People often wonder why hedge fund managers and entrepreneurs are so devoted to the proliferation of charter schools and so hostile to public schools. If you survey the research, it is clear that they get about the same results overall as public schools. There are some that get high scores, but they usually get them by cherry picking the most motivated and able students. Some are fly-by-night operations.
What’s the lure? I believe that some number of the 1% who love charters are motivated by a desire to do good. Others think the free-market of choice and competition will work wonders. Still others are motivated by profit. None are at all concerned that they are inflicting grievous harm on a basic public institution that is central to our democracy. Or they they are experimenting on other people’s children.
Laura H. Chapman reminds us of the power and allure of profits.
She writes:
In Forbes magazine, 2013, by Allison Wiggin.
“About the only thing charters do well is limit the influence of teachers’ unions. And fatten their investors’ portfolios.
In part, it’s the tax code that makes charter schools so lucrative: Under the federal “New Markets Tax Credit” program that became law toward the end of the Clinton presidency, firms that invest in charters and other projects located in “underserved” areas can collect a generous tax credit — up to 39% — to offset their costs.
So attractive is the math, according to a 2010 article by Juan Gonzalez in the New York Daily News, “that a lender who uses it can almost double his money in seven years.”
It’s not only wealthy Americans making a killing on charter schools. So are foreigners, under a program critics call “green card via red carpet.”
“Wealthy individuals from as far away as China, Nigeria, Russia and Australia are spending tens of millions of dollars to build classrooms, libraries, basketball courts and science labs for American charter schools,” says a 2012 Reuters report.
The formal name of the program is EB-5, and it’s not only for charter schools. Foreigners who pony up $1 million in a wide variety of development projects — or as little as $500,000 in “targeted employment areas” — are entitled to buy immigration visas for themselves and family members.
“In the past two decades,” Reuters reports, “much of the investment has gone into commercial real estate projects, like luxury hotels, ski resorts and even gas stations. Lately, however, enterprising brokers have seen a golden opportunity to match cash-starved charter schools with cash-flush foreigners in investment deals that benefit both.”
More at.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
That tax credit for corporate charters is another reason why the country does not need another Clinton, who is buddies with Eli Broad, in the White House.
This tax write off situation also applies to the Turkish Imam, Fetullah Gulen, and his over 147 American charter schools supporting his worldwide Gulen Movement to re-establish another ‘Ottoman Empire’ and Sharia law starting with Turkey…and his importing Middle Eastern men on Green Cards to run these charter schools…and all paid for by the American taxpayer. He takes in over $500,000, 000 a year. Read Sharon Higgins and Susan Ohanian blog sites for details.
To be clear, both of these funding mechanisms apply to almost any construction in low income areas. They are not unique to charter schools. The investors in NMTC (typically banks; no hedge funds that I know of) make the same return on buildings for hospitals, low income housing, etc.
Charters (with the notable exception of a few unscrupulous ones where the real estate is somehow used to enrich founders) would love to have access to cheaper capital with which to build buildings. Typically, we pay for buildings out of operating expenses. Our loans are high risk because we have to get charters renewed, typically every 5 years. As has been noted here before, plenty of charters close, and lenders end up on the short end of the stick in those situations. Lenders make up for this by charging higher interest to charters, which unfortunately takes away from money that could be spent on teachers.
Also, attempts to conflate the philanthropy of some specific hedge fund managers and the investment by others in charter buildings are really quite dishonest. They are the same only in that both deal with money.
I’m not aware of any hedge fund that makes money from any charter school except for Whitney Tilson’s firm, which made money betting that the price of K12 (operator of online charters) would go down (they shorted the stock and have been quite vocal negatively regarding K12’s concept as well as execution).
Anyone who suggests that philanthropists donating to charters are “investing” or getting a return is misinformed or deliberately trying to misinform others. I guess this allows them rationalize away the reason that those philanthropic dollars are going to charters instead of neighborhood schools.
If anyone has any actual data to the contrary, please post. Please don’t bother with fact-less claims or quotes of others (like Juan Gonzales) who write equally fact-free articles.
That wasn’t the point of the tax credit though. It was supposed to spur private sector job creation and create (individual) wealth in under-served communities. The idea was they would have a broader tax base from commercial entities so they could use that to improve public sector services and benefit (individually and as a community) from higher-quality jobs in their own communities, or, ideally, business ownership.
Instead, this happened:
“In the past two decades,” Reuters reports, “much of the investment has gone into commercial real estate projects, like luxury hotels, ski resorts and even gas stations. Lately, however, enterprising brokers have seen a golden opportunity to match cash-starved charter schools with cash-flush foreigners in investment deals that benefit both.”
The first three create low wage jobs, and the other (charter schools) don’t create any jobs at all, because you’re simply pulling students from existing public schools- replacing teachers or other employees 1:1. Charter schools don’t create any tax revenue either, so the “gas station” investment is actually closer to the original aim of the program.
Chiara,
I agree 100%.
There is seemingly an inverse relationship between the number of times a person refers to the New Market credit and his ability to accurately explain what it is.
https://dianeravitch.net/2015/03/12/transcript-juan-gonzalez-on-hedge-funds-and-charters/
For anyone in New York City or state who is concerned about how standalone charter school facilities are financed, the solution is simple: co-location in district schools.
Exactly: where real estate is cheap, the NMTC helps developers (often with close ties to charter operators) obtain super profits, while in urban areas, the plan, a la Eva Moskowitz, et.al. , is to take over public school buildings, push out public schools students, and look forward to the day when a friendly, Bloomberg/Emanuel-type administration sells the building to them for a dollar.
Fortunately, a long time ago someone had the foresight to make all school facilities the property of the City of New York, not the New York City Department of Education. It is a distinction that would prevent any mayor from giving away city assets in the manner you propose in your hypothetical (which has several other holes in it).
Public schools were paid for from taxpayer dollars to educate the children in public schools, not the children in privately managed schools supported by billionaires. When the pendulum swings, and there is a public-spirited governor who is not in the debt of hedge fund managers, your charters will have to pay their own way.
Look up the sale of NYPL libraries to developers for cheap – the Donnell and the Bryant park deal.
The city of New York loves to sell property cheap Tim.
The city made $59 million in the Donnell deal, which is just a little bit more than a dollar. Bryant Park was never sold; it is managed (quite well) by a nonprofit. Any other examples?
In Chicago, Rahm sold off some of the 50 public school sites he shut down to developers for urban renewal and shopping centers.
That the city owns the property, rather than the DOE, is a distinction without a difference.
Michael, you’re wrong. Familiarize yourself with Title 4 of the New York City Administrative Code so we can bury this particular falsehood once and for all.
Dear John, I just typed “hedge funds make money off of charter schools” and got 359,000 hits.
I don’t have time to read all of them and provide you with “any actual data,” though.
I’ve read a lot on the topic and have seriously found nothing except a lot of noise. It’s a good talking point and often repeated; it’s just not accurate.
John, you seem to be unaware, or are willfully ignoring, the tax and publicity benefits – they get to use Black children as props in their foundation photo shoots, while claiming that they don’t really have cash registers for brains – financial types get from their association with charters, the fees they get from underwriting bonds to pay for their expansion, and most importantly, the class interests that are served by neutralizing and eventually busting the teachers’ unions and taking over public resources.
While deceptive – often lying to themselves as well as us – and amoral, the elite among so-called reformers are playing the Long Con here and, with the exception of the many looters who simply can’t restrain themselves, are willing to defer their profits power until the political and institutional infrastructure is fully in place.
Michael,
Bond underwriting is not done by hedge funds, nor by any of the philanthropists supporting charters. Also, at least 10 times as much money is made by bond underwriters on district school debt than on charters.
As for tax benefits, most of these people are over the threshold for itemized deduction limitations on gifts, so they get less tax benefit on a donation to a charter or any other not-for-profit than your or I do.
And, if they’re buying PR, I would say it’s not working out too well since most of the publicity is negative. If that were what they were doing, there would be many smarter ways to spend their money.
You make no case here.
John,
Nothing done by the billionaires who promote privatization ever stirs your indignation.
Why don’t they open private schools for the poor instead of stealing tax dollars from public schools?
Diane,
“Why don’t they open private schools for the poor instead of stealing tax dollars from public schools?”
Explain to me how philanthropists are stealing tax dollars from public schools.
As for why they don’t just fund private schools, it would cost 20x as much to affect the same amount of kids.
John,
They are privatizing public schools. That is not charitable. They are stealing public dollars from public schools, driving some into bankruptcy. Is that what you call charity? And yes, there are entrepreneurs getting very rich by starting charters. Have you not been reading this blog? Did you not read about the Academic charter chain in Florida? Have you not read about the campaign contributions of charter owners in Ohio that protect them from accountability? I don’t have the time to recite the hundreds of examples of charter theft from across the country. You have read them here.
Diane,
Yes I have read and am equally disgusted by anyone making money this way. That includes anyone taking more money than the value they are providing in both charter and district schools.
I don’t see any of the hedge fund managers supporting for-profit charters, do you?
As we’ve discussed before, your view of this as being privatizing is based on the view for adults, not students. These philanthropists are giving money to improve public education and help kids from low-SES families. I understand that you disagree with the methods they support, but I see no evidence that they are doing it for personal gain or nefarious reasons. Do you?
I should qualify that there *are* some people who are just looking to cut public school spending or disempower unions and that some of them support charters as part of that agenda. Clearly, they are not acting in the best interests of children. However, I don’t think most of these philanthropists, who give a lot of money to progressive social causes too, are among them. Also, I might add that there are plenty of anti-charter folks who are also not acting in the best interests of children.
Meanwhile, the money fights happen in NYC and we made more money on bake sales last year than philanthropy.
They are stealing the dollars from public schools by promoting charter schools that end up concentrating higher percentages of disadvantaged children in their district schools while siphoning off finite resources:
https://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2013/02/16/from-portfolios-to-parasites-the-unfortunate-path-of-u-s-charter-school-policy/
It doesn’t have to be like that but until their advocacy for charters comes stapled to advocacy for appropriately funding the district schools those charters depend upon, there it is.
Thank you, Daniel. Every child enrolled in a charter school in my neighborhood is a fixed amount of per pupil spending that does not reach my public school. Enrollment drops; layoffs take place; the union is weakened; less pressure is placed on governments to tax the wealthy. Walmart wins.
If you read the post, you will see that my contribution is nothing more than recycling news from Forbes in which the author also quotes Reuters, and one snippet from the New York Daily News.
I thought that this report was worth recycling because it appeared in Forbes and perhaps serves as a pitch for more investments as touted here edufundamerica.com/tag/eb-5-investment-with-charter-schools/ and
http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-is-helping-hedge-funds-make-money-off-of-charter-schools-2015-3
I live in a state that has 80% of its charters as for-profit. There’s no way investors get on board if there isn’t profit (or at least a solid possibility of profit). I’m not pinning anything on the New Market Tax Credit (and yes I’m aware that it extends beyond charter school construction projects).
But this line in your post is ridiculously disingenuous: “which unfortunately takes away from money that could be spent on teachers.” Disingenuous because charters still turn a profit and often pay their CEOs quite handsomely while paying their teachers very little. I mean if it’s all about the kids, then the CEOs can lower their compensation. Charter teachers can’t apply for non-charter positions fast enough around here.
And I don’t want to hear real estate costs sob stories. The Detroit Free Press series on charters highlighted how the management companies of charter chains routinely lease land back to themselves at the market value of the property. In essence, they get the value of the property as if it were sold each year.
If these problems were so insurmountable, charters wouldn’t exist. But they do and they are geared to profit.
Steve K,
Yes, you are absolutely right regarding for-profit charters. I’m sometimes forget, living in NY, that such a thing exists. For them, money saved on buildings can go to shareholders. I don’t think for-profit charters should exist.
I also think self-dealing like the leaseback scheme you mention should be illegal everywhere as it is here.
Are you in Michigan?
One of the most damning facts about Ohio charters is they pay teachers 40% less than public schools do.
It is difficult for me to believe the goal is to create great schools or attract great teachers when they are paying that much less. Where is the money going if it isn’t going to teachers? I didn’t sign up to pay public dollars toward employing a new group of of managers or executives where they underpay the people who are doing the work. . That wasn’t the deal .
Ohio, Arizona, Florida, Michigan, and Pennsylvania lead the nation in charter corruption
John – what are your thoughts about CEO (and other high-level admin) compensation? What do you think about, for instance, the fact that Eva Moskowitz makes about double what the chancellor of New York makes, even though she has a few thousand students while Farina has a few million?
There are plenty of ways to profit off of “non-profits”.
Dienne,
I think CEO compensation in this country is way out of hand on all fronts. As for CEO compensation for charter networks, my understanding is that they are limited to getting $180k from their not-for-profit (is that the right number, Tim?)
Additional salary is paid by other entities, and I would say that they are getting compensated based mostly on their ability to raise money, which is substantial. I’m sure the net affect on their organization is that they bring in way more money than they cost.
Chiara, yes, I teach in an inner ring suburban school. And, yes, I know how little charter teachers get paid around here. We have hired three teachers in the last few years who came from charters. They gushed about their first year teacher checks and working conditions. Gushed.
I have three friends that are in charter schools. Every month, they ask if I’m hearing anything about openings or retirements.
My neighbors got angry at their local public school and sent their kids to a local charter out of spite, really. They returned to their local public after two years at the charter. When I asked why, they said that the entire K-8 charter teaching staff had turned over in two years.
I stopped to pick up a pizza this summer at a local joint. I had to wait and the guy at the counter struck up a conversation. He asked what I did. He then said his wife was also a teacher at a Detroit charter for the last three years. Then he said he still made more money than her. (He made deliveries and wasn’t the store manager.)
Yeah, I’ve heard plenty around here.
I appreciate the sentiment especially on leasebacks and non-profit charters. But is it really non-profit if the CEO makes 20-30 times what the teachers make? I guess it isn’t technically profit but it kind of is. (In my district, the superintendent makes t.5 times what a top end teacher makes.)
The cap on the portion of New York nonprofit employee compensation that is drawn from state funding is the governor’s salary, $199,000. Anything above that must come from private sources.
If it makes anyone feel better, the vast majority of public school superintendents in New York are paid far more per student than Eva Moskowitz (even with private money included). And while $215,000 isn’t a lot of money to run the NYC DOE, Chancellor Fariña simultaneously collects a $200,000 annual pension (not a typo). Furthermore, the entirety of that pension is exempt from NYC and NYS income taxes. Sweet!
Here’s a story about retired tennis player Andre Agassi and some investment fund that intends to build charter schools. In the story, another fund is mentioned that already owns charter schools. I don’t know what constitutes a hedge fund, but it seems that there are some investment funds profiting from charter schools.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/agassi-serves-merrill-clients-a-charter-school-investment-1441813748
CCProf: the CantonAgassi charter fund is for profit. It is not philanthropy
CCProf,
Yes there are some for-profit funds that make money on charter facilities. There are also bond funds that hold charter bonds, in the same manner that they hold school or municipal bonds. These firms definitely make money on funding schools, as do their investors.
These aren’t hedge funds, and the philanthropists that support NYC charters are not them. My point wasn’t that nobody makes money on charter school buildings (or other school buildings), it was that this hedge fund owner philanthropists are donating money, not “investing” or getting anything in return.
CCProf,
Sorry, should add that these funds, although they are for-profit, are considered a benefit to charters, who often have trouble getting financing or assistance with construction elsewhere.
District schools issue bonds and plenty of people make money off of those.
I know that these funds are for profit. That is why I pointed it out. One of the funds requires $5 million to get into the fund. That sounds like a hedge fund to me.
CCProf….Same goes for Pitbull’s hip hop charters. He brags how much money they bring in.
John,
What is NMTC? TIA!
Duane,
New Market Tax Credit
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Markets_Tax_Credit_Program.
Thanks, I did eventually figure it out by reading the rest of the comments. It’s tough being AI!
John…these appended sites for reading about hedge funds that are teaching investors how to profit from public education should broaden your perspective.
————————————————————————–
Why hedge funds love charter schools – The Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/…/why-hedge-funds…
The Washington Post
Jun 4, 2014 – No doubt hedge fund managers would say they want to support … banks and equity funds that invest in charter schools in underserved areas can … megaplex movie theatres and adjacent retail, public charter schools, and …
Walmart is helping hedge funds make money off of charter …
http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-is-helping-hedge-fun...
Business Insider
Mar 17, 2015 – “Learn and understand the value of investing in charter schools” … The Walmart family is teaching hedge funds how to profit from publicly funded schools … alternatives to traditional public schools and receive both public and …
Hedge Fund Titans Hum a Happy Tune as They Target …
billmoyers.com/…/hedge-fund-titans-hum-a-happy-tune-a…
Bill D. Moyers
May 15, 2014 – Blanton Elementary School kindergarten teacher Amy Collins, left with her … Hedge fund billionaires are indeed investing colossal millions in …
So why do hedge funds so favor charter schools? – Daily Kos
http://www.dailykos.com/…/-So-why-do-hedge-funds-so-favor-chart...
Daily Kos
Feb 15, 2013 – And it’s not just U.S. investors who see the upside of investing in charters. … of billions in tax revenue intended to fund PUBLIC education.
Hedge Fund Managers Tackle Unions over Charter Schools …
http://www.institutionalinvestor.com/…hedge-funds…/hedge-...
Institutional Investor
Apr 27, 2015 – Pro–charter school groups, backed by hedge fund managers, have become a … charter schools — privately run school systems receiving public funding …. When hedge funds begin investing in charter schools to educate ELL …
Wall Street’s Investment in School Reform – Bridging … – Blogs
blogs.edweek.org/…/how_wall_street_invested_in_sc.ht…
Education Week
May 22, 2012 – The hedge-fund managers love to get public funding to manage ….. it seems unlikely that investing in non-profit charters is a significant part of …
Bill Moyers Explains Why Hedge Fund Managers Love …
dianeravitch.net/…/bill-moyers-explains-why-hedge-fund-managers-love…
May 21, 2014 – Not to worry: the hedge funders love education. They love it so much that they are investing in charter schools to compete with public schools
Ellen,
These look the recycling of a single article that doesn’t have any information in it regarding the NYC hedge fund managers that contribute to charters there.
Once again, my point isn’t that nobody makes money on financing buildings. Lots of people do, whether they are charter or district. More money is made on charters because they are riskier, but charter supporters would love to see that problem go away because it’s more expensive for the schools.
I’ll read through the few that you posted that I haven’t already read and will comment again.
Laura made a great analysis of the backers of charter schools. We should respond by amending the “New Market Tax Credits” to exclude education. This would offer students relief from the endless speculators trying to gain a ROI. Students should be sheltered from the ruthless drive of the marketplace, especially since so many poor students already live chaotic lives. As I have said before, students should be entitled to some level of stability. We owe them that as responsible adults. They may be a line item in a portfolio to some millionaire, but we have an obligation to protect and allow them to develop and grow without being subject to the ups and downs of investments. If we change this exploitative law, only the true believers will remain. This will take some of the destructive drain off public education as governors will be less likely to be bought by investors in search of ROI.
Trump made a big splash in the news with his “anchor” baby remark. Money is the anchor baby of wealthy foreigners who acquire permanent resident status under EB-5 visas. Often foreign countries have protectionist policies on their real estate that prohibit foreigners from buying in certain areas. America has none. Many wealthy foreigners are buying large amounts of properties in many American cities, driving up prices and pushing citizens out of the market. Personally, I feel we have less to worry about Mexican and central Americans that we know provide a a net plus for our economy and that just want to support their families than some potential permanent residents from Asia, Russia and the Middle East.
I don’t know, though. The two best places for middle class people to work where I live are not US owned- a Japanese company and a German company. Maybe our problem is not “foreign investors” but US business priorities, which seem to be make a quick buck and everyone at the executive level gets a big payday when it collapses.
That’s what you get with the free market, a short rather than a long game.
Exactly…American free market businesses are based on the Quarterly Reports to investors which strive to show only short term gains, beating the last quarter. It has decimated old line businesses, and this thought process has now permeated even public education.
To clarify, none of this is an investment in charter schools themselves, or students. NMTC is a one-time 7 year loan on a building.
Not sure why you refer to it as an exploitative law. NMTC doesn’t create charter schools, and almost all using it to get started would rent or find some other way to finance their buildings.
In no way does NMTC make students “subject to the ups and downs of investments”.
I refer to it as exploitative because along with true believers it attracts the vulture capitalists that will do and say almost anything to make a dollar. It promotes so much speculation that many clueless opportunists are in the market. Some of these schools don’t even open or barely open. The schools fold, and the students return to home schools minus their funding. The states do little or nothing to recover the money. That’s why this law encourages the proliferation of schools designed to fail. Students deserve better than this. http://populardemocracy.org/news/report-millions-dollars-fraud-waste-found-charter-school-sector
retired teacher,
I agree re for-profit charters. I don’t think they should exist.
But, the hedge fund managers who are noted philanthropists to charters are in NYC and there are no for-profit charters in NY.
“NMTC is a one-time 7 year loan on a building.”
Exactly, a building that is then rented at exorbitant prices (paid with tax dollars) to someone close to management of the charter school. In other words, it’s intended to function as a perpetual motion machine, or self-licking ice cream cone.
Michael,
Most states have laws against that kind of self-dealing. Those that don’t should.
Many states overlook charter self-dealing because of campaign cash to politicians
John: While there are no presumed for profits in NYC, with financial structures that are private, charters can manipulate money behind the curtain. The generous hedge fund managers have allowed the “yuppie” charters in NY and NJ to sit on oodles of cash while they still drain funds from cash starved public schools. The law was not intended to create segregated quasi-private schools at public expense.
retired teacher,
All charters in NY fill out 990s on file with NYS charities bureau and also have to submit audited financials to their authorizers each year. All charter board meetings are open to the public. Charters are subject to FOIL just like district schools.
Some charters accumulate cash because they have to pay for their buildings out of their operating budgets, unlike district schools.
Charters get paid less per student than district schools, some by very large amounts.
John,
Charters in NY get free public space, and nyc has to pay their rent in private space, thanks to your billionaire buddies. Others as in Florida, take money away from public schools for capital plans. Last year, Florida charters got all the capital funding, public schools got none.
No, Diane, only *some* charters in NY get free public space or rent in private space. No upstate NY charters do and only NYC charters that are expanding do. Hopefully the legislature will fix that inequity this year.
I know you disagree that charter school students are public school students, but they are by law. Public school space being used for public school students is appropriate, whether district or charter. To require their schools to pay for their buildings out of their (already smaller) operating budgets is to take funds away from their education inappropriately.
My school has to spend more than $2000 per student for our building. If that were reimbursed in the same way that it is for district schools, we would be able to (and would) spend that on additional teachers.
Of course, we know that corporations never lie on forms, although I seem to remember the meltdown of the housing market in 2008 due to falsifying documents.
John, what it is your position at “your” school, what is your public education experience (do not include charter school experience) and how much do you make/year?
For example: I was a HS Spanish teacher for 21 yrs and the last year I made right at $56,000 gross plus insurance. Out of that gross came my share of insurance and also 14.5% for retirement.
Duane,
I am a volunteer board member and founder. I don’t get paid.
Thanks, John.
I appreciate your service in attempting to better education for all! Do you mind stating which school?
Yes, Duane. I’ve decided not to name my school in this generally unfriendly crowd. I can’t see how it would be any benefit to my students, and I see how it could be a detriment.
To a certain degree I understand your concerns. But at the same time wouldn’t you want to “toot your own horn”, in other words, put your school’s accomplishments out for all to see? I’m not sure that this crowd is really that “unfriendly”, especially if shown the facts of the success of what you are doing. Is there anything that you all do in the teaching and learning procesthat would stick out over and above what is being done in the “average” public school?
Duane,
Please point me to the positive comments on this blog about *any* charter school, regardless of what they’re doing for kids. We could be the best school on earth and still get 99% negative responses here simply because we are a charter.
My school doesn’t engage in pro-charter cheerleading because, as I said, it’s not in my students’ best interests and because I’d like to see district schools succeeding here as well. In my opinion, we all (charter and district) could do with more humility when it comes to what we’re getting done vs. what we could be doing.
So, I’m engaging to hear opinions that frequently differ from my own and to learn some things.
Yes, John, no matter how good a private sector (profit or non-profit) charter is, it is BAD and should lose all public funds—unless it is actually part of a community based, democratic public school district working within the public school system, and there is a long history of charters or alternative schools in the non-profit, community based democratic public schools.
I repeat, no matter how good or great your little private-sector, teacher-run charter school is, I want all public funds pulled and that school either survives on its own or goes out of business.
And if you had real teacher training instead of the 5 weeks from TFA, then you can apply for a job in the public schools and teach there.
Lloyd,
Your opinion is clear. Luckily for the kids in my school, there are many people who feel differently.
We’ll take care of these kids while you…
Defend the democratically elected school board that systematically takes resources away from the poorest schools and gives them the least desirable teachers. You will do this simply based on the fact that they are democratically elected without any regard for what they are actually doing.
Defend this nation’s indefensible teacher preparation programs, which produce graduates that are no better than very bright people who are trained for 5 weeks.
Defend a high school with a 46% graduation rate because it has union teachers, without regard to how they are doing and the cataclysmic affect that has on the community that I live in.
I don’t care for idealogues on these topics on either side. To me, a great school is a great school and a lousy school is a lousy one, regardless of the structure. Students and parents simply care more about their child’s education than whether a school is a charter or private, or whether it is run by a district, a mayor, or a charter.
It sounds like you don’t approve of democracy and transparency. Are you one of those fools who thinks the un-elected oligarchs can do a better job at running the country than those elected to public office. If so, I suggest you watch “The Insider”, a film that’s available on DVD.
This is what I think. Without the billions being spent by the frauds behind the for profit corporate war being waged on community based, democratic public education, your little private sector charter school that you claim is run by teachers wouldn’t exist.
Your little school is a by product of this war and when the big corporations are done with the public schools they will mop up the few indie charter schools like yours—that’s business as usual in the private sector.
Did you answer my question about where you went for your teacher training? I think I’ve asked this a few times. You did answer my
Lloyd,
Thank you for your concern about my “little school”. How thoroughly condescending you are.
I’m not a teacher. I’ve been clear about that here.
My city is very racially segregated. The school board is almost exclusively white. They represent the interests of thei kids, but not the interests of the black and Hispanic families. They make decisions about what schools get what resources, and that includes poorer schools not getting books while more affluent schools get perks. It also includes seniority-based staffing assignments, so that the weakest teachers go to the poorest schools. In short, low SES families get the shaft here from this particular publicly elected school board. I have zero respect for them because I care about their actions, not how they got there.
Theory is wonderful, but we live in the real world, where the things that are better in theory aren’t always in practice.
Also, we live in a democratic republic because our founding fathers recognized that the tyranny of the majority could be an issue in a strict democracy. Charter schools are a way for parents to opt out of a system that isn’t working for them. I simply care more about these kids and their education than I do about propping up institutions that wrap themselves in the flag based on their noble founding principles and then screw the people they exist to serve.
You are not a teacher. Wow, now I know where your ignorance comes from and the fact that it appears you are judging an entire nation, with more than 15,000 public school districts, almost 4 million teachers and more than 50 million school age children, based on your own local public school district and that is wrong on so many counts.
Democracy doesn’t always work fast to make a course correction when things go wrong but at least the opportunity exists for voters, once the majority wakes up and refuses to be fooled any longer as it appears you have been fooled, to make course corrections. When you abandon democracy, that option is deleted. Once parents move their children to undemocratic, for profit, opaque, authority corporate charters, those parents have surrendered their rights to be parents who are in charge of raising their own children.
In reality, those parents are saying, “Here take my kids and raise them the way you think they should be raised. We don’t trust anyone else to do it inculcating us, and if we eventually can’t stand what you are doing and protest, then slap us down and throw our child out of your autocratic, opaque, greed based school that cherry picks numbers and lies to look better than the competition.”
You see, if your city is racially segregated but the democratically (correct me if I’m wrong and they were appointed by the mayor or governor) is all almost exclusivity white, then where were all those minority voters when they were elected and how many minorities ran for the school board?
The voters who voted decided on who makes up that democratically elected school board. Those who didn’t vote got what they deserved.
It’s sad that you think I’m condescending. I was trying to be insulting. We still live in a country that is supposed to be a democracy and the 1st Amendment allows you the right to think whatever you want to think, but I also have the freedom to think what I want and I think you are a one of the fools Abraham Lincoln talks about. You see, no matter what you think about me, I’m exercising my 1st Amendment rights just like you are and I won’t stop because you called me condescending.
“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”
Abraham Lincoln
I’m pretty sure that the fools Lincoln talks about think that everyone else are the fools but the way to separate the two is to figure out who doesn’t know what they are talking about.
Have you read, for instance, “The Teacher Wars”, “Reign of Error”, “Common Core Dilemma” or “The Educator And The Oligarch”? This is just a sample. There are a lot more out there loaded with facts and backed up with citations.
How can any fool who isn’t a teacher think they know more than someone who taught for thirty years and read all those previous books in addition to others and even wrote one of his own on the subject?
Lloyd,
The systems that you support provide the worst schools to the neediest kids and then blame them and their families for the outcomes. Your comment about low income families getting what they deserve because they didn’t vote is particularly despicable. You ignore the fact that incumbents and the unions that almost always support them do everything they can to make it hard for “outsiders” to vote.
Have your read The Prize yet? It’s a pretty balanced book with plenty of lessons for anyone involved in the politics of education. I don’t know how anyone could read that and remain smug about elected school boards. At one point, Newark was spending more than $2,000 per student on janitorial services. Less than half of the money spent actually went to schools.
FYI, I read every one of the books that you mentioned except Common Core Dilemma. Have you read books that you disagree with as well? Whatever It Takes, How Children Succeed, Ain’t Nobody Learning Nothing, Class Warfare, Special Interest, Uncivil Rights, So Much Reform, So Little Change, The Achievable Dream, No Struggle No Progress?
Gone through the slides at http://www.scribd.com/doc/246930164/A-Right-Denied-The-Critical-Need-for-Genuine-School-Reform ?
As for me being a fool regarding teaching because I’m not a teacher, how many schools have you started Lloyd? How much of your free time is spent volunteering with kids from low SES families? How many charter schools have you visited? How many school leaders have you had long talks with? Have you been a school board member?
And yes, you were in fact both condescending and insulting, so you achieved your goal. If you need to beat up on a school filled with dedicated educators and very hard working students trying to overcome their economic circumstances, that you know nothing about, to feel better about yourself, I guess you’ve picked the right place to do it.
John said, “You ignore the fact that incumbents and the unions that almost always support them do everything they can to make it hard for ‘outsiders’ to vote.”
Voting restrictions in the US since the 2010 election: state by state (you will discover that the most restrictive laws are in states mostly controlled by the glorious GOP in states where labor unions have the least power.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/13/voting-restrictions-2010-election
Republicans Are Trying to Make Sure Minorities and Young People Don’t Vote This November
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/10/voting-rights-november-voter-suppression-states
Who fooled you into thinking that unions were making it hard for ‘outsiders’ to vote, and what do you mean by ‘outsiders’?
For more than a century, oligarchs like the Waltons and the Koch brothers have spend money on propaganda to demonize labor unions and story them—to blame them for everything. It seems you have foolishly fallen for these lies.
In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent, and there were 17.7 million union workers.
In 2014, 7.2 million employees in the public sector belonged to a union (35.7% of the total number of public sector employees), compared with 7.4 million workers in the private sector (6.6% of the total), and you are naively saying that unions are responsible for making it hard for ‘outsiders’ to vote.
In August 2015, there were 123.42 million full time private sector workers in the U.S., and you foolishly think the unions have the power and money and clout to restrict voting rights. I think you have really swallowed the neo-liberal and neo-conservative Kool-Aid designed to fool as many Americans as possible.
As for those who vote, yes, if they do not vote when they can, then they have not earned the right to complain when an idiot is elected to public office. How many people fit that category?
Too many and it doesn’t matter if they are poor, middle class or wealthy. By not taking the time to educate themselves and vote, they deserve what they get.
Voter Registration Statistics for the last presidential election:
Total number of Americans eligible to vote 218,959,000
Total number of Americans registered to vote 146,311,000
Total number of Americans who voted in the 2012 Presidential election 126,144,000
Percent of Americans who voted in the 2012 Presidential election 57.5 %
State with the highest voter turnout rate (Minnesota) 75 %
State with the lowest voter turnout rate (Utah) 53.1 %
Top Reasons Cited for Not Voting
Too busy conflicting schedule 17.5%
Illness or disability 14.9%
Not interested 13.4%
Did not like candidates or campaign issues 12.9%
Other 11.3%
Out of town 8.8%
Don’t know 7%
Registration problems 6%
Inconvenient polling place 2.7%
Transportation problems 2.6%
Forgot 2.6%
Bad weather 0.2%
Voter turnout always drops off for midterm elections, but why?
Voter turnout regularly drops in midterm elections, and has done so since the 1840s. In 2008, for instance, 57.1% of the voting-age population cast ballots — the highest level in four decades — as Barack Obama became the first African American elected president. But two years later only 36.9% voted in the midterm election that put the House back in Republican hands. For Obama’s re-election in 2012, turnout rebounded to 53.7%.
Who turns out to vote and why is of much more than academic interest. In an era of increasingly polarized politics, campaign strategists must decide how much effort to put into persuading independent-minded voters to come out and support their candidate without antagonizing their party’s core supporters, who are more likely to vote anyway. Obama’s victories in 2008 and 2012 were largely due to his campaign’s success in expanding the electorate — inspiring new voters and increasing turnout among blacks
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/24/voter-turnout-always-drops-off-for-midterm-elections-but-why/
If you honestly think that labor unions are behind the low voter turnout rates, then I can’t think of words that describe you other than ignorant and easy to fool, but don’t feel bad, you are not alone. After all, almost a quarter of registered Republicans think Trump should be president.
Lloyd,
Clearly, the GOP is behind efforts to reduce voter turnout nationally and in state elections.
But, local school board elections are largely under the control of unions and union supporters, and they act exactly the same way.
I’m getting tired of you calling me a fool and ignorant, so I’m done engaging with you. I don’t need your validation, nor does my school.
Yes, the members of local teachers’ unions at the district level, thousands of local teachers’ union branches below the state and national levels, are involved in local community school board races. Teachers, on weekends and in the evenings, will go out on their own and walk door to door to support school board candidates that teachers think will support the schools that they teach in. Most of the time they are parents and sometimes they are even retired teachers who live in those communities. They know about educatoin and/or care about children and making a profit doesn’t enter into it. In most or all public school districts, these school board members work for little or nothing.
You keep throwing out the word “union” as if it is a cancer controlled from a central source, but unions are democratic organizations that vote for their leaders starting at the local level, then moving up to the state and even national level, and the union members at the local levels are almost always working teachers.
So, when a local teachers’ unions is supporting candidates who are running for a local school board, it isn’t the NEA or AFT, it is individual teachers who belong to the local who are offering that support.
I know, because I belonged to the REA (Rowland Education Association), and that local was made up of about 700 teachers who taught in the small Southern California school district where I worked for thirty years. For a few years, I was even one of the reps who attended representative meeting—-after school—-and sometimes we listened to local school board candidates who were asking for our help to support them during their campaign.
Teachers who belonged to those local union branches and worked in those community public schools researched the candidates and asked them questions because those teachers didn’t want someone like Arne Duncan on the school board where they worked.
The national and state teachers unions do not tell teachers at the local level who they must support in local school board elections. That decision is made by teachers at the local level.
I have lost count of the number of times you have disparaged public school teachers, public schools and teachers’ unions alleging that they don’t care about kids and that some 5 week wonder TFA recruit is better than career teachers who dedicate their lives for decades to work with kids.
You seem to wrongly think that you are doing a better job in your little charter school then public schools do when it comes to working with children who live in poverty. Maybe in your local area this is correct, but when we look at the entire nation, that is totally wrong, and I know it was wrong for the district where I taught for thirty years.
For proof, I will turn to one of the Stanford studies—and there are other studies from other sources that validate this Stanford study. Here is the evidence that public school teachers in the United States are doing a better job than almost all if not all of the other OECD nations—-tested by PISA—when it comes to working with children who live in poverty.
The title for this Stanford report says, “Poor ranking on international test misleading about U.S. student performance, Stanford researcher finds”
The report also found:
“There is an achievement gap between more and less disadvantaged students in every country; surprisingly, that gap is smaller in the United States than in similar post-industrial countries, and not much larger than in the very highest scoring countries.
“Achievement of U.S. disadvantaged students has been rising rapidly over time, while achievement of disadvantaged students in countries to which the United States is frequently unfavorably compared – Canada, Finland and Korea, for example – has been falling rapidly.
“U.S. PISA scores are depressed partly because of a sampling flaw resulting in a disproportionate number of students from high-poverty schools among the test-takers. About 40 percent of the PISA sample in the United States was drawn from schools where half or more of the students are eligible for the free lunch program, though only 32 percent of students nationwide attend such schools.”
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/january/test-scores-ranking-011513.html
So, I return to what I think about you being an ignorant fool who has been brainwashed by the propaganda being pumped out by the fraudulent corporate education deformers funded by a small number of autocratic billionaire oligarchs.
And don’t forget, your little charter school wouldn’t exist without the oligarchs funding their fraudulent war on democratic public education. If they lose this growing war with millions of teachers, parents and students across the country, then the odds are that your little charter school will eventually lose its public funding. For instance, we just witnessed this happening in Washington State.
I will continue to think (on my own as one person) that you are an ignorant fool until you prove otherwise. I am not a diplomat. I was trained to deal with problems that the diplomats fail to solve—I’m talking about Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Syria.
When the meddling autocratic oligarchs, the appointed diplomats and elected representative screw things up, it’s the Marines, Army, Navy and Air Force that has to deal with the crap they have created.
These men and women go out and give their lives or their physical and mental health to clean up the messes some power hungry, greedy ignorant fools created.
John said, “As for me being a fool regarding teaching because I’m not a teacher, how many schools have you started Lloyd? How much of your free time is spent volunteering with kids from low SES families? How many charter schools have you visited? How many school leaders have you had long talks with? Have you been a school board member?”
Bla, Bla, Bla, John, you sound like one of the corporate charter propaganda machines spewing out lies and cherry-picked facts.
Starting a school doesn’t make you a saint or prove that you know what you are doing and for sure you have no idea how much damage you are causing.
John asked, “How much of my (meaning me) free time is spend working with kids from low SES famlies?
Currently NONE!
Why, because, I already did that for thirty years in schools with extremely high levels of poverty at rates of 80% or higher. I worked an average of 60 to 100 hours a week during those thirty years. Now that I’m 70 and retired, I choose to live my life differently with less stress.
How many years have you had your little charter school? Let’s compare that with the 30 years I spent in schools with high rates of children who lived in poverty.
Again, your little charter school wouldn’t exist if it were not for the oligarchs—the Waltons, Broad, Gates, the Koch brothers, etc—funding this fraudulent war against the public schools filling your head full of lies and fooling you, and others, to think that you can make a difference.
You are so ignorant and biased it is tragic.
You said, “Defend this nation’s indefensible teacher preparation programs, which produce graduates that are no better than very bright people who are trained for 5 weeks.”
The evidence is clear that the 5 week wonders who are TFA recruits are not better teachers than teachers who go through traditional programs and are significantly inferior to teaches who go through urban residency programs. In addition, 60% are these TFA recruits are gone from the classroom within 2 years and most of those who stay transfer to more affluent communties to escape the challenges that poverty causes.
“The Teacher Wars” by Dana Goldstein makes that clear. Read the book. I’m not going to provide the facts for you that blow away your foolish, biased ignorance.
You said, “Defend a high school with a 46% graduation rate because it has union teachers, without regard to how they are doing and the cataclysmic affect that has on the community that I live in.”
Look closer at schools with low graduation rates and you will almost always find poverty. Move the teachers to a more affluent community without poverty and those same teachers will almost always appear to do a better job when we look at the graduation results and the tests scores.
Teachers seldom create a failing school. Poverty causes that and it is a struggle for the teachers who stay in those schools to overcome the challenges that walk in their classroom door daily. I know. I was born into poverty and I ended up teaching in schools for thirty years that had poverty rates between 80% to almost 100%. I have worked with children from both sides of the track and the kids who are there to learn will learn even if the teacher isn’t all that great. Teacher training is not standardized because education is state controlled and each state sets its own standards from the top down. For instance, there are a few states that will license substitute teachers who only have a GED and never went to college while other states require college degrees to substitute teach.
You said, “Defend the democratically elected school board that systematically takes resources away from the poorest schools and gives them the least desirable teachers.”
Huh? I’ve never heard of this. Where did you come up with this alleged garbage?
The allocation of funds is dictated by law in each state and public schools are monitored to make sure they are spending those funds as ed code dictates. There are federal and state laws that dictate how that money is spend. In addition, the way public money is collected to find the schools from state to state tends to favor more affluent communities and punish poor communities because the public funds is collected.
Community based, democratically elected school boards in transparent public schools are watched carefully and they don’t have the kind of power you allege—at least in California they don’t. The state legislature and court rulings decide how the money is to be spent. If the laws in a state that dictate how the public funds will be raised and spend are bad, that wasn’t the fault of a local school board. That was the fault of a state legislature and its governor.
With more than 15,000 public school districts, the odds are that a small, insignificant nubmer are corrupt when a corrupt school board gets into power and hired only corrupt administrators—simlar to what Eli Broad is doing with his unaccredited Broad academy graduated and those loyal TFA recruits who finished their two years of teaching in a poor community and then moved on to manage schools after being trained how to do it from the top down..
John,
You forgot the definition oh a public school: it accepts all could re.
Definition of a non-public school: a school that accepts only rhode with high scores. A school that pushes out kids with low scores.!
Diane,
So, a magnet school isn’t a public school? Nor is an admission-based high school?
My definition of a public school is a school that has been given the responsibility of educating public school children by the state.
Also, it isn’t accurate that district schools take all comers. Districts do, but individual schools frequently do not.
Sorry, John. I cannot agree that charters are public schools. They are public insofar as they receive public money. After that exchange, everything gets real private real fast. Charters have few rules that are identical to public schools and therefore, they are not nearly the same.
The ability to essentially “select” a student body is a huge difference. The ability to kick low performers to other schools is a huge difference. Not backfilling empty seat is a huge advantage.
Public means they take everyone, unless they no longer have the physical capacity to do so. Public means that they have an elected school board that has to be responsive to the public.
If they don’t have to abide by all of the same rules as the traditional publics, they should be called something more accurate. It’s a phony term. I just watched Ravi Gupta of Nashville Prep note that 90% of their school day is math and English. No public school could do that without a parent revolt. They can do that because they essentially choose and keep a select population. That’s not public.
If we allowed such a system to be the entire system, countless kids and families would find themselves unable to receive an education. Test scores are the metric that matters so what would schools, in an endless marketing race, do with low achievers? Kick them around.
Public means you serve the public. The entire public. Until charters do that, they’re not public.
Charters are public by the most narrow definition imaginable. They are 10% like a public school and 90% something else.
Lloyd,
You say that I’m biased and then say that “no matter how good a charter school is, it’s BAD” ?
Then you say “The evidence is clear that the 5 week wonders who are TFA recruits are not better teachers than teachers who go through traditional program”. Yes, the evidence is clear that they are about the same. Don’t you see a problem with that?
Lloyd, you seem to care more about schools as employers than about children’s education. That is clear from your knee-jerk, dogmatic assertions without regard to quality.
I care more about whether public schools are delivering quality education, which is their purpose. You seem to care more about the institution than the purpose. That reminds me of people who want to ban flag burning. They care more about the symbol than about the actual freedoms it represents.
To all of you above:
New Orleans is now 100% charter school district. Therefore they can not cherry pick or expel any student for any reason. They must and do take in all New Orleans students (i.e., public) and are supported by public funds. My question is are they public schools or in some mind boggling distorted way of thinking promoted by Diane Ravitch are they private schools? I would like to know. Please provide a detailed rationale which can stand the test of time.
For your information there are other small school districts that have turned into all charter districts. It is also know that a judge in Washington thinks that charter school schools do not agree with the State constitution.
Peter Greene has already talked about what it takes to be a public school, for instance, here: http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2015/09/charters-are-not-common-schools.html
BTW, just because NOLA is all charter doesn’t mean the charters have to accept all comers. Mercedes Schneider has written at length about the convoluted application/assignment process for charters. There’s also the fact that even once charters accept a student, they don’t have to keep him/her. NOLA has lost hundreds if not thousands of students that they simply can’t account for – those are probably the ones that no charter would take.
Raj…do some homework on why Green Dot left New Orleans.
Charters in New Orleans had to be dragged into court to address special education
Southern Poverty Law Center filed action on behalf of New Orleans students with disabilities pursuant to IDEA, Section 504, and Title II of the ADA in October 2010.
• The defendants are the State Superintendent of Education, the Louisiana Department of Education (LDE), and the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE).
• The Orleans Parish School Board (OPSB) is the Defendant- Intervenor
• Lawsuit alleged that the LDE failed to ensure that students with disabilities in New Orleans had equal access to educational services and were protected from discrimination
Consent Judgment has been approved and signed by SPLC, OPSB, and LDE .
• Judge Zainey signed the Consent Judgment on March 25, 2015.
All charter districts have been created by eliminating the right of citizens to vote on how their schools are governed, including the taxes they invest in education. Citizens who can and should be concerned with education are not just parents.
The other district with more than 50% charters is Detroit.
To John:
If you are a teacher, then your students will not have a chance to learn the humanity principle.
I need to tell you that there is certain slogan to accurately describe the implication.
In business, I have heard that: “”Business people EARN whatever they plan to SPEND.””
Therefore, please do not express gullible thought, or do not try to distract readers with your own misunderstanding the meaning of “”investment”” versus “”philanthropy.””
Again, any action in philanthropy will not yield in ENFORCEMENT or CONDITION from givers to the receivers’ end.
Extra note for you, John, please open these links to cultivate your mind or maybe you can learn some DIRTY TRICKS from Eli Broad regarding real-estate value from $1 to 7.5 millions in the base from invasion/shut down of public school property, then eventually own them all in 20 years from today!!!
http://www.progressive.org/news/2015/09/188330/weaponized-generosity-how-las-1-disrupt-democracy-and-dismantle-public-school#sthash.jdvSrHpi.dpuf
http://www.defendpubliceducation.net/who-is-eli-broad/
I am from Ontario, Canada. I am bitter over EX conservative Ontario Premier who took 3 billion to build a toll highway then leased to foreigner at 100 million for 100 years. This foreigner will employ our Ex Premier as their board director for future connection or expertise for a duration of # years(?)
All legislators cannot do anything about it because ex-premier had major power in his winning election.
As a result, my personal decision on any election in which I make sure that NO PARTY shall be major in election. Voters should be aware about legislation. Most of all, all immigrants should vote for candidates who have substantial background in doing social good deeds in their community or public school.
Please DO NOT vote them because of race or gender or PR submissive personnel’s idea.
Please do not let media that is controlled and manipulated by business owners who only go for their own individual/family GAIN without any concern for the welfare of country (America) and voters (American). Back2basic
m4potw,
I understand that you disagree with the schools that philanthropists are donating to, but they are still donating to schools.
The piece regarding Eli Broad is equally disingenuous. It says that he is benefiting because an art museum that he endowed got a deal on real estate.
I agree that people with money get good deals from government all of the time, and I support any efforts to get money out of politics.
But, we were talking about a very specific issue and this doesn’t make the case.
Hi Laura:
Thank you for the link
http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-is-helping-hedge-funds-make-money-off-of-charter-schools-2015-3
which reinforces my understanding of business’s slogan:
Business people always EARN what they SPEND,
Gullible consumers SADLY over-SPEND what they EARN
(because banking business, insurance business and pharmaceutical manufacturing and legislators join-in to rip off consumers). Bac2basic
To John:
You try hard to hardly understand “”a very specific issue” = Looting fund from Public education + destroying dignity in teaching profession + damaging learning spirit in millions of young learners.
The best teachers are the ones who can instill the joy of life long learning to learners’ mind
The worst teachers are the ones who think that they are brilliant and who cruelly intimidate and brutally ridicule young learners to the breaking point.
Again, I welcome the real meaning in action of philanthropy from all philanthropists.
Otherwise, all rich families can use their billion or million to open any charters as they please WITHOUT taking public fund and even WITHOUT complying transparent public regulations.
I think that I am clear and conscientious in my expression although I am not teacher by profession.
There is an extra note that I do not mind if all politicians are mischievous or intentionally lying as long as they work conscientiously for their country and their people as their priority. For example, politicians can take bribery and can put puppet masters in jail for screwing national economy or security. Yes, both do not have integrity and both can kill each other. As a result, there will not be any crooked puppet masters, neither crooked politicians.
In the same vein, all rich families can open K-12 charter privately under their own curriculum, EVEN WITHOUT transparency, and WITHOUT following national guide-line as long as these graduates from UN-transparent education CANNOT work in public sectors, cannot represent public in any ways because they will harm country and people. It is the price of their choice to against public by being secrecy.
Who wants to serve in public sector, (s)he should participate and follow through the transparent public educational protocol. It is as it is. Simple and transparency. Back2basic
I am sorry for typo “”Looting fund from (not for) Public education””