A reader asked in the comments: Why does EduShyster (Jennifer Berkshire) interview reformsters, the people who want to dismantle public education and replace it with a private choice system? I asked her. The question was, “Why does Edushyster interview these folks? What am I missing?”
This is her answer:
“Hi – I’m happy to answer that. Can I share my answer with you? I’m out and about having a ladies day and can’t remember my password to log into WordPress (which is somehow different from my blog password – this is what happens when one gets older!)
The easy answer is that I love interviewing people and always have. Way back in the day (OK–many days), I had an, ahem, underappreciated radio show where I would do live interviews. And when I edited a newspaper for AFT, I made my q and a’s (including one with Diane), a staple.
In my latest incarnation, I’ve taken these up again, and I’m still amazed by the fact that virtually every single person I’ve approached has agreed to to talk to me. Well, there was one person who turned me down but I am too discrete to say who. (Email me!) So in the last few months I’ve been making a regular feature of these conversations with people across what I think of as the education reform divide. Here’s why I do them:
1) I think we’re in a war over really big, important questions–not just about education but about democracy, inequality, race, and who gets to decide what kind of country we’re going to have. And yet the education reform debate has started to feel really small to me. I think talking to people about what they believe is a way to get at the big issues that are at stake.
2) The education reform movement isn’t nearly as monolithic as it can seem from a distance. There are key differences between the different constituencies, and doing these interviews helps me gain a better sense of where the divisions are.
3) I’m fascinated by how it is that two people can look at the same set of circumstances and see the world completely differently. Interviewing people like Andy Smarick forces me to try to see the world through his eyes AND makes me think about how I see the world.
In the fall I’m going to be launching a podcast series so that you can hear what these conversations actually sound like. And you don’t have to listen if you don’t want to!
Jennifer
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I TOTALLY agree especially with comment #1. I have even commented myself in this blog on that issue. This is much more than even education. There is so very much going on which is undoing our democratic form of government. Money has usurped people’s needs. Our government, the best that money can buy and it is killing us.
AND to try to view the other person’s point of view is most certainly an aspect of educating one’s self.
Congratulations.
I have noticed some commonalities among the “Reformers” First of all most of them seem to be male and in their late 30’s, mid 40’s or early50’s. Generally Gen Xers like me. They also seem to be white ( all white). They also appear to me to be men who might have been picked on when they were younger. ( I’m of their Gen so I can imagine which group they identified with when they were in their teens) They are smarty pant types. This means they like to think they know everything. They all seem as if they were overindulged with compliments by their parents when they were younger , mainly about their brains. They are not really good at reading social cues. Their body language suggests they are nervous in public. They would be labeled as Geeks if you saw them at a nightclub. None of them look like athletes. One could assume from this profile that we are witnessing a real life scenario of “Revenge of the Nerds”. God Help Us!
P.S. Oh and lastly, their lack of respect and disregard for elder wise women in the teaching profession tells me they must of mother issues. Again God or help us!
Hmmm….Michigan’s Governor Snyder actually ran his campaign and refers to himself as “One Tough Nerd”. You just might be right.
The corporate education reformers have financial and investment interests in promoting their agenda. Their spokes people are handsomely paid to speak for Gates, Broad, and Walton. To try to reason with them is a waste of time and dangerous. They are not interested in being reasonable. They are interested in making money and collaborating with them only helps them hone their ideological tools for attacking public schools and its defenders.
Thanks Edushyster.
I can’t wait for the podcast series.
I usually blast one of those when I’m cleaning my place.
(INSERT SARCASTIC COMEBACK HERE.)
Thanks for this…regarding #1, it is a war! The problem is that one side (the reformists) seem to feel that it’s their job to drag education into the 21st century, while the rest of us (called neo-traditionalists in some circles) feel that our beliefs are grounded in evidence and practice. Mix in ed tech money, Deweyists and Freirists with a dash of Vygotsky and there you go.
Take as a perfect example the recent Ed Week article, “Why Ed Tech is not Transforming How Teachers Teach,” by Bejamin Herold http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2015/06/11/why-ed-tech-is-not-transforming-how.html?cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS1
This line takes the cake for me: “The student-centered, hands-on, personalized instruction envisioned by ed-tech proponents remains the exception to the rule.” The rest of the article explores why that is and how to “fix” it. The problem is that there is NO evidence for the effectiveness of “student-centered, hands-on, personalized instruction”. But, damn the torpedoes! Those teachers just need to get with the 21st century! And we’ll hold them accountable, darnit!
Toos in Terry Moe’s article for the Hoover Institute on how ed tech will kill teachers’ unions and free students from schools and there you go. http://www.hoover.org/research/has-ed-reform-failed
I’d also call your attention to Audrey Watters’ recent piece on the California Ideology here–where libertarianism meets ed tech and reform: http://hackeducation.com/2015/05/17/ed-tech-ideology/
Jennifer, you give them an additional outlet. I am not interested and would rather see you interview people who understand what we need in education and the entire country. I am very disappointed. I also believe they take these opportunities to refine their arguments against us.
I agree. It seems we are going to have to go through a long period of suffering before people on our side understand this is a war and in a war you do not collaborate with the enemy. My hope is with the youth. Many of them get it even if the adults don’t.
Now the edreform movement has a new friend in Edushtster, the accomplice to the recent prison escapees reminded me of her new work, “More details have emerged since, like law enforcement sources’ revelation Friday that Mitchell gave the inmates hacksaw blades, drill bits and two pairs of lighted eyeglasses. Authorities also have said Mitchell planned to pick up the escapees only to back out at the last minute. And a source with knowledge of the investigation noted her cell phone was used to call people connected to Matt, thought it’s not clear who made the calls, when they did, or if Mitchell knew.” It’s unfortunate Edushyster is allowing them a platform for more exposure.
Wha? Comparing Edushyster to an accomplice to a jail break? Give me a break. Reasonable people can have differing opinions about whether or not skewering the rephormsters actually just gives them another platform and whether or not it’s best to just ignore them, but Edushyster is very clearly not in league with them. Her recent interview of Andy Smarick was classic – she gave him ample rope and he obligingly tied it around his neck and hung himself with it. I suppose some people who might otherwise never have heard of Smarick might have been exposed to him, but I’ll eat my hat if that interview convinced anyone that he has anything to say worth listening to.
This is where the pro public school folks lose credibility- with good reason. We need to listen to both sides of the issue and engage. Every interview Edushyster does, we get a better understanding of where the pro reform movement is coming from. They often expose themselves in the process. Just closing our ears and eyes to the people in power is not effective, and maybe they have something to offer.
For example, as much as I am critical of TFA, they recruited their most diverse group of teachers yet this year. I work in a public district that really struggles to recruit minority teachers and administrators. What is TFA doing to get past this barrier?
This is not a war that will end with one side giving up and dying off- it is a major policy disagreement that will most likely end in compromise. The more level headed and responsive the pro public education side is, the better we will fare in that compromise. The more willing we are to engage and teach everyone, rather than isolate them, the more progress we will make.
Thank you edushyster- Keep it up!
Thanks, EduShyster, for going there. It’s important–I’m a believer in the adage, “keep your friend close, but your enemies closer.” To have any success is to understand what, how & why the other side thinks. One always mines valuable information…which can then be used to one’s advantage. And–there is that slight chance that, by talking, the other side may just see some light and may read, read some more, think more deeply & make a 180 degree turn, as Diane did.
Finally, these interviews help to expose any lies and distortions coming at us, which we can so easily dispute & then diligently work to turn it around for the good of our children.
By all means, Edushyster, get the leading figures of the self-styled “education reform” movement to open their mouths and go on the record concerning vital issues.
A classic case of people who will find their own words coming back to haunt them.
And one of the most hilarious aspects of all this? That the “thought leaders” of corporate education reform actually believe their own sales points, pr spin, and massaged and tortured numbers & stats.
Important? Unimportant? Does anybody still remember when Michelle Rhee, not so long ago a supernova of the rheephorm firmament, touted as one of her claims to national fame and unchallengeable expertise that she raised “her” [forget that pesky co-teacher!] students from the 13th to the 90th percentile? She combined that with a ferocious insistence on being a maven of “data driven decision making” aka 3DM. So when people began to insist that she prove the data closest to her oh-so-bad self, i.e., the 13th to the 90th percentile bit, she finally had to admit that she couldn’t come up with any verifiable proof—but that’s what her principal told her! And it gets better, or worse. No one at the school she worked at or the principal in question has ever—over the last twenty years, no less!—supported her claim of doing the educational equivalent of walking on water and turning water into wine.
As was and is the wont of so many rheephormistas when they are basking in the attention of MSM enablers and other attentive listeners, she opened her big mouth and felt entitled to give voice to whatever self-aggrandizing notion or claim had popped into her mind that she felt would (like a blowfish) make her look BIG and IMPORTANT and full of GRAVITAS.
Apparently she never read John Steinbeck:
“Man is the only kind of varmint sets his own trap, baits it, then steps in it.”
But then if she had read him, we wouldn’t have had the spectacle of her hoisting herself so spectacularly on her own rheetorical petard.
So go for it, Edushyster. Let them talk, freely. Let them speak their mind. Give them license to be… *I just remembered the ‘Rules of the Road’ for this blog.*
Or as that old saying, up-dated, goes:
Loose lips sink rheephorm ships.
😎
The whole reform movement seems shot through with charlatanism, from Rhee’s claims—she also put on her resume that GOOD MORNING, AMERICA and the HARTFORD COURANT did glowing profiles of her, which Guy Brandenburg discovered these were also total fabrications… to John Deasy’s PhD., where he took any courses, and never set foot on campus, and gave the university a huge contract to something for the district he was running… to the Paul Vallas a couple years ago, where he was required to complete courses to remain as a superintendent, then spoke on the phone to one professor a few times and claimed that satisfied the requirement… to “Dr.” Steve Perry’s thesis that looks like it was written by an eighth grader… to those Superintendent candidates in Connecticut …
Below is a long post of mine that starts with WAITING FOR SUPERMAN director Davis Guggenheim portraying Michelle Rhee as a self-less heroic figure unfairly persecuted her enemies merely because she put students first… but documents show otherwise…
—————————————-
Michelle Rhee makes more in an hour of bashing public school teachers & their unions than the average starting teacher makes in a year—while we have to read the outrageous stuff that her supporters claim about how self-less and noble she is..
Below, we can read as one of her backers blathers about how Rhee is now “shunning high salaries” to “improve the lot of our nation’s students,” and how she was targeted and victimized in D.C. because she “put students first.”
Check out what WAITING FOR SUPERMAN director Davis Guggenheim wrote in his blurb accompanying her page in TIME Magazine’s 100 Most Important People list:
(CAPS are mine… Jack… it’s in the last paragraph)
http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2066367_2066369_2066128,00.html
—————————————
DAVIS GUGGENHEIM:
“She (Michelle Rhee) SET A GOAL TO IMPROVE THE LOT OF THE NATION’S STUDENTS, and she has stuck to that. And she PAID DEARLY FOR IT, stepping down from her D.C. post in 2010 after Mayor Adrian Fenty lost his bid for re-election, a public rejection that some saw as A REPUDIATION OF THE TOUGH STEPS to raise the standards of the city’s public schools.
“Subsequently, SHE SHUNNED ANY HIGH-SALARY OFFERS that resulted from her high-profile tenure and INSTEAD FOUNDED HER OWN ORGANIZATION.
” ‘PUTTING KIDS FIRST’ could be a pithy slogan. For many it is.FOR RHEE, IT’S A LIFELONG COMMITMENT.”
—————————————
Hey Davis, you know who else has to “pay dearly”? The folks who have to pay to have this woman speak for an hour or two!
Ms. Rhee may have “shunned any high salary offers” after the voters of D.C. ran her out of town, but she sure isn’t shy about lapping up her $50K / hour speaking fees!
(NOTE: her 2013 STUDENTS FIRST tax forms indicate she currently makes $350,000 annually… isn’t that “a high salary?)
It’s nice that her “lifelong commitment” to “putting kids first” pays so well.
Here’s Hollywood agency CAA’s promo blurb for her:
http://caaspeakers.com/michelle-rhee/
——————————————————————-
“In the ever-evolving landscape of education in America, Michelle Rhee has been working tirelessly for the past two decades to give children the skills and knowledge they will need to compete in a changing world.
“From adding instructional time after school and visiting students’ homes as a third grade teacher in Baltimore, to hosting hundreds of community meetings and creating a Youth Cabinet to bring students’ voices into reforming the DC Public Schools, Michelle has always been guided by one core principle: put students first.”
——————————————————————
Wow, Rhee has “been guided by one core principle: put students first.”
How touching and noble of her? Given that moving statement, I’m sure that—like Dr. Ravitch—Ms. Rhee probably donates her time to give speeches and make appearances… at most only asking to have her expenses covered.
Wait a sec. I just found something on-line. It says that… Ms. Rhee… NO, I DON’T BELIEVE IT… SOMEBODY’S LYING OR MAKING THIS UP TO HARM HER REPUTATION…
No… it says that… she actually CHARGES MONEY (???!!!) for her speeches?
Say it ain’t so!
And that, when giving speeches, she is represented by the top Hollywood agency C.A.A., Creative Artists Agency?
Well, I’m sure her pay is just a small honorarium… as, like you, Dr. Ravitch, her true motives are to improve the educational lives of children, and to make sure every child has a great teacher at the front of his or her classroom, and, as Davis Guggenheim puts it, her mission to “put students first,” while “shunning high salaries.”
What’s that? It’s NOT just a token honorarium. Let me guess…
$1,000?
$2,000?
Higher? You gotta be kidding!
$5,000?
$10,000?
Get outta town!
$15,000?
$20,000?
What? She gets more than that just for an hour or two of speaking and answering questions?
Really? It’s actually higher?
$25,000?
$30,000?
Okay, someone’s just winding me up here. There’s NO WAY she charges more than THAT!!!
$50,000!
BINGO!!!!!
$50,000???!!! I don’t believe it.
Somebody’s gotta be making that up to discredit Ms. Rhee. It’s probably some evil, corrupt defenders-of-a-failed-status-quo teachers union thugs who put adult teachers’ interests ahead of children/students’ interest that hacked into C.A.A.’s website and created… yeah, it’s probably them who are making up and spreading these lies in an effort to harm Ms. Rhee’s reputation, and protect those teachers’ own selfish interest and cushy jobs-for-life.
Apparently not.
Some enterprising writer named Molly Bloom at the on-line publication STATE IMPACT actually got a copy of the contract that Rhee uses for her personal appearances and posted it on-line.
Oh, will you just shut up and gimme that link!
http://stateimpact.npr.org/ohio/2011/10/10/michelle-rhee-to-speak-at-kent-statestark-prompts-faculty-to-organize-counter-event/
What’s that? Just scroll down and you can see
a scanned copy of Rhee’s boilerplate contract? Hmmm….
Yep! There it is… In the contract posted, $35,000 is indeed what she’s getting paid to speak at Kent State, plus a bunch o’ FIRST CLASS expenses. .. (She claims here that she was discounting her usual $50,000 / hour fee because the venue, Kent State, was “a school.”)
The contract posted is the actual one used for Ms. Rhee’s appearance at at Kent State University,
Why, that’s SECOND worst atrocity ever associated with that school’s history. (“Tin soldiers and Nixon’s coming… Four dead in O – hi – o… “)
(Watch this whole video… it’s pretty well done!)
I like how the “Purchaser”—the entity or person who hires her— sends the payment to:
“Rhee Enterprises, LLC” (PAGE 2)
Helping improve the education of children and “putting students first” is a lucrative Big Business, apparently.
There’s more on PAGE 3:
——————————————————————
“a. Purchaser shall provide the Artist with one (1) First Class round-trip, unrestricted, fully-refundable airplane tickets, or cash equivalent, at Artist’s election;
“b. Purchaser shall one (1) VIP hotel suite; Purchaser to make and confirm reservations in consultation with the Artist; Artist reserves the right to choose hotel;
“c. Purchaser to provide the Artist with meals and all reasonable incidentals;
“d. Purchase shall provide Artist with a towncar and Professional Driver for round-trip transportation from the Artist’s home to the airport, airport to hotel, hotel to engagement, or any combination thereof;”
——————————————————————
Yes, that’s right… Rhee demands not just a hotel room, but a “VIP hotel suite” at a hotel approved by her, as well as a towncar with a chauffer to drive her around???!!!
Come one. Be fair. Don’t beat up on Rhee because of this. You need all that if you’re going to be “putting students first.”
Item 6 is telling. Michelle or her agent crosses out the following:
——————————————————————
(CROSSED OUT WITH A PEN)
“6. RESPONSIBILITY for EVENT-RELATED TAXES. Purchase agrees to pay any and all local, State, and/or Federal rental, amusement, sales or other taxes as required by law.”
——————————————————————
Next to the crossing out, Michelle or her agent scrawls,
“TAX EXEMPT”…
… as Students First is a non-profit organization.
Awww, that’s too bad. That money would have gone to the state’s general fund for education, as Ohio schools are hurting for cash right now.
Item 9 is interesting:
——————————————————————
“9. ARTIST’S MERCHANDISING RIGHTS. Artist shall have the right, but not the obligation, to sell souvenir programs and other merchandising items on the premises on the place of the presentation without participation by the Purchaser, subject to local venue’s contract requirements, if any, of which the Artist is notified in writing.”
——————————————————————
(INSERT JOKE HERE… it’s too easy… i.e. Michelle Rhee T-shirts, action figures, etc.)
There’s also a pay-or-play clause, which means that if the event is cancelled for any reason, you have to pay Michelle her $35K anyway.
Reading this I feel like I’m watching a final scene of “THE WOLF OF WALL STREET”, where the slimebucket and convicted Wall Street felon Jordan Belfort now makes a cushy living as a “motivational speaker.”
God save us all!
Please write more about Lawrence, MA Edushyster!!!
Give them every opportunity to speak.
These people are so enamored with their own voice that they ignore the obvious:
“It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.” (Mark Twain)