Archives for the month of: March, 2016
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Cleveland: Charter School Teachers Form a Union

By dianeravitch
March 16, 2016 //
5

One of the main reasons that billionaires like the Waltons fund charters is to cripple the teachers’ unions. Ninety percent of charter schools are non-union. The teachers are often unlicensed and lack certification. A large number are Teach for America and have no intention of making teaching their career. Charter teachers serve at-will and may be fired for any reason.

 

The American Federation of Teachers announced that charter teachers in Cleveland have joined their union.

 
Educators Win Historic Union Charter School Organizing Victory in Cleveland

 

Teachers and Support Staff at University of Cleveland Preparatory School Join the Ohio Federation of Teachers and the American Federation of Teachers to Address High Turnover and Improve Education for Their Students

 

CLEVELAND—In a historic first for Cleveland, teachers and support staff at University of Cleveland Preparatory School voted overwhelmingly today to join the Ohio Federation of Teachers and the American Federation of Teachers, hoping to improve conditions for students and teachers. UCP is part of the network of charter schools operated by Cleveland-based I CAN SCHOOLS.

 

The successful vote represents the first union charter school organizing victory in Cleveland, adding to a growing national movement of charter school educators demanding a voice for their profession.

 

Educators across the I CAN SCHOOLS chain are organizing to form a union to challenge the conditions that lead to high teacher turnover. Teachers and support staff say lack of job security has a chilling effect on raising concerns or suggestions to better support students’ individual needs. Teachers have had no voice in professional development or their evaluation process.

 

Today’s win was hard-earned. In 2014, in response to teachers’ organizing efforts, I CAN SCHOOLS undertook a brazen anti-educator campaign. Seven teachers who were instrumental in union organizing were fired as punishment.

 

In spite of this, teachers did not back down. They continued their organizing efforts and remained committed to a shared vision of real partnership among families, the administration and teachers; transparency in school policy, procedures and decision-making; a strong voice for educators to promote student achievement; reasonable expectations and workload; adequate staffing; protected planning time; educational support; and accountability. Families of I CAN students joined the effort by issuing an open letter to the administration demanding turnover be addressed, demanding meetings with members of the administration and circulating an online petition to support teachers.

 

“This takes us one giant step closer to our goal of a contract for educators and support staff that improves school accountability, respects our professionalism and gives us a strong voice to advocate for students,” said Abi Haren, a second-grade assistant teacher at UCP.

 

Haren was among the fired I CAN teachers. All seven were reinstated with full back pay after the National Labor Relations Board found I CAN had violated their rights by wrongfully terminating them based on their union activity. In total, 17 unfair labor practice charges were filed against I CAN SCHOOLS in 2014. Currently the National Labor Relations Board is investigating additional unfair labor practice charges involving illegal surveillance and retaliation against pro-union teachers at UCP and Northeast Ohio College Preparatory School.

 

“These hardworking educators deserve a seat at the table, and the students and families served by UCP deserve teachers and staff who are empowered to deliver the best education possible—that’s what forming a union is all about. We’re proud to welcome our new union sisters and brothers at UCP,” said Cleveland Teachers Union President David Quolke, who is an AFT vice president. “Those closest to the education process must have a voice in education policy and practice.”

 

“We welcome the teachers and support staff of UCP into our union. We know we share many common challenges and a common vision of professionalism and high-quality, student-centered education,” said Ohio Federation of Teachers President Melissa Cropper, also an AFT vice president.

 

“This vote to have a voice through a union is a historic move for the charter educators in Cleveland. There is now a growing movement of teachers at charter schools across the country who are committed to raising their voices so they can better advocate for the students they serve,” said American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten.

 

“I CAN teachers and staff have overcome serious anti-union tactics, and they have stuck together and united with I CAN families to speak out for their students. They want the same things all educators want: a voice in decisions that affect their students, fair evaluations that help them grow professionally, due process protections, and transparency and accountability from their employers.”

Categories Education Reform, Ohio, Support for public schools, Unions

Georgia: A Win for Common Sense

By dianeravitch
March 16, 2016 //
0

The state legislature in Georgia is nearing the passage of legislation that would reduce the number of mandated tests and reduce the role of tests in teacher evaluations.

 

Legislators are responding to complaints about the sheer quantity of tests. They also recognize that the state’s test-based evaluation has caused high attition, especially among new teachers.

 

Not everyone was pleased with the reduction in testing pressure:

 

“Some still oppose the rollback in Georgia, including the group StudentsFirst, which pushes for better public schools and more alternatives to them. At a hearing in the House last week, Georgia director Michael O’Sullivan said research supports the use of test results in a third to a half of teacher job reviews, and Ryan Mahoney, regional director of the Foundation for Excellence in Education, a group founded by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, said students need to get used to taking tests since they’ll be taking them to get a driver’s license, to gain admission to college and to get a job. “Tests are a part of life,” he said.”

 

 

Unfortunately, the same proposal adds tests for children in first and second grades, “to be sure they are on track.” On track for what? For taking standardized tests in third grade. Can’t trust their teacher’s judgment. Tests know best.

Categories Education Reform, Georgia, Standardized Testing

Kamenetz v. Skeels: Are Charter Schools “Public” or “Private”?

By dianeravitch
March 16, 2016 //
42

Senator Sanders said in Ohio that he supports “public charter schools” and opposes “private charter schools.”
His statement left many people wondering what he meant. All charters claim to be “public,” because they get public money. Even for-profits call themselves “public,” as do corporate charter chains, like KIPP and Success Academy.

 

Anya Kamenetz reported at NPR about Bernie Sanders’ statement during the Ohio Town Hall.

 

Kamenetz writes:

 

Here’s the contradiction: Charter schools are all public. And, each has some element of private control….

 

Charter schools, by definition, are publicly funded schools, free to students and paid for by taxpayers. They are also subject to public oversight and control; for example, they have to employ licensed teachers and administer state-mandated tests, which private schools do not. They can also be closed by districts for underperformance.

 

However, also by definition, charter schools maintain a measure of independence from public oversight. They have freedom from certain district and union rules; for example, they can have a longer school year or school day, require uniforms, or incorporate different topics in the curriculum. They are also governed by privately appointed boards.

 

This is not entirely accurate. Some states, like North Carolina, do not require charter schools to employ only licensed teachers. And while it is true that charters may be closed for underperformance, most are controlled by their authorizers, not by their district; in some states, the governor appoints a commission to authorize charters that can overrule the local district (this is an ALEC model statute). In many states, charters completely avoid accountability of any kind by making political contributions to legislators and the governor (see, Ohio and Florida).
Robert Skeels, a teacher who is earning a law degree, disagrees with Kamenetz:

 

 

He writes:

Addressing Anya Kamenetz’s confusion on charter schools

Journalist Anya Kamenetz provides the charter school industry’s public relations definition of “public” in her NPR piece on Senator Sanders and charter schools. ( http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/03/15/470376273/bernie-sanders-says-he-opposes-private-charter-schools-what-does-that-mean ) As a Juris Doctor candidate whose specialty is education law in the era of neoliberalism, allow me to present the legal arguments both on why Kamenetz’s definition is incorrect, and on how privately managed charters are not at all “public.”

Generally charter schools are not public schools. This has been long established by both existing case law and public policy. The Washington State Supreme Court (2015) held that charter schools are not “common schools” because they are governed by appointed rather than elected boards. The 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals (2010) ruled that charter schools are not “public actors.” The California Court of Appeals (2007) ruled that charter schools are not “public agents.” Additionally, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) joined scores of other government agencies in unequivocally determining that charters are, in NLRB’s words, “private entities.”

By definition if a charter school is operated by a for-profit company, or by a 501c3 non-profit corporation (e.g. Harlem Success Academy), then it is not a public school. The United States Census Bureau frames this latter issue best:

> “A few “public charter schools” are run by public universities and municipalities. However, most charter schools are run by private nonprofit organizations and are therefore classified as private.” (US Census Bureau. (2011). “Public Education Finances: 2009 (GO9-ASPEF)”. Washington, DC: US Government Printing O ce. Print. vi).
Because these lucrative charter schools are not public, and therefore not subject to even a modicum of public oversight, they are able violate the constitutional rights of their students. The decision in Scott B. v. Board of Trustees of Orange County High School of the Arts saw scholar Rosa K. Hirji, Esq. write:

> “The structures that allow charter schools to exist are marked by the absence of protections that are traditionally guaranteed by public education, protections that only become apparent and necessary when families and students begin to face a denial of what they were initially promised to be their right.” (American Bar Association https://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/childrights/content/articles/winter2014-0114-charter-schools-upholding-student-rights.html )

===

Robert D. Skeels is a Los Angeles based social justice writer, public education advocate, and immigrant rights activist. He holds a BA in Classical Civilization from the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), and is currently a Juris Doctor Candidate at Peoples College of Law (PCL).

I hope both Sanders and Clinton give a speech soon on K-12 education and explains their views.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categories Charter Schools

John Thompson: The Utter Failure of Standardized Teacher Evaluation

By dianeravitch
March 16, 2016 //
14

John Thompson, teacher and historian, writes here about one of the most controversial education issues of our time: mandated systems of test-based teacher evaluation. This was a central aspect of Race to the Top, and it was hated by large numbers of teachers.
Thompson writes:

“The obituaries for the idea that value-added teacher evaluations can improve teaching and learning are pouring in. The most important of those studies, probably, are those that are conducted by well-known proponents of data-driven accountability for individuals.

 

“Before summarizing the meager, possible benefits and the huge potential downsides of value-added evaluations, let’s recall that these incredibly expensive systems were promoted as a way to improve student outcomes by .50 standard deviations (sd) by removing the bottom-ranked teachers! In Washington D.C., for instance, a $65 million grant which kicked off the controversial IMPACT system was supposed to raise test scores by 10% per year! Of course, that raises the question of why pro-IMPACT scholars don’t mention its $140 million budget for just the first five years.

 

As reported by Education Week’s Holly Yettick, a study funded by the Gates Foundation and authored by Morgan Polikoff and Andrew Porter “found no association between value-added results and other widely accepted measures of teaching quality.” Polikoff and Porter applied the Gates Measures of Teaching Quality (MET) methodology to a sample of students in the Gates experiment, and found, “Nor did the study find associations between ‘multiple measure’ ratings, which combine value-added measures with observations and other factors.”

 

“Polikoff, a vocal advocate for corporate reform, acknowledged, “the study’s findings could represent something like the worst-case scenario for the correlation between value-added scores and other measures of instructional quality. … ‘In some places, [value-added measures] and observational scores will be correlated, and in some places they won’t.’”

 

“Before moving on to another study by pro-VAM scholars which calls such a system into question, we should note other studies reviewed by Yettick that help explain why the value-added evaluation experiment was so wrong-headed. Yettick cites two studies in the American Educational Research Journal. First, Noelle A. Paufler and Audrey Amrein-Beardsley which concludes, “elementary school students are not randomly distributed into classrooms. That finding is significant because random distribution of students is a technical assumption underlying some value-added models.” In the second AERJ article, Douglas Harris concludes, “Overall, however, the principals’ ratings and the value-added ratings were only weakly correlated.”

 

“Moreover, Yettick reports that “Brigham Young University researchers, led by assistant professor Scott Condie, drew on reading and math scores from more than 1.3 million students who were 4th and 5th graders in North Carolina schools between 1998 and 2004” and they “found that between 15 percent and 25 percent of teachers were misranked by typical value-added assessments.”

 

“Finally Marianne P. Bitler and her colleagues made a hilarious presentation to The Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness that “teachers’ one-year ‘effects’ on student height were nearly as large as their effects on reading and math. While they found that the reading and math results were more consistent from one year to the next than the height outcomes, they advised caution on using value-added measures to quantify teachers’ impact.”

 

“Bitler’s study should produce belly laughs as she makes the point, “Taken together, our results provide a cautionary tale for the interpretation and use of teacher VAM estimates in practice.” Watching other advocates for test-driven accountability twisting themselves into pretzels in order to avoid confronting the facts about Washington D.C.’s IMPACT should at least prompt grins.

 

“Getting back to the way that pro-VAM researchers are now documenting its flaws, Melinda Adnot, Thomas Dee, Veronica Katz, and James Wyckoff spin their NBER paper as if it doesn’t argue against D.C.’s IMPACT evaluation system. Despite the prepublication public relations effort to soften the blow, their “Teacher Turnover, Teacher Quality, and Student Achievement” admits that the benefits of the teacher turnover incentivized by IMPACT are less than “significant.”

 

“The key results are revealed on page 18 and afterwards. Adnot et.al conclude, “We find that the overall effect of teacher turnover in DCPS conservatively had no effect on achievement.” But they add that “under reasonable assumptions,” it might have increased achievement. (As will be addressed later, I doubt many teachers would accept the assumptions that have to be made in order to claim that IMPACT improved student achievement as reasonable.)

 

 

“The paper’s abstract and opening (most read) pages twist the findings before admitting “To be clear, this paper should not be viewed as an evaluation of IMPACT.” It then characterizes the study as making “an important contribution by examining the effects of teacher turnover under a unique policy regime.”

 

“In fact, the paper notes, “IMPACT targets the exit of low-performing teachers,” and “virtually all lowperforming teacher turnover [prompted by it] is concentrated in high-poverty schools.” That, of course, suggests that an exited teacher with a low value-added might actually be ineffective, or that the teacher was punished for a value-added that might be an inaccurate estimate caused by circumstances beyond his or her control.

 

“Their estimates show that exiting those low value-added teachers improves student achievement in high-poverty schools by .20 sd in math, and that the resulting exit of 46% of low-performing teachers “creates substantial opportunity to improve achievement in the classrooms of low-performing teachers.” The bottom line, however, is: “We estimate that the overall effect of turnover on student achievement in high-poverty schools is 0.084 and 0.052 in reading.” Both estimates may be “statistically distinguishable from zero” but they would only be “significant at the 10 percent level.”

 

“So, why were the total gains so negligible?

 

“The NBER study concludes that IMPACT contributed to the increase in the attrition rate of Highly Effective teachers to 14%. It admits that some high-performing teachers find IMPACT to be “demotivating or stressful” and that the loss of top teachers hurts student performance. It acknowledges, “This negative effect reflects the difficulty of replacing a high-performing teacher.”

 

“The study doesn’t address the biggest elephant in the room – the effect of value-added evaluations on instructional effectiveness on the vast majority of D.C teachers. If high-performing teachers leave because of the “stress and uncertainty of these working conditions,” wouldn’t other teachers be “dissatisfied with IMPACT and the human capital strategies in DCPS writ large?” If the attrition rate of the top teachers in higher-poverty schools increases to 40% more than their counterparts in lower-poverty schools, does that indicate that the harm done by the evaluations is also greater in high-challenge schools? And, the NBER paper finds that “teachers exiting at the end of our study window were noticeably more effective than those exiting after IMPACT’s first year.” Shouldn’t that prompt an investigation as to whether the stress of IMPACT is wearing teachers down?

 

“Adnot, Dee, Katz, and Wyckoff thus continue the tradition of reformers showcasing small gains linked to value-added evaluations and IMPACT-style systems, but brushing aside the harm. On the other hand, they admit that IMPACT had advantages that similar regimes don’t have in many other districts. D.C. had the money to recruit outsiders, and 55% of replacement teachers came from outside of the district. Few other districts have the ability to dispose of teachers as if we are tissue paper.

 

“Even with all of those advantages provided by corporate reformers in D.C. and other districts with the Gates-funded “teacher quality” roll of the dice, an incredible amount of stress has been dumped on educators as they and students became lab rats in an expensive and risky experiment. The reformers’ most unreasonable assumption was that these evaluations would not promote teach-to-the-test instructional malpractice. They further assume that the imposition of a accountability system that is biased against high-challenged schools will not drive too much teaching talent out of the inner city. They never seem to ask whether they would tackle the additional challenges of teaching in a low-performing school when there is a 15 to 25% chance PER YEAR of being misevaluated.

 

“Now that these hurried, top-down mandates are being retrospectively studied, even pro-VAM scholars have found minimal or no benefits, offset by some obvious downsides. I wonder if they will try to tackle the real research question, try to evaluate IMPACT and similar regimes, and thus address the biggest danger they pose. In an effort to exit the bottom 5% or so of teachers, did the test and punish crowd undermine the effectiveness of the vast majority of educators?”

Categories Education Reform, Failure, Race to the Top, Teacher Evaluations, VAM (value-added modeling)

New York: Opt Out Leaders Stunned by King’s Approval

By dianeravitch
March 16, 2016 //
25

To say the least, John King had a rocky tenure as Commissioner of Education in New York. He managed to alienate parents with his abrasive, top-down style and his unwavering commitment to the Common Core.

 

Reporter Jaime Franchise spoke with leaders of the Opt Out movement, and all expressed astonishment that he was nominated and confirmed for the post as Secretary of Education in light of his performance in New York.

 

“Jeanette Deutermann, a Long Island parent, founder of the Long Island Opt-Out Info Facebook page, and co-founder of nonprofit New York State Allies for Public Education, blasted King’s ascension Tuesday via her popular Facebook page.

 

“It is inconceivable that a man synonymous with failed education policies could be promoted to the highest education post in our nation,” she slams. “The incompetence of John King as New York’s SED Commissioner was epic, and New York will be cleaning up the mess he made for years to come. The silver lining may be the igniting of an education uprising across the country the way his leadership, or lack thereof, ignited New York.”

 

“That “ignition’ is the robust, pro-public education and anti-Common Core movement that sparked parents, educators, and students to organize, protest, and take action against the education reforms they believed were undermining public education.

 

“Michael Hynes, superintendent of Patchogue-Medford schools, finds the idea of King as U.S. Secretary of Education “beyond appalling.”

 

“It’s really scary to think that that gentleman, and I’m being kind by saying that, has the potential to reframe or to move forward with what Arnie Duncan has started,” he told the Press in January. “This is a guy who is pro-charter, his kids go to Montessori school. I really believe he doesn’t know anything about public education. And now potentially will set policy nationwide.”

 

 

 

 

Categories Common Core, Corporate Reform, Education Reform, John King, New York, Standardized Testing

A Washington State Legislator Joins the Honor Roll

By dianeravitch
March 16, 2016 //
6

The Washington State legislature is bending itself into pretzels to protect the 1,000 students who attend privately managed charter schools. Meanwhile, the legislature has failed to attend to the court-mandated full funding of the public schools attended by more than 1 million students.

 

Why do 1,000 students matter more than 1 million students? What kind of future will Washington State have if it protects 1,000 students and ignores the needs of 1 million students? Which billionaire or billionaires hired the 22 lobbyists who worked the Democrats who control the House in the legislature?

 

Representative Mike Sells of Washington State responded to this post about the Democrats who betrayed public schools; he describes what has happened in the state legislature in the following comment. For supporting the 1 million students in Washington State who attend public schools, I add Mike Sells to this blog’s honor roll:

 

 

What is not mentioned here, is the proponents literally disappearing when it comes to full funding for the public schools. Despite their protestation during the regular session that they believed that the funding should take place, they are nowhere to be found or even commenting much on blogs other than bragging about their coup. The 22 highly paid lobbyists brought in cleared the halls the day after the vote and are nowhere to be seen on the funding of public schools issue.

 

The bragging by proponents of spending on two six figure ad buys has not translated over to helping the public schools. You know big money was being spent when Strategies 360 lobbyists were outside the door plunking for a vote along with the usual ‘astroturf’ groups.

 

A number of us raised amendments on the charter school bill that were turned down. Rep. Drew Hansen suggested temporary funding for the current 8 [charters] until we could figure out the funding issues. That was a no. I proposed that charter schools use the same Teacher/Principal Evaluation Programs that we passed in 2010 for the public schools, if we believed in the importance of teacher quality. (You can find roll calls on many of these amendments) That was a no. Suggestions to make the governance more transparent and open were also turned down, which I believe will only add to the unconstitutionality of the new bill.

 

Only those that had pre-acceptance by charter school proponents seemed to make it through out of the 27 amendments on the House floor. Even proposing that charter school board members file public disclosure forms like other appointed public officials do was at first opposed on the House floor, but actually made it through, when opponents realized that appointed Board members in this state do file them already in other areas. We are now in special session with the supplemental budget, and it has been complicated by the millions slated for charter schools. No more funding is pointed toward settling the court ordered funding for the public schools, and we are facing possible cuts due to a so-called levy cliff.

 
Rep. Mike Sells, 38th Legislative District

Categories Billionaires, Charter Schools, Education Reform, Honor Roll, Washington State

Jeff Bryant: Why Schools Should Not Operate Like Walmart

By dianeravitch
March 16, 2016 //
13

This is a must-read article. Share it with your friends who don’t understand the corporate assault on American public schools.

 

Jeff Bryant writes here about the Walton family’s effort to impose the Walmart business philosophy on public education. I have called it the Walmartization  of public education. The he family collectively is worth about $150 billion.

 

When Walmart enters a community, the local businesses can’t compete with its low prices and vast inventory. The local businesses close down. Main Streets across America are filled with empty stores and a dying commercial core, thanks to Walmart’s cutthroat competition. Walmart doesn’t care about community. It has only one purpose: profits for Walmart.

 

Central to to its business philosophy is cost-cutting. It wants the lowest-paid employees. It wants the lowest price products, so it buys wherever labor costs are lowest. I would be surprised if anything sold by Walmart is American-made.

 

To to achieve its goal of low prices and high profits, Walmart is anti-union.

 

When Walmart recently announced that it was closing more than 150 stores, many people lost their jobs, and many communities awoke to realize they had no grocery store, no hardware store, no toy store, no shoe store, no drug store. Walmart had killed them all.

 

The Waltons are doing to education what they have done in business: killing off beloved community schools and replacing them with privately managed charter schools that have no roots in the community. These schools are almost always non-union. They are staffed by Teach for America recruits, who will be gone in two or three years.

 

Instead of local community schools staffed by career teachers whose parents and grandparents lived in the community, the new charters are transient, filled with transient teachers and administrators. If they don’t enroll enough students or if they see a better market niche elsewhere or if their scores are disappointing, they will close and move on, leaving a shattered community behind.

 

As I write this, I suddenly remembered my third-grade teacher in Houston, Miss Doty. Years later, I read that she became principal of an elementary school. A deranged father entered the school grounds while the children were at recess. She rushed out, shooed the children inside, and stood between him and the school entrance. He set off a homemade bomb, killed himself, and Ms. Doty lost a leg.

 

Nothing transient about Ms. Dory or her school. Now Houston is awash in charter schools. They siphon money away from public schools, as well as the motivated parents and children. One of the purposes of public education–building community–is sacrificed to the market.

 

Walmart represents the predatory face of capitalism. As Bryant asks, why should a handful of billionaires reshape public education?

 

 

Categories Billionaires, Charter Schools

Jeb Bush’s Group Congratulates John King

By dianeravitch
March 15, 2016 //
15

This says it all.

 

Patricia Levesque of the Foundation for Educational Excellence (created by Jeb Bush to promote charters, vouchers, the Common Core, entrepreneurship, and digital learning) issued the following statement:

 

Statement by Patricia Levesque on U.S. Secretary John King

 

Tallahassee, Fla. – Today, Patricia Levesque, CEO of the Foundation for Excellence in Education (ExcelinEd), released the following statement congratulating Secretary John King on being confirmed as the U.S. Secretary of Education.

 

“Throughout his career – from teaching to leading the New York State Education Department – Secretary John King has shown a tireless commitment to improving student learning through rigorous accountability and high quality educational options. Our nation’s students are fortunate to have him at the helm of the U.S. Department of Education at this crucial time. ExcelinEd looks forward to working with Secretary King and our many state partners to ensure implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) maintains a commitment to accountability for the success of all students while also creating opportunities for state innovation.”

Categories Education Reform

Charles Pierce Wants Rahm Emanuel to Get a Pie in the Face

By dianeravitch
March 15, 2016 //
6

Charles Pierce writes a blog for Esquire. I think he is a fabulous writer. I enjoy his directness and insight. I remember when he let Boston Mayor Marty Walsh have it between the eyes for promising to support public schools while making a secret deal with the billionaires to privatize as many as a quarter of the city’s public schools. Pierce said Walsh was pulling a “full Scott Walker.”

 

Now his target is Rahm Emanuel. Pierce commends Bernie Sanders for throwing a rhetorical pie in Rahm’s face. Pierce knows that Rahm has been a disaster for public education in Chicago, a guy who believes that the way to fix education is to close down public schools and open charters to please his pals in high finance.

 

Pierce says that Bernie’s sharp repudiation of Rahm puts Hillary Clinton into a jam. What will she do? Thus far, she has avoided being photographed with him. How long can she manage that? (I am sorry but I was reminded of the famous and very sexist scene in “Public Enemy” when James Cagney shoves a grapefruit into Mae Clarke’s face, and I imagined Hillary doing that to Rahm. But I decided that was a very rude thing to suggest, and I am trying to maintain the spirit of civility. So forget I ever suggested it.)

 

Categories Education Reform

How Donald Trump Lives: A King in His Castle

By dianeravitch
March 15, 2016 //
22

This is one of the paradoxes of this election. Donald Trump has turned himself into a hero of working-class Americans, appealing to nativist sentiments and to those who have lost their jobs. But people like them will never see the inside of the place that The Donald calls home in Florida.

 

The New York Times has an article today describing the baronial mansion where Donald lives when he is not in his penthouse on Fifth Avenue in New York City. The article quotes the butler, who has worked in the house for many decades.

 

“You can always tell when the king is here,” Mr. Trump’s longtime butler here, Anthony Senecal, said of the master of the house and Republican presidential candidate.

 

The king was returning that day to his Versailles, a 118-room snowbird’s paradise that will become a winter White House if he is elected president. Mar-a-Lago is where Mr. Trump comes to escape, entertain and luxuriate in a Mediterranean-style manse, built 90 years ago by the cereal heiress Marjorie Merriweather Post.

 
Few people here can anticipate Mr. Trump’s demands and desires better than Mr. Senecal, 74, who has worked at the property for nearly 60 years, and for Mr. Trump for nearly 30 of them.

 

He understands Mr. Trump’s sleeping patterns and how he likes his steak (“It would rock on the plate, it was so well done”), and how Mr. Trump insists — despite the hair salon on the premises — on doing his own hair.

 

Mr. Senecal knows how to stroke his ego and lift his spirits, like the time years ago he received an urgent warning from Mr. Trump’s soon-to-land plane that the mogul was in a sour mood. Mr. Senecal quickly hired a bugler to play “Hail to the Chief” as Mr. Trump stepped out of his limousine to enter Mar-a-Lago.

 

 

Mar-a-Lago seems to have prepared Trump well for the pomp and circumstance at the White House. Actually, the White House may seem small compared to Mar-a-Lago. Let’s hope he stays in Palm Beach.

Categories Education Reform
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »