Karen Quartz wrote a powerful article explaining why Eli Broad’s plan to grab control of half the students in Los Angeles is a huge mistake. Quartz is the director of research at the UCLA Community School, a K-12 university-supported neighborhood public school in Pico Union/Koreatown.
She wrote:
“In September, a proposal from Great Public Schools Now, an initiative led by billionaire Eli Broad, unleashed ferocious debate. Rife with business-speak, it suggested LAUSD could be fixed by attracting edupreneurs to launch 260 new charter schools that would capture 50% of the district’s “market share” by 2023. Within weeks, battle lines were drawn. Rallying anti-charter-school activists, former school board president Jackie Goldberg declared “This is war!” On its website, the teacher’s union posted “Hit the Road, Broad.”
“Another coalition of local foundation leaders then weighed in with its own open letter in November and offered to mediate. Without taking sides, they cautioned that “intended reforms often fall short if they are done to communities rather than with communities.”
“Then, in an abrupt turn, Great Public Schools Now announced in December that it would channel its resources not just into adding more charter schools, but into replicating models of success at traditional schools as well. It released a list of 49 schools that were models of success, 42 of them magnets and charter schools. Both types of schools rely on competitive admissions policies that are based on lotteries or criteria such as giftedness.
“The list’s near-exclusive focus on charters and magnets rather than neighborhood schools sends a powerful message about how these private reformers want Angelenos to think about education — as savvy consumers competing for scarce resources needed to help their children get ahead.
“What does this process of edupreneurship and innovation look like on the ground? Magnets and charters use aggressive recruitment campaigns to draw families with more social capital away from their neighborhood public schools. The most vulnerable children, then, are left behind in quickly emptying buildings, which sit waiting for a Proposition 39 takeover bid, which allows new charter schools to open in the unused classroom space.”
Quartz explains why Broad’s proposal is harmful to the democratic concept of public education.
“My point is not that one method of reform trumps all others. Rather, it’s that to ensure high-quality schools for all children requires recognizing that public education is both an individual good that helps people get ahead — “the great equalizer,” as Horace Mann put it in 1848 — and a collective good that defines how we together determine our shared fate.
“Edupreneurship is designed to unleash creative energy into conservative school systems and disrupt longstanding patterns of underachievement. But if that comes at the expense of our common good, it threatens the very foundation of public schooling.”
Of course, there is no guarantee that the edupreneuers will succeed. Based on their spotty record, they are likely to fail and move on, leaving communities in shambles. For the Broad team, the little people are pawns on their chess board.

“Edupreneurship is designed to unleash creative energy into conservative school systems and disrupt longstanding patterns of underachievement.”
Well, not really. It’s a sales line that sounds good, but really edupreneurship is designed to suck money out of the public coffers. Nothing really creative has emerged from edupreneurship.
LikeLike
Right on!
LikeLike
One of the points glossed over in these “business-based” approaches to education is that many of them are just impractical. A small farming community, out in the hinterlands, is not going to have multiple schools for any level, let alone magnet schools and charter schools. Even in suburban areas, there is usually only one high school one’s children can walk, or bus to. It is not as if a school 100 miles away is an option for most families. So, most of the “choice” agenda is a false hope. If, perchance there are 4-5 middle schools or primary schools close by, one does indeed have a choice, then the question becomes “how the heck can I tell the good ones from the poor ones?”
The current “charter school movement” is using modern advertising tools (slick adverts, deceptive marketing statistics, appeals to prejudices, etc.) to help parents select their school. But there is not some standard ranking system by which schools are measured and judged. So, how is one supposed to choose? Is it like buying a car: buy one and hope for the best? At least when buying a car there is Consumer’s Digest and other car reviewing agencies that can supply some reliable data. Not anything equivalent when it comes to “school choice.”
It is also interesting that the “free market economists” state that their models are based upon consumers being perfectly knowledgeable about the goods being purchased and that the markets are perfect, that is free of distortion … such as advertising. These people want it both ways; they want to be free of market-distorting government regulation but they don’t want the consumers to have any more information than they themselves provide.
LikeLike
Steve says:
But there is not some standard ranking system by which schools are measured and judged.
Almost every community has one or more ways of ranking public and private schools in terms of “desirability.” Real estate agents are playing a major role is using demographic and state-wide reports on school performance, especially for shoppers who are looking for a “the right” neighborhood.
In Cincinnati, the school board now has a budget for advertising, including direct mail. I recently received a full color, one page, double sided, glossy overview of the district, information of use but not with ratings.
For shoppers who have the savvy to use the internet, the charter industry has well-developed strategies for marketing “choice” through ratings of schools. The most comprehenseive and targeted to resemble a version of consumer reports( while gathering data of use in marketing schools) is “GreatSchools.”The following is from the website: Begin quote:
What is the purpose of GreatSchools? To improve K-12 education by inspiring parents to get involved.
When was GreatSchools founded? Bill Jackson, a former teacher, founded GreatSchools in 1998 to catalyze parent involvement — a force that he believed was vital to the process of achieving excellence in education.
Where does GreatSchools get its funding? GreatSchools receives generous support from leading foundations that share our goal of empowering parents to support their children’s education, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Robertson Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation. GreatSchools also generates funding through our advertising and content licensing programs.
Can GreatSchools help my family if we move? We sure can. You can look up the best schools in the area you are moving to by ZIP code, school district or city name.
Why should I join GreatSchools? While all visitors can access school data, expert advice, articles, and our community content, we invite users to register with us so they can publish, post, and connect with members of our online parent community. This makes for a truly interactive and rewarding experience.
Join GreatSchools and become a parent ambassador to represent your children’s schools on the GreatSchools Web site for the benefit of other interested parents.
How can I join GreatSchools? Registration is easy – and free. When you register, you have the chance to tell GreatSchools a bit about you and your family, which in turn helps us put you in touch with resources that can help you navigate your child’s education.
Find the Right School Using GreatSchools Data
School Data – Public & Charter schools, Private Schools, Preschools
GreatSchools Ratings
Official School Profiles
City and District Data
School and District Boundary Map
The new and improved GreatSchools
Parent Survey Information
Comparing Schools
My School List
What types of schools does GreatSchools.org provide profiles for? GreatSchools.org profiles more than 90,000 public elementary, middle and high schools in the United States. Charter schools, magnet schools, year-round schools, and some continuation and alternative schools are included as well. In addition, GreatSchools.org includes basic information on more than 30,000 private schools. This information is limited because private schools are not required to give tests or report results.
Exactly what does a school profile include?
Public school profiles in every state include most or all of the following information:
Phone number, address, district name, location map
Grade levels served, school type, enrollment
Detailed academic performance data, including state-mandated standardized test results
Student-teacher ratio, student ethnicity breakdown and other important statistics about teachers and students.
Clear explanations for all data presented
GreatSchools Ratings
In addition, all schools have the option of “upgrading”–at no cost–to an Official School Profile, which allows school principals and administrators to add information about curriculum, programs, activities, and photos.
Where does GreatSchools get its data? Public school test scores for most states come from the state Department of Education. School contact information and teacher/student statistics are obtained from both the state Department of Education and the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). End quote
Source: https://www.greatschools.org/about/gsFaq.page
LikeLike
Well, Laura, I hope that GreatSchools, the Gates Foundation, and the Walton Family Foundation are paying you enough to make it worth your while to flog their sh!t.
LikeLike
Thanks, Steve. Great comment.
LikeLike
Steve,
I believe that you might be wanting to refer to Consumers Reports, a non-profit science driven organization and not Consumers Digest.
For an explanation of the differences in organizations and how they work see: http://www.snewsnet.com/news/consumer-reports-consumer-guide-and-consumers-digest-magazine-differences-explained/
LikeLike
It needs to be stated over and over again, until it gets through people’s heads, that education is not a consumer product that can be bought. The whole “business” approach to education is based on that false paradigm. Education as consumer product will continue to lead people astray if not countered.
LikeLike
You’re right, Scott. I just hope that we can all get it through people’s heads. When Broad’s initiative talked about “market share,” that pretty much said it all. Education is not a “consumer product,” and should never be seen as such.
LikeLike
It seems as though Broad is not only trying to be an edupreneur, but also a social engineer. With all of these choice options for capable students, what are the prospects for the students deemed “unworthy?” Trying to rank students for the purpose of limiting access to educational opportunities is highly undemocratic. Not only can students run the risk of being misidentified, but some late bloomers may never have the opportunity to bloom if they are tracked into an environment of limited educational value.
By the way, the public magnet schools out performed the charters in Los Angeles. That is to be expected when a school is highly selective, but this does not imply they have better instruction than other students. By selecting the best and brightest, schools can get amazing results. This is hardly shocking news. To assume that all students can achieve at those levels is a false assumption. http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2016/01/ca-magnet-schools-outperform-charter.html
LikeLike
If they had sold this as privatizing schools, we could have had a genuine national debate on whether we wanted to do that.
Since they chose to instead sell it as “improving public schools” they stifled any real debate on whether privatizing US public schools is a good idea.
I resent that. I don’t blame the billionaires either- they’re accountable to no one. I blame the people we elect who decided it was easier and safer (for them) not to have that debate.
LikeLike
Chiara: yes, they try to stifle a genuine, wideranging, open-ended public discussion.
But when the pushers and beneficiaries of self-styled “education reform” are talking to each other—
From today’s LATIMES, 1-26-2016. A piece entitled “He brokered deals for an empire of California charter schools — and now faces a felony charge.” The person in question is Steve Van Zant. More context is necessary to understand the exchange between Van Zant and Tom Pellegrino (please click on the link provided below) but note the tenor of such insider conversations:
[start]
Van Zant advised Alpine on authorizing Endeavour (originally called Albert Einstein), according to emails between Van Zant, an EdHive employee and then-Alpine Superintendent Tom Pellegrino.
On May 9, 2013, Van Zant responded in an email to a question from Pellegrino about who must be notified about the Endeavour charter: “It’s independent study. They are not locating a school. You don’t need to send them anything because they are not site based…,” Van Zant wrote using his Mountain Empire email account.
In an email exchange — with the subject “charter thoughts” — from Feb. 18, 2001, Van Zant advises Pellegrino about how new independent study charters should pay Alpine in fees. “The district eats first. So you take 7% (That’s the cut we take from ours).” It’s unclear from the email exchange how the fees would be justified. He also offered mathematical calculations that considered charter grants, labor costs and leases.
Pellegrino thanked Van Zant for his help and detailed calculations. “You are a charter God. Like Matt Damon in ‘Good Will Hunting,’ ” he replied.
Pellegrino resigned in 2014 and moved his family to Costa Rica.
[end]
Link: http://www.latimes.com/local/education/charter-schools/la-me-edu-he-built-an-empire-charter-schools-faces-felony-charge-20160125-story.html
“You are a charter God.”
🙄
Any further comment by me would be superfluous.
😎
LikeLike
Sadly, Broad’s attempt to undermine the LA public schools is but the extreme culmination of a bi-partisan embrace of competition as the driving force of education improvement. Haven’t we done enough? Must we have winners and losers even in education?
See: http://www.arthurcamins.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Havent-We-Done-Enough.pdf
LikeLike
Thanks, Diane.
TRUE. I am just so tired of this lunacy re: $$$$$ and profits, and total control. Pretty soon we will have a nation of Trumpets.
LikeLike
“. . . often fall short if they are done to . . . ”
Kind of like making love. It’s never as good if it is done “to” one’s partner rather than done “with” one’s partner.
LikeLike
Underneath it all is the belief that “the profit motive” is optimal, if not necessary, for human prosperity.
My intuition, personal experience, and reading of history and social science tells me that this is not the truth.
Must we continue to debunk this claim, which is perpetuated almost exclusively by those in power?
Capitalism may not be a disease itself, but it is the perfect set of conditions for disease…
LikeLike
I’m afraid we’ll have to continue debunking the myth of the privatizers. The profit motive has no place in education. The only motive should be educating our children–clear and simple–and you can’t do that with cuts for profit. It doesn’t work. Never has, never will. Just looks at the big boxes that sell us all the junk we buy–worthless. That’s why we need a strong public education system for all–never perfect, but always the goal–well-trained passionate teachers, fair wages and benefits for teachers, fair salaries for administrators (not excessive), excellent text books and other materials, and an all-encompassing diverse curriculum (without rewritten history and civics). Without these things, there is no education, only propaganda by the corporatists and ideologues.
LikeLike
Kids aren’t consumers, and I think most so-called reformers would agree.
They think of the parents as consumers; the kids, in the immortal words of Michelle Rhee, are assets.
LikeLike