings of successful disruption innovation or failure to innovate actually proved the opposite conclusion. She also argues it is often disastrous to apply disruption to public enterprise and much better to follow an incremental improvement strategy (this applies to many businesses too). Wendy Lecker’s article is proof positive of the destructive power of erroneous ideas which become commonly held by those who should know better.
What is “Jumoke” anyway? What does that word mean? All it makes me want to do is get a Jamocha milkshake.
According to the FUSE website: The term Jumoke is Yoruba (a Nigerian tribal language) for “the child is loved.”
Kids are props. Loved = USED.
Another commenter here observed that the “um” in Jumoke is silent. : )
TAGO!
Threatened–I’m probably posting this way too late for you to read it, but your last sentence gave me a huge (much needed) guffaw!
And, thanks for asking–been questioning that term myself, but keep forgetting to ask.
Sorry–my first comment was meant to go right under Threatened’s 11:03 AM post–about the “Jamocha milkshake.”
It is not possible to exaggerate the degree to which the disruption theory has taken over business theory…and the harm it has caused without driving benefit.
We desperately need educators to keep calling out the mythology of Disruptive Innovation. After reading the Lepore article, I wrote the following blog post for my marketing and TV colleagues. But the lessons apply as well to schools and education.
Is Disruption the Most Important Model for Innovation?
http://dsgarnett.wordpress.com/2014/06/26/is-disruption-the-best-way-to-search-for-innovation/
I so agree with Doug Garnett–the term “Disruptive Innovation” is oxymorinc in the extreme. What good “innovation” can come out of “disruption?” This also makes me think of the name of that new group that is aiming to duplicate Vergara in every state in the union (all of our Dumbocratic fiends–er–“friends”). InCite, as in “Incite a riot.” Or–as in, “Incite disruption.”
Anyway, my hope is that all of this nonsense as revealed in this post will very decisively help Jonathan Pelto’s gubernatorial campaign, pushing him over the top.
Look out, Connecticut–it’s been done–NYC, Newark, Chicago (defeat of an entrenched, family dynasty candidate), Indiana (Glenda Ritz), LAUSD School Board, and elsewhere. Yes, WE can…and we WILL!