I know I am supposed to be taking a break, but I assumed the holidays would be a quiet time. I was wrong.
The Los Angeles Times published an editorial today about charter schools that pretends to be balanced, but it is not. It begins by saying that it is somehow wrong to be for or against charters; one needs a more “nuanced” view. It reports on new research that shows students in charter high schools enter with higher scores than those who do not enroll in charter high schools; that charter middle schools get impressive results; and that charter high schools get unimpressive results. These findings might be reasons to oppose Eli Broad’s proposal to put half the students in Los Angeles into privately-managed charter schools, but that’s not what the editorial says. A photo caption alongside the editorial says “A charter school expansion could be great for L.A.” What happened to that “nuanced” view”?
If you care about the future of public education in the United States, if you don’t like the idea that billionaires should be allowed to privatize public institutions, why shouldn’t you oppose Eli Broad’s plan? Why should you be on the fence?
If you read the editorial to the end, you will see that education coverage in the Los Angeles Times–apparently including the editorials–is underwritten by a group of billionaires, including Eli Broad. But of course the piper doesn’t call the tune. Except when he does.
The best part about the editorial is the comments that follow, each of them expressing a thoughtful response about why it would not be a good idea to let Eli Broad take control of half the children in LAUSD just because he wants to.
Cross posted it with
Just today, The NY Times proved that it was owned and operated by the liars and billionaires of the EIC (Educational Industrial complex)who want to see the end of public education.
Read Peter Greene’s razor-sharp evisceration of the New York Times’ editorial praise for high-stakes testing and the Common Core .http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/CURMUDGUCATION-NYT-Spots-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Lies_Media_Peter-Greene_Testing-151231-606.html
It reflects how all genuine educators feel about the outrageous lies the media perpetuates.
Says Greene: the NYT board has done the opposite of journalism here, and this belongs with “Cigarettes Are Totally Good For You” or “US Must Solve Critical New Car Gap.”
Peter looks at the underlying sources for the Times’ editorial and identifies each of them as fraudulent. How could the New York Times get everything so wrong? Peter says it is because they relied for their “data” on organizations funded by the Gates Foundation to promote the Common Core standards. Are these trustworthy sources?”
Broad is one of the worst destroyers of public education. Charter schools in LA are frauds and failures!
Here is a link to my series on charter school corruption.
http://www.opednews.com/author/series/author40790.html
Thanks, Susan Lee. Good post.
The reformers heard you were taking a break and thought they could inundate the media with a barrage of lies while the radar was down.
😃
They still think that they can fool people by putting shiny new labels on the same old bottles of $tudent $ucce$$ and doubling down on whatevers.
Seems they don’t ever read past page 1 of their Marxist playbook. They might have noticed this one:
Chico: “The garbage man is here.”
Groucho: Well, tell him we don’t want any.
We don’t want any more of that same old same old either.
And haven’t they heard the latest? It’s all about being “platform-agnostic” now. In words, of course, just don’t change the deeds…
😎
Could it really be a coincidence that NY and LA have pro charter editorials at the same time?
I understand the “I thought I would just take a break, but…” dilemma. Thank you for your vigilance and dedication.
This point cannot be over-stated, or rather
should be repeated as often as possible…
The new plan that the privatizers are trying to
push in LAUSD is a facade.
It’s actually the old plan — the secret one that
was leaked against their wishes, and which
they are trying to wish out existence in the
public’s mind… an impossible goal.
Here’s Peter “Curmudgucation” Greene’s
analysis of that old/new plan:
http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2015/09/la-plan-to-crush-public-education.html
Peter Greene: “The LA Time published further confirmation of the story they broke in August– Eli Broad and friends would like to replace public education in Los Angeles, taking over half of the district’s ‘business.’
“The confirmation comes by way of an extraordinary document– the Great Public Schools Now Initiative. It’s nothing short of amazing– a plan to do away with democratically controlled, publicly accountable education in LA.”
” … ”
” … the Great Public Schools Now Initiative puts the ‘aud’ in ‘audacious’ and the ‘balls’ in ‘holy schneikes but you have a big brass pair on you!’ It’s forty-four pages of ‘How To Completely Circumvent the Public School System For Fun and Profit.’ ”
and on it goes …
———-
The privatizers have replaced billionaire Eli Broad,
with another billionaire, Bill Siart, but it’s still Broad
that’s running this show, make no mistake about it.
UTLA and others did a bang-up job of alerting
both teachers and the community as to what the
Broad-Walmart Plan is, and and is not, and who
Broad is and is not.
Thanks the all that, both the plan and Broad are
being opposed from multiple fronts, and the
public is getting wise.
The corporate reform privatizers’ latest scam is to say,
– – – – – – – –
“Oh no, the plan is not to
replace traditional public schools
with privately-manages charter schools. Just
ignore that secret plan that was leaked earlier…
that’s not what we’re all about at all.. .. even
though that plan came from our organization …
and it paints traditional public schools as
irreversibly hopeless failure factories, and
privately managed charters as the only hope
for children.
“We want to help all schools — charter
and public equally … we’re even using
certain public schools as models to be
replicated ..
“So just pretend you never read that earlier plan.
“Oh, and the billionaire who’s actually
behind this is lesser known and
less radioactive Bill Siart, not that other
guy with the initialss E.B. He’s not
part of this.”
– – – – – – – –
Even the pro-privatization L.A. School Report
finds this new facade laughable:
http://laschoolreport.com/37711-2/
Come meet the new plan,
same as the old plan.
This attempt to change the label is
bogus. The plan is to wipe out public
education, and de-professionalize teaching
and replace traditional public schools
with privately-managed charters… and
replace highly-trained and appropriately
compensated teachers, with poorly
trained and minimally compensated
non-teachers … or what they call
“human capital.”
This new pose is all a lie.
Come meet the new plan,
same as the old plan
Oh, one more thing. Read this latest
from UTLA
Click to access United_Teacher_December_2015.pdf
This from the front page of UTLA’s United
Teacher newspaper to its members
It’s the above-the-fold story (with two more
relevant articles on Page 5, the latter about how the same
money funded school board campaigns):
– – – –
Growing coalition stands against Broad-Walmart plan
Parents, students, educators, and community groups
urge LAUSD School Board to pass motion opposing
market-driven reform.
A growing coalition of parents,
students, educators, and community groups
is calling on the LAUSD School Board to
take a stand against the plan by Eli Broad
and the Walmart heirs to greatly expand
unregulated charter schools at the expense
of neighborhood public schools.
At the December 8 School Board
meeting, a stream of speakers urged the
Board members to pass Scott Schmerelson’s
motion against the Broad-Walmart plan
and called for District officials to invest in
Sustainable Neighborhood Community
Schools—a positive alternative to defund
ing and deregulating public schools. UTLA
and our community allies will be back at the
next School Board meeting, January 12, to
repeat our push for the motion’s passage.
“The main purpose of the LAUSD Board
is to oversee and to protect our public
education system and make it the best
possible to serve all students—not to hand
over the future of our children to private
companies and billionaire funders, who
have never experienced our struggles,”
said Martha Sanchez, a parent of three
LAUSD students and a member of the
Alliance of Californians for Community
Empowerment.
“Eli Broad has no right to
tell us what’s best for our children, and I
don’t welcome nor appreciate him and his
Wall Street friends deciding our future.”
As an added demonstration of support,
several letters were presented to the School
Board signed by members of the eight
LAUSD unions and the Los Angeles County
Federation of Labor; by eight prominent
local and state community organizations:
— Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment,
— Clergy & Laity United for Economic Justice,
— Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of L.A.,
— Labor/Community Strategy Center,
— Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy,
— Schools L.A. Students Deserve Grassroots Coalition,
— Strategic Actions for Just Economy,
and
— The Youth Justice Coalition;
and by long time community organizations
— Community Coalition
and
— InnerCity Struggle.
Schmerelson’s “Excellent Public Education
for Every Student” resolution would put
the School Board on record as opposing
all market-driven education reforms such
as the Broad-Walmart initiative.
The Broad-Walmart plan that was leaked to the
press in September contains numerous
references to students and schools as
“market share” and labels teachers as
“human capital.”
If implemented, the Broad-Walmart plan
would trigger a race to the bottom by
forcing schools to compete for resources,
threaten LAUSD’s financial viability by
draining the District’s budget, and create an
unregulated education system that would
leave high-needs students behind.
The community fight against the Broad-Walmart
Plan is helping to shape the
LAUSD superintendent search and bolsters
UTLA’s call for a leader with no ties to
the Broad Foundation or similar corporate-
reform entities. The Schmerelson motion,
in its highlighting of community schools,
should act as a roadmap for the District’s
new leadership.
In the response to the backlash against the
Broad-Walmart initiative, proponents of
the plan now claim they are not focusing
so solely on the expansion of unregulated
charter schools— yet Great Public Schools
Now, the new organization formed to push
the campaign, is being led by executives
from the company ExED.
Funded by a banker and other billionaires,
ExED helps charter schools manage their business
operations and offers start-up services to new
charter schools. In the initial list that Great
Public Schools Now released on December
7 of “the kinds of schools” the organization
intends to replicate, the majority of them
were charters.
In sharp contrast to the Broad-Walmart
plan, UTLA is working with parents,
students, and community members for
Sustainable Neighborhood Community
Schools. These are schools that are accessible
and equitable for all, have a well-rounded
curriculum, involve parents and educators
deeply, are connected to the community,
and have well-resourced wrap-around
sevices and restorative justice programs.
More than 40 leaders of innovative school-based
programs convened at UTLA last month
(see story on page 5) to discuss specific
aspects of their work and how to expand
success models across the district.
Citywide chapter chair meeting on
January 7:
UTLA will be holding a citywide
chapter chair meeting on Thursday, January
7, to review a roadmap for 2016. Chapter
chairs will receive important materials for
members and discuss the Build the Future,
Fund the Fight voting timeline, the national
“walk in” for public schools on February 17,
and the impact of the Broad-Walmart plan
on the search for a new superintendent. Two
sessions (location to be announced) have
been scheduled to accommodate those who
have professional development meetings on
that day: 12 to 2 p.m. and 4 to 6 p.m.
Siart is a former banker whose bank merged with Big Bank. Who woulda thunk!
I hope you had a nice vacation, Diane. Four days’ light duty must have been invigorating, I think Gates and Co. will find. Now Dr. Ravitch has gone from 99.999% vigor to 100%. Watch out, deformEDsters!
I admit, I haven’t stopped much either. I read the editorial this morning, went to latimes.com/education and scrolled down to the Howard Blume article about the (I assume Gates funded) study and read the 40-something page report. (Thank you for the compliment on the comments below the editorial, Diane. If I may be excused for bragging, I wrote the one about independent versus conversion charters.)
What I took from the editorial was a change in tactics by the privatizers. They are asking for forgiveness for their lack of success. They are in tactical retreat. They have paused their full frontal attack on the union and are asking for the school board to refrain from fighting back, now that some realities including some of their secret plans have been exposed. Perhaps it’s time for LA to join its neighbors to the south and go for a moratorium on charter growth. I think that’s what Sun Tsu would do. Drive when the enemy retreats, I believe it goes.
It did, however, sound like the Times wants to use the Berkeley and Stanford data to make another school choice promoting database of test scores. This could be a weak attempt to thwart or get around The California Department of Ed’s getting rid of the reductionist Academic Performance Index of test scores and possibly replacing it with something more holistic and positive.
It’s good to have you back, Diane. It’s good to see SomeDAM Poet and everyone else too. Happy New Year. Look out, 2016!
LeftCoastTeacher: your third and fourth paragraphs—
Much food for thought.
Again, amazing how the rheephormsters think that if they simply use a few different words for the same eduproducts they can continue to sell failure.
Thank you for your comments.
😎
🆙
LeftCoastTeacher, I had the same reaction to the database. By what logic is that the next step?
By the way, I’ve heard that Karin Klein has not left the LA Times editorial board afterall. So any hope that there might be a fresh look at the corporate privatization of schools and support for public education as a foundation of a democratic society is lost.
I think the database is the Times’ original purpose in writing about education. It’s why they care so much about standardized tests and student surveys. It’s their dream of making an online shopping website that would rake in the dough, the way hotels.com or apartments.com do. Data = Dollars. They never cared about education. They want money. I’m just glad they don’t get to use VAM for individual teachers any more.
Another thing: the picture and caption accompanying this editorial are from one of the
“Magnolia” Charter schools — not to be confused with Magnolia Elementary, a traditional public school.
The Magnolia charters are secretly — or not-so-secretly — run by a Islamic Imam from Turkey — the Gulen schools:
or here:
They’re such a scandal that 60 Minutes did an expose on them:
The Gulen L.A.-based schools new CEO Caprice Young— who was hired to bail them out after financial disaster — was asked about this, and she denied that they had any goals or ties to Gulen. In fact, she’d never heard of such a thing, dismissing it as a quack conspiracy theory.
Really, Caprice?
If you were running a bunch of schools that were being featured in a 60 MINUTES expose, wouldn’t you watch the show, and then have a comment ready when asked?
Here’s education researcher Sharon Higgins on Gulen — and charter schools in general:
Thanks Left Coast and Jack…now that you have reported all this with depth and alacrity, I can take my still bruised and messed up body back to bed…but not without wishing everyone, especially my local buddies/colleagues, LC and J and all the rest, the best of new year’s wishes…not forgetting the LAUSD BoE members who fight for public ed…particularly Scott Schmerelson and Monica Ratliff.
Thanks Diane for getting it all online so the world world can read and learn. Great new year to you, Mary, and your families.
Feel better soon, Ellen. Be well.
In my personal experience as a parent in the neighborhood which has more charter schools than anywhere else in the country, parents are choosing three things:
1. smaller class sizes,
2. autonomy from an unresponsive bureaucracy, and
3. a more familiar community.
The LAUSD board needs to complete the feedback loop with charters. If there is one single person in the charter division of LAUSD whose job it is to analyze and report and recommend to the superintendent or Board any practices from charters that could be applied to public schools, I would like to meet him or her. As it is, the charter division seems to be nothing but charter cheerleaders and our elected officials need to take action now. They should start by asking any superintendent candidates what specific experience they have in closing that feedback loop so the school district benefits from the experimentation of charters.
Karen Wolfe, Executive Director
PSconnectNow.org
Karen, those seem like very thoughtful, helpful suggestions & observations. My hopes for 2016 include
* giving district educators opportunities to create new, teacher led options, including start up funds for schools like the Boston (and LA) Pilot schools
* more opportunities for district & charter educators to work with & learn from each other, because both groups have terrific ideas.
* More schools using the best ideas of the most effective schools, whether district or charter.
On another of Diane’s posts about a pre-school using the wilderness, I posted an example of a charter that is doing this. It would be great to learn about other schools, district or charter, that are doing this.
Happy New Year to all who post here – and who care about youngsters and families.
Karen, it’s true that parents seek homogeneity. It’s only natural. The school in which I teach, in this, our charter plagued neighborhood of West LA, is composed of students very different racially and socioeconomically than the residents. My district school students are from South and Central LA, not West LA. And we used to have an extremely serious problem with unresponsive bureaucracy. Then, last school year, we teachers banded together with parents and homeowners in the neighborhood to force Cortines and Zimmer to respond. Our new principal is amazing. The atmosphere of the school has become one of rich, well rounded academia and warmth. Emulating the unresponsive churn and burn of charter schools is what the other principal we got rid of used to do. Now, charter schools could learn from us. But imitating public schools is not what charters were designed to do. There’s no profit in supporting experienced teachers and heterogeneous families.
It’s great to talk to you again, Karen. Probably see you again at the next protest of Broad. Happy New Year!
Joe, you strike the same tone as the LATimes editorial that is the subject of this post: Sure, charter schools siphon funds from children and fail to improve “outcomes”, but why doesn’t the school board just forgive the charter schools, join hands with them and sing Kumbaya. Enough of that. Charter schools are an attack on public schools, plain and simple.
Charter schools do not have a pedagogy that is useful for public schools; public schools to not degrade the teaching profession like charters do. Public schools have nothing useful for charter schools; charter schools do not keep teachers long enough to make them great. And the pilot schools that Deasy made are just public schools with more iPads.
No, I don’t think the inexperienced, undertrained temps teaching in charter schools have anything to teach me.
LCT – Charter, like district school faculties vary. Yes, charters tend to have younger teachers, in part because in most states they receive less per pupil than district public schools.
Here’s an article from the Minneapolis paper describing how district & charter educators learned different approaches from eachother to offering college level courses in high school. They are tradeoffs and advantages to different approaches, whether it’s AP, IB, “College in the Schools” or students taking courses on a college campus.
These educators brought a “let’s learn from eachother and help kids” attitude. The result were huge increases in the number of inner city kids participating in these courses:
http://www.startribune.com/dual-credit-courses-proving-popular-in-st-paul/286248171/
As to the “taking dollars away” argument – this was raised when a group of progressive parents and educators created a new option within the St Paul public schools in 1971 – we talked with similar groups in LA who faced the same opposition.
It’s not necessary to choose from either improving existing schools or helping educators create new options – whether traditional or charter. We can and I think should do both.
You are welcome to your views. I choose not to welcome charter schools or collaborate with them. I choose desegregation and integration. I choose to care about the kids with special and other needs that charter schools ignore. I choose to support unions that protect better conditions for all instead of some.
I choose to fight privatization of all public services, hammer, tooth and nail. And after twenty years of anti-public school teacher propaganda from every mass media outlet on the globe, you might think twice about trying to get me to go steady with you. You chose this war. I choose to finish it. Those are my views.
LCT – like many innovative district educators, I chose 45 years ago to help create new public schools that, based on research and innovative ideas, had the possibility of helping some youngsters who were not succeeding in the current system.
I understand that this threatens some today, as it did 45 years ago. I’m also heartened by the number of educators who’ve come to see the value of working outside schools to make this a more just world, and inside schools to help more youngsters succeed.
I hope 2016 goes well for you and your students.
I do not feel threatened by this, what I earlier called a tactical retreat by the deformers. Anyone can claim to have good intentions. That is neither here nor there. The data suggest privatization fails society on many levels. Period. Admit it. Privatization has not improved anything for anyone but xenophobes and bigots. And investment bankers. So, Happy New Year. I will pray for you.
Prayers always welcome.
Over 45 years, many, many youngsters and families have written, spoken and testified in various places about the value attending schools quite different that traditional programs.
And 2016 will be a very good year for my students in my traditional, public classroom. They are the best kids in the world, the whole, wide world.
This is getting ridiculous. Over 45 years, many, many youngsters and families have written, spoken and testified in various places about the value attending traditional programs.
LCT, ask Joe Nathan how much income he has generated doing what he does . . .
My salary is less than $50K this year, and less than $60K last year. How much was your salary in 2015 and 2016, Mr. Rendo?
Sorry, I meant my salary in 2014 was less than $60K, and less than $50K in 2015. How much was your salary in 2014 and 2015?
Joe Nathan, you mean that you get all that funding from major foundations and you are paid less than $50K? You are a saint indeed.
Yes, my salary is less than $50K/year. Also, our current funders are all based in Minnesota.
Our current work focuses on helping a variety of Mn district, charter & alternative schools help more low income and students of color take various courses that will help them earn college credit in high school…thus increasing the likelihood that they will graduate from high school, enter some form of post-secondary education, and earn some kind of post-secondary certificate or degree.
On a related subject, here’s a link to a piece that ran on National Public Radio yesterday.
http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/01/01/458782257/6-education-stories-to-watch-in-2016?ft=nprml&f
Here’s a quote from me that appeared in the NPR story. It refers to charter public schools:
As Joe Nathan, a senior fellow at the Center for School Change, who helped write charter school legislation in 32 states, puts it: “We have not done enough to deal with the crooks and charlatans, of which we have our share.”
Robert,
There was a privatizer who called himself John here in Diane’s living room a few months ago. He got on Diane’s nerves as much as this guy Joe has gotten on mine today. I asked John what he did for a living, and he claimed he made no income from education, and that his involvement in a charter school was strictly volunteering, charity work only. Then it got dragged out that he owned the charter school. I’d ask Joe about his income from privatization, but he’d just lie. They’re all the same.
Robert, thank you for you reply. I have a great deal of respect for you, based on your insightful comments. I am quite buoyed by the last two days of conversation here about the Berkeley study. I’ll say it again: Look out, 2016!
Interestingly careful selection of words. Salary is one form of income. I just made a pot of tea. Wanna keep playing, Mr. N?
Sorry, I’m turning to work on a proposal to help more district & charter students succeed.
Have a nice time. Bye bye!
I would personally love to investigate exactly how much Joe Nathan has earned in the last 15 years, under what circumstances, and how many ownership interests he has “owned” in one or perhaps more than one charter school in a single given fiscal year. Paid consultations? Speeches?
I would love to know the rate of teacher retention in each of the schools he has worked in or managed (oops . . . Auto correct for spelling just typed in “damaged” instead of “managed”. . . Even the computer suspects Mr. Nathan.)
I would also like to know what kind of personal wealth Mr. Nathan came with to the charter school table that he can afford to live off of $60,000 per year with a wife and children, presumably. Family money inheritance? May be some or none of the above. I assume nothing, but do question everything.
Something tells me that some of puzzle pieces are still missing in Saint Joseph’s portrayal of his personal income.
His business reports having received $25 million from Gates, Waltons, and a host of others (to replace career teachers across the country with TFA). But times have changed recently for the Rheeformers. The inBloom is off the rose for many of the billionaire boys. His funding may have dried up in the last two years. He may be tightening his belt and fishing here for more donations, or he might be hiding investment income from us here to fish for more donations. Either way, as Alex Caputo-Pearl said the the Howard Blume article about the subject of this post, “The main takeaway of the new study is that it shows that many charter schools are in fact selecting higher-performing students and excluding lower-performing students.” Now, finally, and I do mean finally, this is my 16th comment on this post. That’s too many. (Hint, hint, Mr. N.) I apologize to all, especially Diane, for overtaking too much of the discussion. Over and out for now.
OK, 17. I meant to refer to Robert’s keen hypotheses by writing that Mr. N may be hiding investment OR OTHER income. Back to lesson planning for me now.
Left Coast Teacher,
You did not take up too much room on this blog.
You challenged an individual who is very, very questionable, and who NEVER is willing to discuss redistribution of wealth, fairer systems of taxation for uber wealthy people and corporations, and how children should be prevented from being born into poverty BEFORE they come into the public schools.
Mr. Nathan mentions nothing about social safety nets, such as saving SS, expanding Medicare for all, 6 month paid maternity and paternity leave, and universal child care, etc. He never talks about Citizens’ United or our unregulated banking system. He just carries on as though charter schools should be blind to these ills, and that a great charter school education will free future generations from these inequities because students will have become better critical thinkers and will therefore change the political landscape and fiscal terrain of society in future years.
Mr. Nathan sees privatization as one cure, but he is unable to assess it as the illness. I’m afraid he’s too infected with free and open market values to be healthy enough to think collectively and fight for the common goods.
Do NOT fall for his civil tone of voice and gentle writing demeanor, because like mesothelioma, he is silent, unassuming, and deadly . . .
Here’s a portion of one of the blogs Education Week and Deborah Meier asked me to write last year (2015), under the title, “Priorities for a Progressive Education Agenda”
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2015/05/whats_are_priorities_for_a_pro.html
” * Develop partnerships with organizations working to expand health care, increase number of good jobs, increase affordable housing, and advocate with/for low-income families. While schools can have huge positive impacts, reducing the other actions can help schools become more effective. As an example, the organization where I work admires and collaborates with a terrific Minnesota research/advocacy group called Growth & Justice.”
* Increase federal income taxes on the wealthiest 5-10% of Americans, to help pay for a number of things cited above. ”
In the 8 months of discussion and debate in Education Week, Ms. Meier and I found ways to share, discuss, debate, disagree and learn from each other without personal attacks. Perhaps that’s because we know a fair amount each other’s work over 35 years.
But it’s a free country. So if some want to disagree via personal attack, that’s their right.
(19.) You know, Mr. N, you’re right. This post is not about you. It’s not about what you’ve done in the last 45 years. It’s not about what you’re doing in Minnesota now. This is about charter schools in Los Angeles failing to serve the whole population and then not having the test scores to excuse it.
Karen,
I posted this video BELOW— cleverly
edited at the beginning — of the Board’s
meeting where Goethe Charter school
sought a renewal and expansion in your
neighborhood. Jose Cole-Guttierez,
the Director of the Charter Division,
is indeed a charter cheerleader, and
becomes tongue-tied when Board
Member Steve Zimmer questioned him
about exactly why Goethe’s charter
application omitted an entire zipcode
just across the street from that charter,
while?
Zimmer mentioned that the
entirety of that zipcode 90230 was
the Mar Vista Housing Projects (the
western-most public housing
projects in the U.S., btw), and that
in doing so, Goethe charter school
excluded hundreds of low-income
minority children residing in those
projects. At the beginning of the
video, all the Goethe speakers were
blathering about how much their school
values ethnic and socio-economic diversity.
Later, Zimmer rightly points out that —
Goethe folks’ flowery speeches and
token speakers aside— the actual
numbers show that the school
is as white as Sweden.
In large part, this was due to their
exclusion of the Mar Vista Projects
zipcode, while Zimmer points out
that the charter simultaneously
includes zip codes three and four
miles — miles not blocks — away
from Marina Del Rey Middle school,
the public school campus on
which Goethe was then co-locating.
The end of the video has a parent
and teacher complaining about how
Goethe’s application to take over
more classroom speech will
negatively impact the Special
Ed kids at the existing public school —
the same kids that, along with
the Mar Vista project kids — are
not attending Goethe… due to
chicanery of the Goethe officials.
This video is a good way to start
the new year. Here’s the post:
————————————
There’s so many videos I could post on this site
about LAUSD Charter School fiasco. It one instance where
Deasy took the right position, against Charter School
cherry-picking.
Here’s one about Goethe International Charter School:
Back in 2011, the Goethe charter school officials are
seeking a renewal of their charter, and an expansion from
their current set up of Grades K-to-5, to add grades 6-8.
Unfortunately, in its five years of existence,
Goethe’s student body has somehow ended with
a student body that is 90% white and
only 10% non-white. Meanwhile, the
nearby public schools — including the one
where Goethe is co-located — are 10% white, and
90% non-white (black & Latino).
This video is also a case study in how important
the role of LAUSD Board President is.
Former LAUSD Board President Monica Garcia
allows a parade of Goethe folks bragging about
their support for, and efforts to have diversity at
Goethe.
(NOTE: Garcia was deposed in 2013 when the
corporate reformers lost their majority on the board …
Vladovic served two years, and now Steve
Zimmer thankfully is LAUSD Board President)
Well, then, if — according that parade of speakers
bragging about Goethe Charter’s pledge to diversity
in both the school’s management and outreach —
the how in-Hell did that 90% white student body
thing happen?
That is a question that nobody will touch…
until Zimmer brings it up, and demands that
the LAUSD’s Charter School Office Director
Jose Cole-Guttierez answer it.
I can only describe the montage of Goethe’s
highly-staged parade of speakers
making empty pledges toward diversity
—alternated with bursts of applause from
the T-shirted crowd bused in for the occasion—
at the beginning of this video as
a classic example of what Soviet film theorist
and director Sergei Eisenstein might call
“sarcastic” editing.
Watch it:
Oh… and you notice that the T-shirted crowd,
and most of the speakers are black and brown
folks, even though that flies in the face of what
Zimmer points out are “the actual numbers.”
The one opposing speaker says, “I’m a leader
in the Latino community (in the community
where Goethe is located), and I live in the
community, and I’ve never seen any of these
people (i.e. the Goethe speakers.).”
However, here’s where the power of the LAUSD
Board Presidency comes in. As Chair, Garcia
follows her corporate masters’ marching orders
and blocks any more of the non-Goethe parents and
community members opposing Goethe from
getting the mic.
These parents are pissed off about Goethe’s lack of
diversity, doubly so when they had to sit through
that ridiculous montage of speakers claiming they
want diversity. They also decry the invasion and
seizing of classroom space by Goethe, and the
damaging effect this will have on special ed students.
Now, here’s where it gets good. Zimmer — just
two years into his term, having taken office in
July 2009 — doesn’t not buy this staged fiasco
for one second. He proceeds to go quietly apesh#% on
the Goethe Charter people, and on LAUSD’s charter
school office Director Jose Cole-Gutterez, who was
placed there by Deasy to do everything to defend
and expand charters in LAUSD.
Somebody said about Cole-Guttierez: “You can’t
be a refereee (his real job evaluating which charter
schools should be opened, or if opened, later
closed) and a cheerleader (what he’s actually doing,
as evidenced in this video) at the same time.”
(It’s moments like this that later led the
charter folks to pour $5 million into the coffers of Zimmer’s
corporate stooge opponent Kate Anderson… in
Kate’s ultimately failed bid to replace Zimmer on
the Board.)
First, think of a map of East Germany before the fall,
with the island of capitalist West Berlin surrounded by
Communist East Germany.
Zimmer notices something similar in the map
of the Goethe’s charter school application. They
claim to serve a certain geographic area, but
as with West Berlin on the East German map, he notices
that one area — defined by a ZIP Code 90230 — is not
included in the which children will be allowed
to attend Goethe charter school.
He points out that this ZIP Code 90320 includes
the low-income minority housing projects!!!!
Indeed, IT’S ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE
SCHOOL SITE WHERE GOETHE CHARTER IS
CO-LOCATED!!!
WTF????!!!!
It sticks out like West Berlin on an old East
German map (my analogy, btw, not Steve’s … I
wasn’t writing his speeches then… or now. ;- ) )
( 04:07)
( 04:07)
STEVE ZIMMER:
— (after listing the included ZIP Codes)
“Why is the (ZIP Code) 90320 not included?”
— DISSOLVE —
“(90320) includes the Mar Vista Gardens
Housing Projects. Over 650 families who live
in that project are the primary students who,
if we’ll be honest.
— (to Charter Shill, Jose Cole-Gutteirez, LAUSD
Director of Charters)
“So my question for you and the charter office
is …
” ‘How could you let this (omission of 90320
& its projects-dwelling kids from Goethe) get by,
and not (question it) … ?’
“I mean, you’re bringing this to us with a
recommendation to (renew & expand Goethe charter)
but (90320) is literally a block across the
street at Centinela (from Goethe’s co-located school site),
and that ZIP Code (90320) is NOT included?
And ZIP Codes that are 2 to 3 to 4 miles away
ARE included?
“How could that happen?”
(Now watch a charter shill spew forth some double talk)
JOSE-COLE GUTTIEREZ:
“First, let me say a couple things. First, in addition
to ZIP Codes and … I will acknowledge that I
don’t have the exact response for (the exclusion of)
that Zip Code (from Goethe’s student body) …
but one of the factors we do look at are … what
are the schools that current residents are
would be otherwise attending? … Our analysis…
it’s solely not the ZIP Codes, but where students are
currently coming from in the neighboring area… ”
(JOSE C-G totally dodges the question. In fact,
charter honchos have no consideration about where
students otherwise attend, as poaching those
students —the most desirable and easiest-to-educate
kids, that is… not housing project kids allowed
— is the goal.
Zimmer ain’t havin’ it.)
STEVE ZIMMER:
“It’s a stunning omission when the most diverse —
especially for Latino and African-American families —
the most diverse ZIP Code is not included in the
target market. So it calls into (question) …
My question is actually not for (Goethe officials)…
it’s for you… like… I mean… I’m in that neighborhood
all the time. I know who’s there (i.e. who lives there.)
“The question… my concern is…
I am willing to accept what folks say on face value.
If folks want to talk about diversity, and make a
pledge to diversity… I support Dr. Deasy (in charter
schools having student bodies with diversity.)
” … ”
“What Dr. Deasy says, and what I urge my colleagues
to support is … let’s work on this… ”
“Show us in the elementary level, in the school that
you have now, that those numbers can change, and
that you’ll get there (address the lack of diversity) … and
we’ll gladly consider expanding the grade level.”
“The diversity picture that was painted (by the speakers)
today was a beautiful picture of Los Angeles,
but that doesn’t play out in the (actual) numbers
(of who actually attends the school), and unless you can
tell me that this plays out in the numbers … it just doesn’t.
It doesn’t match in special education
It doesn’t match in free-and-reduced lunch
It doesn’t match in the other demographic.”
Again, to be fair, Deasy also believes this this exclusion
of 90230 should no be allowed.
Charterista Board Member Yolie Flores
then tries to change the topic by bringing up an
irrelevant urban legend — teacher union folks gave fliers
to parents warning them that if they attended a charter
that they would be deported.
This is a total lie. UTLA then and now denies this…
but it was part of Ben Austin’s (and others’) disinformation
campaign.
The late great Marguritte LaMotte then chimes in,
supporting Zimmer. She decries the lack of “access”,
as demonstrated by Goethe’s exclusion of ZIP Code 90320.
Under pressure, Garcia allows two people opposing
Goethe’s expansion to speak… (also… Goethe is also co-locating
at Marina Del Rey Middle School, so that its proposed expansion
will displace those public school students attending there,
specifically Special Ed. Students).
A special needs parent — not paid by anyone, not affiliated with
any group — then gets up and opens a can of whoop-ass on
Goethe. He decries the lack of notice to parents opposing
Goethe’s expansion, and how Goethe’s actions, and those
actions detrimental effect on special ed students. goes against the settlement
that LAUSD made regarding Special Education (Consent Decree)
He says Goethe has only 16 special ed students, and most of them
are the least disabled — speech — and the school does not
include the most disabled students.
Compare the speech below — from a parent
who is not being paid or orchestrated by
anyone to speak as he’s there totally on
his own— with that staged Goethe speakers’ farce
(that was sarcastically edited) in the beginning
of the video. Notice also how Goethe folks seated
their token minority students in camera view,
carefully and deliberately so… as these are in
the background as he speaks. The expressions
on their faces as this parent calls out the
chicanery of their schools leaders, and LAUSD
Charter Division / charter cheerleader Jose
Cole-Guttierez are truly priceless.
( 09:55 – )
( 09:55 – )
SPECIAL ED. PARENT Joseph O’Heiron Gideon (sp?):
“I am a parent of a Special Resources child attending
Marina Del Rey Middle School, and I am here speaking
in opposition to the expansion of Goethe—through
this process—into the existing space that is (currently)
occupied by the middle school itself. Essentially what
is projected here is that Special Resources rooms
are being designated or termed ‘excess,’ and
(regarding today’s expansion hearing) there was not
sufficient notice to the parents (of children —
Special Needs or otherwise — who will be
negatively impacted by Goethe’s expansion),
particularly myself.
“I only heard about this meeting about two hours
ago, in contrast to the very well-presented advocates
for the expansion. (You can thank Jose Cole-Gutterez
for that, JACK). That itself raises a due process
consideration as to whether or not adequate notice
is being given to the (Marina Del Rey Middle School)
parents, parents of Special Needs children, parents
of the regular children.
“There’s also the issue of whether or not this violates
the Consent Decree (the court-mandated and
court-supervised settlement of the
famous 1990’s Chanda Smith lawsuit
charging LAUSD with not indentifying
and then providing for the needs of Special Ed.
Kids) that the L.A. Unified School District is operating
under, relative to the compliance with Special
Education laws.
“The displacement (of pre-existing Special Ed kids)
as contemplated by Goethe, is to the detriment of the
Special Needs kids at the Marina Del Rey Middle
School.
“Also, in terms of the diversity, a statistic that I was
provided before I came down here is that, in terms
of Special Education kids, there are only 16 in the
Goethe school body, 10 of those are in Speech
and Language (the most minor of disabilities)…
for example, a lisp or something of that nature,
not really falling in the category of Special
Resource kids.
“Essentially what’s happening, is — as indicated
by the discussion of the zipcodes — is that there’s
cherry-picking going on here. The principal
school (Marina Del Rey Middle School) is designed
Special Needs kids are being displaced (to
accommodate the expansion of Goethe.) and putting
them in the closets.”
MONICA GARCIA: (cutting him off)
“Thank you, sir.”
Finally, a Special Ed. Teacher chimes in.
SPECIAL ED TEACHER:
“The crux of this is that I believe that (charter schools’
exclusionary policies) are running afoul of the 14th Amendment.
I strongly believe so. Charter schools, because of
NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, have an incentive to
keep away Special Ed. kids. We (the student body
at Marina Del Rey Middle School) are 90%
poverty, we are 90% minority, and those very
kids that (Goethe) does not serve. (Goethe)
wants that very space (that those kids use
for their classroooms).”
Goethe ended up getting four more classrooms,
but its request to expand to Grades 6, 7, & 8 are denied.
As the video’s closing caption illustrated, taking
back those 4 classrooms back from Goethe
and restoring them to the existing traditional
public school would require an act of the
California legislature.
Jack: dynamite info.
You wrote:
[start] I can only describe the montage of Goethe’s highly-staged parade of speakers making empty pledges toward diversity—alternated with bursts of applause from the T-shirted crowd bused in for the occasion—at the beginning of this video as a classic example of what Soviet film theorist and director Sergei Eisenstein might call “sarcastic” editing. [end]
You, sir, are too kind.
😎
Did you edit and post that on YouTube?
If so — or to who ever did — bravo!
That editing at the beginning is quite hysterical… especially when contrasted with Zimmer’s calling Goethe out shortly afterward.
Seriously, that long-winded post of mine is just to show that Goethe and other of Saks Fifth Avenue Charters — as well as the 99 Cent Store charters (those nicknames coined by Robert Skeels, I believe) — are nothing more than private schools with public money.
If Goethe wants to exist via funding from parents’ tuition checks plus other fundraising like an actual private school, then good luck. They can then cream, and discriminate, and kick kids out with no due process, and refuse special ed kids to their hearts’ content. ( I taught at one of those for years, and enjoyed it immensely… another story for another day …)
However, If they’re going to take tax money — but are totally unaccountable to the “public,” not transparent to the “public,” and refuse to education all the “public” — then well … there’s virtually no difference between them and a private school funded by vouchers like they have next door in Nevada That’s the the real end game.
The old corporate reform cliche …
“Charter schools ARE PUBLIC schools; they’re just different KIND of PUBLIC school”…
… is a total canard. The only thing “public” about them is the taxpayer money they’re using to run them.
Jack, how do you feel about “public” schools in suburban districts where the price of admission is the ability to purchase a home for a million dollars or more? Some of those places hire detectives to keep out people who want to send their children to those “public” schools.
Mr. Nathan: Public schools in LA that are surrounded by multimillion dollar properties are mainly attended by students receiving free and reduced price lunches. Charter schools have produced a new kind of white flight. (Sorry for jumping in, Jack. Sometimes I can’t refrain from correcting an erroneous argument. And there was coffee involved. I need to unplug again soon. 😎) I teach in a public school in one of the wealthier neighborhoods in LA county. It’s lily white, by LA standards, but 170 of 174 of my students are neither white nor Asian. And get this — this kills me — I just found out my school possibly serves predominantly homeless students. Predominantly. The rich kids have fled their neighborhood school. So, it’s hardly a neighborhood school. Thanks, charters! Giving people new and innovative ways to discriminate.
LeftCoastTeacher: thank you for your comments.
As I understand rheephorm selling points, one of their pitches involves claiming that it is right to punish inner city students and parents with privatization and charters and such [guaranteeing $tudent $ucce$$ for a few] for alleged suburban sins.
That doesn’t make any sense. On a lot of levels. And it underscores once again what those for a “better education for all” keep bringing up: there’s a lot more to genuine learning and teaching than rising or falling test scores. Translation for the reality-impaired: you want world class outputs, you have to provide world class inputs.
Where they’re needed. Whatever it takes. No excuses.
😎
P.S. Note that Jack’s point re Goethe remains unchallenged—and silence means compliance and agreement. And who can forget that recent expression of popular outrage and spontaneous banding together as Eva “The Saint” Moskowitz marshaled her students and parents and employees to politically lobby, er, enjoy a day learning about local government.
Funny, what $575,000 for a year’s “work” can buy…
Silence about assertions in LA does not mean agreement. Like many others commenting here, I’ve seen many questionable postings here.
Just a couple of examples from this series of comments: “I choose to care about the kids with special and other needs that charter schools ignore.” Some charters, like some district schools have entirely or mostly students with special needs and/or students with whom traditional schools have not succeeded.
Or, referring to the LA Times, “They never cared about education. ” Actually, many print journalists care a lot about education, in part because they want more people to read what they write.
I would like to learn more about how students in extremely wealthy suburbs go elsewhere. Or is this extremely wealthy area where LCT teaches, a part of LA Unified (So, not it’s own separate school district)?
Joe,
I believe all students should have the option of a neighborhood school, one that is accountable to the public via a democratically-elected school board, one that is a transparent to the public, one that educates all of the public.
That includes all neighborhoods, from the richest to the poorest and every socio-economic level in-between.
All of those schools should be fully funded, with low class sizes, a full and rich curriculum that includes all the arts, a library, and staffed with experienced, professionally trained teachers who are doing this for life or at least for decades, and who demonstrate a degree of professionalism on a par with doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc.
These schools should remain in the public commons, along with police, firefighters, etc. … and not turned over to the private sector.
The video and story above shows how problematic it can be when you privatize schools, as the zipcode with low-income and most vulnerable students are omitted from admission to an alleged “public” school that claims to be open to all, and that claims to seek diversity, while the numbers show otherwise.
We agree that a well funded neighborhood school, open to all, should be an option for all families, Jack.
I also think that no school receiving public funds should be able to use admissions tests to determine which students are allowed to attend. I also think – and have worked on this for more than 40 years, that public school teachers should be empowered to create distinctive public schools – for example – Montessori, or project based, or Core Knowledge – or a vast array of other approaches, and that families should be able to choose those too.
This becomes more of a challenge in some sparsely populated areas. One approach our Center has helped with is helping create some options within a building.
Hope that’s useful.
Who is the L.A. Times editorially board trying to kid? An extended editorial in Thursday’s print edition is absurdly titled “The Ongoing War on Charters.” They can’t be serious! A ‘war’ on charters? The last time anyone checked, charters were expanding exponentially and a plan is afoot in to convert up to 50% of schools in the LAUSD into charters by 2023. How is that a ‘war’ on charters? Most people realize the charter industry is making major inroads into the traditional public schools to the point that proponents of that sector are predicting the end of public education as we know it. Interestingly, the online version of this editorial carries the much more neutral title: “Both Traditional and Charters Schools in L.A. Unified Could Learn From This Study.”
“Better yet, the district and charter schools in it could make the confusing landscape of school options easier to navigate by creating a one-stop online shop where parents could find out all about the educational offerings reasonably close to their homes, including the neighborhood schools, magnet and pilot schools and independent charters.”
It is precisely this move that has parents in Boston up in arms, as the mayor is pushing forward the Boston Compact – a Gates product (defective, as so many Microsoft products are). It is a move to one enrollement form for public, charter and parochial schools. Of course, though all public schools must participate, charters can opt out of the process. Why would this be a good move for public schools? It wouldn’t. Or in Oakland, CA, either.
See more: http://publicschoolmama.com/2015/12/08/the-demands-of-phantoms/
For the record, I’m not suggesting for a minute that we should be exploring models like pilots which were an embarrassing compromise by the union to go with the charter flow to try to retain a seat at the table. Parents are looking for something when they choose charters but that does not mean that it’s what charter management organizations are aiming to provide. I think there’s a disconnect there that the school board could help traditional schools fill.
A.J. Duffy opened a charter school after being UTLA president. Wasn’t he the one who easily capitulated on pilot schools (and the Board’s School Choice initiative as well)? Capitol-Pearl is clearly a relief. Well, I’ll say this, that how to perpetually compete with the unrestricted growth of charters, with the charter chains’ huge, billionaire-funded advertising and lobbying campaign, without more strictly regulating charter approvals and renewals, is certainly a riddle. Imitating charters schools cannot be the answer. There just has to be better oversight of charters by the district, the county, and the state.