Sean Combs, the famous rapper, is sponsoring a new charter school in Harlem that will open this fall. It will be dedicated to the theme of social justice, a worthy goal that is missing from many lives today.
If making money and becoming a celebrity is your definition of success, then Sean Combs is a huge success.
But he apparently has a serious anger management problem.
Last June, he exploded at a UCLA coach of his son’s football team, swung a weight at him, and was arrested on a felony charge. Being rich and famous, he got a super lawyer, the charge was reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor, Combs was released on $160,000 bail and the charges were eventually dropped.
Diddy said the coach had yelled at his son during practice and was riding him. Apparently the coach didn’t know who the young man is or how important his father is.
The New York Daily News reported:
“Hot-headed rap mogul P. Diddy was arrested Monday after being accused of attacking his son’s college football coach in Los Angeles with a kettlebell weight.
“The 45-year-old Diddy came unhinged after he angrily confronted the UCLA assistant coach for screaming at his son, Justin, who plays defensive back from the Bruins team, according to TMZ.com.
“Diddy, whose real name is Sean Combs, was arrested about 12:30 p.m. by UCLA campus cops after the violent encounter at the school’s Acosta Athletic Training Complex.
“He was charged with felony assault with a deadly weapon, the kettlebell weight.
“Combs exploded at assistant coach Sal Alosi after he confronted him about riding his son during an on-field strength and conditioning session, sources told the gossip website.”
What can be learned from this encounter? What are the social justice lessons?
A father must always stand up for his son?
If you are rich enough, you can escape the consequences of your actions?
There is one law for the rich, another for the poor, so get rich?
What is the teachable lesson here?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
So, I guess this anger issue disqualifies him from any form of philanthropy? Or, would it be OK to donate to NAPE? UFTA?
Certainly Combs should contribute money to philanthropy. He should support the kids in Los Angeles, for example, who have no teachers of the arts.
Shameful behavior. Responsible, emotionally mature parents and teachers work hard to teach their children and students self-control and peaceful conflict resolution. This person is the anti-role model.
Thank you for pointing this out, Diane. Obviously laws do not apply to Combs because of his money and status. That is also a terrible shame. I wonder if he was remorseful?
One of the inherent dangers and occupational hazards of being a teacher: some unhinged parent may come in and punch your lights out if you have reprimanded or disciplined their child. Or you may be the “lucky” recipient of a physical assault from a parent who mistakes you for the teacher of their child when you are not in fact the teacher of their child.
In 2005 Sean Combs was a “deadbeat dad.” The mother of one of his six children took him to court where he was ordered to pay $250,000 in back child support payments. Since that time he has apparently taken responsibility for the children including one that is not his biological child.
In our high school, we occasionally have similar parents. Thank goodness for peer pressure– it plays a passive but vital role in helping us support these parents’ kids to learn personal responsibility in spite of their parents’ example. Sometimes these kids have to live ‘double lives’ but that’s ok because they’re gaining important skills and stand a chance at an independent life.
Just What We Need: More Black Celebrity Charter School Crooks… I Mean ‘Entrepreneurs’
Wednesday, March 30, 2016, 11:48:46
A Black Agenda Radio Commentary by BAR managing editor Bruce A. Dixon
Celebrities they say, are people who are famous for being well known, while entrepreneurs, in popular lore, are those with a talent for detecting opportunities to get paid, in much the same way crocodiles and sharks smell blood in distant waters. So the celebrity entrepreneur is all about finding ways to leverage that celebrity to get paid.
In this neoliberal age of privatization, the surest way for the well-connected to get paid is to bribe public officials to help you convert public assets into your private property. Look at entrepreneur Ervin “Magic” Johnson, who gave Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel a perfectly legal $250,000 campaign donation and received an $80 million contract to replace the formerly unionized janitors in Chicago Public Schools. That’s entrepreneurship. Now principals in some of those schools are buying mops and brooms out of their own pockets to keep the filth at bay.
Since the Clinton era, charter school investments get automatic tax credits that allow investors to double their money in as little as 7 years. Thanks in part to vigorous lobbying on the state and federal levels by charter schools and their investors and contractors the charter school industry is not subject to the same instructional, operational, fiscal and accounting, or conflict of interest rules as actual public schools. In most states it’s perfectly legal for a charter school operator to give her brother the maintenance contract, her sister the instructional contract and her cousin the textbook contract, to replace the teachers with computer programs, while her own privately held company rents and subleases the school building at a hefty markup, all with public money, and misleadingly call yourself a “public school.”
So it’s no surprise that black celebrity entrepreneurs want in on the charter school racket. Magic Johnson’s name is on a profitable charter school diploma mill chain that substitutes computers for human teachers and awards quick high school diplomas not in its own name but in the name of the public school the student dropped out or was pushed out of. If that’s not educational fraud, it’s hard to imagine what is. Deion Sanders and Jalen Rose have charter school train wrecks named after them, and they’re far from alone. The truth is that black celebrity charter schools are not about giving back, they’re about cashing in. If black celebrities cared about education for black children they’d be siding with parents, students and communities instead of with their investment portfolios.
The latest entries in the charter school feeding frenzy are Sean “Diddy” Combs, with accomplices Steve Perry and Iyanla Vanzant. Together, they’re fronting what’s called the Capital Preparatory Harlem Charter School, apparently part of the chain of Capital Preparatory operated by Steve Perry, who’s not much more of an “educator” than Diddy, and has a history of abusive and threatening public rhetoric, and advocating the mass firing of qualified, experienced teachers, especially black ones.
Despite PR flourishes like calling its teachers “illuminators,” and occasional references to “social justice” Diddy’s charter school venture looks a lot more like another parasitic business venture than any kind of real educational institution. It’s time we looked a lot closer at black celebs who claim to be “giving back,” and at their kind of black “success stories” as well. The last thing we really need now is more black celebrity charter school crooks… I mean entrepreneurs.
For Black Agenda Radio I’m Bruce Dixon. Find us on the web at http://www.blackagendareport.com.
Bruce A. Dixon is managing editor at Black Agenda Report, and a member of the state committee of the GA Green Party. He lives and works near Marietta GA and can be contacted via email at bruce.dixon@blackagendareport.com.
http://blackagendareport.com/just-what-we-need-more-celebrity-charter-school-crooks
The whole idea that public schools should get better by competing with charters is totally flawed, especially when public schools are crippled when too many students leave. This is unfair “competition.” Public schools cannot hire publicists, spin doctors, or marketeers, nor can they sponsor funding rallies with bus loads of cheering students. Public schools are designed to be a democratic, public service, part of the public trust. Public schools cannot buy lobbyists to influence votes in legislatures, even though unions may do so. Public schools should not be subject to the horrors of political corruption. With charters in the mix, public education is always on the losing end of political deals and maneuvers since public schools must rely on honest legislators, and those are few and far between. It is not the same level playing field. The system is corrupt!
Thank you so much. I keep an eye on celebrities associated with charter schools and I had no idea that Magic Johnson had any involvement with public education.
I guess the rebranding is successful and complete.
I’m referring to the names of Sean “Puff Daddy” (you realize that refers to puffing on marijuana cigarettes, right?) to “P. Diddy” when he moved to East Hampton and started socializing with Martha Stewart and the rest of the ultra-rich denizens of that rarefied beach colony on Long Island, NY.
His history is not something to be proud of unless you read the scrubbed clean version.
The deaths of Tupac Shakur and the Notorius B.I.G. certainly linger around his record label and name years after the fact. He has been accused of ordering the hits by a cop who investigated the murder of Tupac and wrote a book about it.
Here’s a bit of a ’round-up’ up his criminal past:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/23/diddy-s-crazy-rap-sheet-from-attacking-a-record-exec-to-his-alleged-kettlebell-assault.html
I’m so old that I remember a time when Americans frowned upon educators having criminal records and a history of criminal activity but money talks, as they say, and lots of people listen (just look at the defense comment posted at the top of this thread).
Being rich covers a multitude of sins under the current oligarchy, I guess.
Sean Combs rose from the dangerous streets of Harlem to being a very wealthy mogul involved in rap music, cologne, vodka, clothing, and many other things. He certainly has street credibility and has earned the right to share his story and offer advice to aspiring entrepreneurs.
Does that make him qualified to run a charter school? Smells an awful lot like a money-making opportunity to me. He freely admits to being cocky, driven, self-aggrandizing, and hyper ambitious when it comes to money.
Maybe that’s the future the children of Harlem and their parents are seeking too.
I hope not.
Puff Daddy is an pseudonym for a ‘father who smokes DOPE.’ Not a role model kinda guy IMO.
But this self proclaimed famous plutocrat is an exemplar of the Donald Trump mindset as to ‘one can do no wrong if one is rich’….a robber baron mentality which captures and enthralls young gangsta wannabees.
Being a woman’s ‘baby daddy’ (he has 6 off spring so far) is his claim to this fame, to this title.
Certainly NOT a role model for any child.
Thanks for reminding us of his flare up and battery against a UCLA coach who ruled against one of his children…so glad he did not choose to shoot the coach, but only hit him.
This is the descent to the underworld that the entertainment industry (and media) had imposed on American values and morals. It stinks.
Life of a celebrity is surely not all that’s it’s cracked up to be.
Stay tuned…
the combination of P. Diddy & “Dr” Steve Perry may turn into a Charter Reality Show if certain conditions arise. Two hot heads with enormous egos and need for constant public attention…could get interesting. Eva could add another direction to this band of charter shysters. The cast of Deformster-Reformsters would hold ones titillating interest if it were not extremely serious for children and public education.
Which other shady characters would make marginal charter CEOs and owners?
Only the shadiest must apply!
One lesson to always draw from such matters: approach reports about bad behavior by celebrities with a few grains of salt, particularly if said celeb is black, male, and/or connected to the rap music industry.
And I’m not quite sure how his personal behavior outside of the not-yet-extant school is relevant to the creation or operation of the school.
Glad to know that you are an advocate of allowing anyone to run a school, no matter their background and disposition.
That blows that whole role modeling myth and the idea of keading by example right out of the water, eh?
We’ll just forget about those schools started by athletes that never educated anyone or pastors who saoked the tax payers for millions and didn’t bother with textbooks or desks.
Background means nothing, right?
@Chris in Florida: glad that your putting words in my mouth leads to your gladness. Try responding to what I actually said.
“And I’m not quite sure how his personal behavior outside of the not-yet-extant school is relevant to the creation or operation of the school.”
Perhaps Chris in Florida should have limited comments to:
“That blows that whole role modeling myth and the idea of keading by example right out of the water, eh? “
Ever since I realized that my father didn’t actually know everything, that my mom swore occasionally, and that Mickey Mantle chased women and drank like a fish, I’ve put a lot less store in the notion of “role models.”
Similarly, I don’t subscribe to biographical criticism of artists, writers, filmmakers, etc. Woody Allen may not be my role model, but he’s a hell of an auteur, and I always am interested in what he puts on the screen.
I don’t know anything about Sean Combs as a human being. I like the notion of schools that explicitly want to focus on social justice. He might be utterly bestial, utterly full of crap, etc., but does anyone think he’ll actually be running the school? Does Andre Agassi run his charter schools? Does Jalen Rose? They are names who put money into these things so that others will put more money into them. The schools they sponsor may be monstrous or exemplary, but that doesn’t logically depend on the behavior outside of the schools by the ‘founders.’
The rush-to-judgment game is very popular. I am not terribly interested in playing it. Where I’m more inclined to do so is when I know something about the actual philosophy and/or practice of those directly involved in making things happen. That is, if I knew Combs or Agassi or Rose supported nothing but direct instruction and back-to-basics mathematics teaching and content, or “tough love,” or a host of other things that I find of doubtful efficacy, I’d be more inclined to prejudge a school they were helping to create. Absent that, I’d wait to see what actually was going on. Crazy, I know.
Since Woodie Allen’s name was mentioned and allegedly maligned, I think it worth sharing the fact that since Woodie Allen never married Mia Farrow and only Mia adopted Soon-Yi Previn, that Previn was never legally Woodie Allen’s step daughter and if she had been, she would have been Allen’s adopted step-daughter.
Today, Previn is 44 and Allen is 79. They have been married since 1997. Woodie Allen has been married three times. This is his third marriage. He has also had partners that he did not legally marry, and they were Diane Keaton and Mia Farrow, who he says he never lived with.
Allen’s bad reputation came about because Mia Farrow declared war against Allen in the media and Farrow has about as much money as Allen has.
In an interview with Time Magazine, Allen said, “I am not Soon-Yi’s father or stepfather,” he said definitively at the start of the interview. “I’ve never even lived with Mia. I’ve never in my entire life slept at Mia’s apartment, and I never even used to go over there until my children came along seven years ago. I never had any family dinners over there. I was not a father to her adopted kids in any sense of the word.” Adding that Soon-Yi never treated him as a father figure and that he rarely spoke to her before the affair, Allen seemed to see few issues with their relationship. “There’s no downside to it,” he said. “The only thing unusual is that she’s Mia’s daughter. But she’s an adopted daughter and a grown woman. I could have met her at a party or something.”
Michael Paul G., I strongly believe that school leaders should represent a higher level of integrity than the average person. They are molding the character of children. What they do in the privacy of their home is their own business, what they publicly do reflects on their probity and fitness to lead children in their development.
Diane, do you believe that Mr. Combs will be involved with the day-to-day activities at the school, interacting frequently with children, molding the curriculum, etc.? I do not, any more than I think Eva Moskowitz does much where the rubber meets the road at SA, though she’s probably more involved in such things than the average head of a charter chain (and at this point Combs is only proposing one school, I believe). Certainly I doubt that Combs will be more involved than Agassi or Jalen Rose, or other celebrity charter sponsors.
But then again, I’m a little more loose in my fervor to see folks have their feet held to the fire for failing to be “role models” or paragons of virtue. That’s just my sense of pragmatism and realism at play. It’s why I don’t think that what Bill Clinton did outside his marriage vows mattered in the least bit when he was POTUS, while others felt it utterly disqualified him and made him someone deserving to be impeached and removed from office. On the other hand, he did things in his role as president that were ethically despicable and which still are destroying the lives of many poor and minority Americans. Those didn’t seem to get Republicans or conservative Democrats upset at all. A good take on such things can be found in Philip Roth’s introduction to THE HUMAN STAIN, a truly great novel inspired by the Clinton impeachment fever.
The question remains, in my mind if no one else’s, what sort of program for social justice this proposed charter will actually run. It’s an open question and I will reserve judgment until I see some particulars. No one else need follow my lead.
Deion Sanders was REALLY involved in his charter school, and it was a disaster. Maybe it won’t be like that, but it might be. I’m not too comfortable with letting these celebrities carrying out experiments or ego projects on children.
Well, when you consider that EVERYTHING this creative nullity, fraud and social entrpreneur does is based on self-promotion (the one talent he does possess) don’t you think this current episode is consistent with that, and that people are justified in questioning his motives?
If you want your argument (an otherwise reasonable one) to be persuasive, Sean Combs is probably among the worst examples you could use.
@Michael Fiorillo: so the issue for you is Mr. Combs’ character, as you see it, rather than the project and how it is actually carried out. That’s certainly your prerogative. I’m not inclined to presume that it will be something awful, though should it turn out to be, I will be more than willing to condemn it for cause.
Since I’m not trying to “win” anything, but simply expressing my views, which differ from most of those weighing in here, I guess we’ll just have to conclude that I don’t care that Combs is, ostensibly, a worst choice for any sort of defense.
Michael Paul G.,
Over time–20 years–I have come to see charter schools as parasites on public education, draining away resources from public schools, while running unaccountable empires. I don’t care who the sponsor is or whether he/she has written hateful lyrics. If they have money and talent, they should improve the public schools that enroll the vast majority of children.
Diane, I’m hardly a fan of charter schools by and large. I believe I’ve been clear about that here and elsewhere. But there are exceptions, and I’ve granted that to vehement advocates for charter schools whose support comes from personal experience with individual schools (i.e., schools not part of some big chain, not managed by a private management company, and not bilking the public in any way that can reasonably be construed as different from the sorts of things we might argue about regarding the management and operation of any regular neighborhood public school). At the same time, I’ve had to remind such people that their experience is not typical, particularly when compared with what goes on in the big chain charters that have become central to the anti-public school deform movement. They don’t like to admit that. And I think there is a tendency among many people in the pro-public school movement to refuse to acknowledge the existence of these other sorts of charter schools, ones that operate in the spirit that Al Shanker had in mind when he advocated for charters a long time ago.
Maybe it’s because I’ve taught in both sorts of charter schools. Maybe it’s because I’ve worked extensively with kids, teachers, and administrators at inner city schools, some of which were charters operating with varying degrees of quality and integrity, and others of which were regular neighborhood public schools, also operating with varying degrees of quality and integrity. Maybe it’s because a principal I respected greatly while working with him/her at a neighborhood public school in Detroit for a couple of years and then again in another location more recently turned up in a federal bribe-taking scandal last week, leaving me to wonder just exactly whom one can trust in the education world. As Lily Tomlin said, “No matter how cynical you become, it’s never enough to keep up.” I try not to be completely cynical, but I’ve been around too long to have complete confidence in the incorruptibility of anyone.
And perhaps that also makes me hesitant to presume that Mr. Combs is up to no good. Should we keep a watchful eye on his project and try to warn potential “customers” should it prove that “social justice” is honored more in the breach than observance? Of course. But I’m starting to wonder just who shouldn’t be under a watchful eye in education and other venues these days. The fundamental corruption of the system in which all these institutions are embedded makes everyone Caesar’s wife.
Michael Paul Goldenberg,
I speak out against charters all the time, as any reader of this blog probably knows. In fact, I was probably the first person in the UFT to warn the (unwilling to listen) leadership of the dangers posed by charters back when the NYS charter law was passed in 1998. Thus, while it may have been an error on my part to not mention my personal bias,which is that charters are never anything but a bad idea that is destructive of public education, I assumed readers took my opposition to them as a given, and that I was addressing Combs’ unseemly character and unsuitability for being involved in a school.
Surprise, surprise: bad policies and bad institutions attract and reward bad actors, so it should be no surprise that a Sean Combs would gravitate to charter schools to feed his vanity and polish his persona.
@Michael Fiorillo: “Thus, while it may have been an error on my part to not mention my personal bias,which is that charters are never anything but a bad idea that is destructive of public education, I assumed readers took my opposition to them as a given, and that I was addressing Combs’ unseemly character and unsuitability for being involved in a school.”
And my experience differs just enough to claim that charters are sometimes an excellent idea. Here’s a link to one I taught at for three years. Please explain to me how it is a “bad idea that is destructive of public education.”
http://www.themiddlecollege.org/
I look forward to your reply.
p.s.: I would be repeating comments I’ve made dozens of times online since 2008 to mention in detail the horror show that is the White Hat Management (of Akron, OH) cabal of “charter schools,” one that could well serve as a reverse poster child for the many ills of charter chains.
It’s simple: while there are indeed independent charter schools that provide a good education and are run by compassionate and competent people, from an institutional and policy perspective, they are invariably parasitic, siphoning funds from the public schools.
The benefits received by students in those charter schools came at the expense of other students in the district, which have had facilities or funds, or both, taken by charter schools.
That’s not to even raise the issue of the scalability of independent charters, and the fact that the Big Dogs in so-called reform see them as nothing more than window dressing and part of their marketing, as if to say, “You see, it’s not all Walmart!”
In the unwholesome event that the big chains are able to engorge themselves even further, those independent, mom-and-pop charters will be disposed of, just as the public schools are intended to be.
@Michael, let me guess that you didn’t bother to look at what WTMC is or then check into those like it. They aren’t chains and aren’t “mom and pop” operations either. Nor are they likely to be swallowed up by chains given how they’re chartered and by whom.
I know a good deal about the charter world and have suffered more than you can ever imagine at the hands of some of the real bad guys. I’d never work for a charter chain again no matter what I was offered.
And yet I can step away from my emotions and bad memories to look evenly at those schools that merit praise and consideration. Who said anything about scalability? Not I. And yet there is a loose confederation of middle college programs out there, and I know a few people working with that group to do professional development in mathematics. Some of the best math coaches I know, in fact, people with whom I’ve worked several times and would unhesitatingly work with again.
To write as much is not to countenance KIPP, SA, or any of the other monsters. But to dismiss the good, however small it may be, to eradicate the monsters, risks becoming a kind of monster oneself.
Michael Oaul, how would you word a law that sorts the “good charters” from the boot camps and profiteer and predatory charters? In many states, the predators wrote the charter laws or control the key policymakers with campaign contributions.
Why are for-profits even allowed? Most of the charters in Michigan operate for profit.
@diane: I would guess that most charters operate either openly or sneakily on a for-profit basis and that all charter chains do. I’m neither a lawyer, a legal scholar, nor a legislator, but an honest set of laws that wished to honor the spirit of the charter school ideas of the late Albert Shanker would certainly ban any sort of for-profit set up. That means not only no openly for-profit charter schools, but no operation of non-profit charter schools by management firms that directly or through some sort of back-door means are designed to turn a profit for anyone.
But how to write air-tight legislation of the above sort requires – wait for it! – a serious review of all the sleazy ways that “non-profit” groups can operate in ways that make some people more wealth than we’d expect based on reasonable salaries for paid employees doing comparable work. Or in other words, laws that are designed to rein in yet another place where vulture capitalism rears its ugly head. And such legislation would need teeth, including the money needed for oversight.
The middle college model is one subset of charters that seems to operate within the spirit of such “laws,” though, of course, I don’t know for a fact that it would not be possible in Michigan or some other state to operate a middle college program very much like WTMC, where I taught mathematics for three years, that was meaningfully different in management from that school. That means running one via an outside management group that was, in fact, a for-profit company. Once that happens, all bets are off.
That said, I know of no such situation. The middle colleges with which I’m familiar are not being run by outside groups. The community college that hosts the school on its campus is the charter-granter. There is a publicly-elected board of trustees and that board is also answerable to the publicly-elected board of the community college. The school itself has a small (very small) administration answerable to the boards.
I don’t wish to paint the situation as perfect by any means. When I worked there, WTMC did not have a teachers’ union. I don’t know if that has changed. And without a union, employees are working with at-will contracts. That’s tough on teachers, but there’s no reason that any charter school faculty couldn’t unionize, no matter what. Were I still there, I would long ago have pushed for a union. I don’t think any faculty at any school can afford to operate without one. But then we would be entering into another arena for serious conversation: the pros and cons for teachers, students, parents, and administrators of such unions.
And to my mind that gets us back to questions of corporate and/or vulture capitalism. The older I get, the more I believe that a capitalist system like ours is inherently corrupt, inherently predatory, and inherently cannibalistic. No system is guaranteed to be free of some degree of corruption. No system can be certain to protect all members of society, particularly members of the workforce – professional or otherwise – from injustice within the context of work. But unchecked market-driven capitalism as we know it eats its young, its old, and in various ways destroys the very souls of nearly everyone it touches (I leave open the possibility of the occasional saint).
So I don’t really think the fundamental issue is to charter or not to charter. Shanker had a very good idea, but I doubt he envisioned it being bastardized by the next wave of Milton Friedmans. I see far too little opportunity for innovation within typical public school bureaucracies, even before 1981 (the year I mark as the beginning of the Deform Era). Charters have the potential to create pockets of change, of freedom, of fresh air for kids and teachers alike. But that’s not the only model, and if districts were committed to other models that promoted meaningful change and innovation, I would support that.
My view is that the traditional public school model is rife with problems that reflect the system within which it has little or no choice but to operate, often to the detriment of students, staff, and society. Charter schools are no panacea, even under more oversight and limitations, not because they are a bad idea but because they swim in the same polluted waters as the rest of public schools.
I have no problem condemning and fighting the charter chains plus any individual school run “wrongly.” But doesn’t/shouldn’t that apply to all schools? Situations like the recently-broken bribery and kickback scandal in Detroit Public Schools speak volumes about fundamental illnesses in our country. The biggest of those is poverty and its devastating effects. That is one key reality through which capitalism creates self-fulfilling prophecies (e.g., public schools are corrupt, particularly those where “those kinds of people” are running things, so the wiser heads that prevail in government must put in emergency financial managers to take control away from locals, and blah, blah, blah. It’s absolutely unconscionable that middle-class educated black people, including one person I worked with for several years, engaged in a kickback scheme through which they stole about $2.5 million from Detroit citizens and children. But such things are utterly predictable, as are cheating scandals like Rheerasuregate in Washington, DC, the cheating scandal in Atlanta, and previous and future cheating scandals that the entire Deform and GERM enterprises create through the horrid values and pressures they bring to bear. The sickness doesn’t start with Detroit, but with Lansing and Washington and Wall Street. And it will get a lot worse if we don’t start taking folks like Bernie Sanders more seriously and stop putting more neoliberals and neoconservatives into government to do the bidding of the oligarchs.
Combs is a perfect fit for a no-nonsense, autocratic, opaque, publicly funded private sector corporate charter school where he will have children to scream at and abuse any time he wants to and he won’t have to call his high priced lawyers. In fact, the tax payers will pay him to verbally and physically abuse children.
If you put the incident into a bigger context, yes, there is a social justice lesson to be learned. I’m not a Sean Combs supporter, or a charter school supporter, but there are some facts to consider before using it as a basis to attack him and his involvement in a new school.
First, as far as I know, Combs is not facing any charges related to the incident. This could mean that prosecutors didn’t find sufficient evidence to charge him. It could even mean that he never actually swung the weight at the coach and/or was acting in self-defense as he claims. There are conflicting statements by witnesses.
Second, the other person involved, Sal Alosi, apparently has a questionable track record. He’s the former New York Jets strength coach who stuck his knee out and tripped a Miami Dolphins player who was running down the sideline during a game. That incident also made national news, and it cost him his job. (You can watch the video on YouTube.) In the same year, 2010, a woman working as a chiropractor and acupuncturist said she feared for her safety because of Alosi’s “outrageous, sociopathic behavior”–acting “belligerent” and screaming at her for borrowing some towels. She also reported that Alosi got into a fistfight with a Jets player. When one friend of Alosi said that when he heard about UCLA incident, “I said at the time that I bet Sal had something to do with this. He has that bouncer mentality.” See this link for a balanced feature on the coach:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2518602-the-sal-alosi-you-dont-know
A TMZ sports report cites a source that says Alosi had been bullying the younger Combs for three years. Another article reports that Alosi publicly humiliated the athlete for appearing courtside with his dad at an NBA All-Star game instead of lifting weights, and on other occasions.
Third, and most important from a social justice perspective, there’s a long history of coaches mentally and emotionally abusing players at the college and professional levels, especially in football and basketball. A pattern of white coaches and other officials exploiting black athletes and showing them disrespect (and sometimes mentally and emotionally abusing them) is well known. The latest egregious example of abuse with a racial component comes from the University of Illinois women’s basketball program:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/07/us/illinois-athletics-allegations/
An assistant coach was dismissed and the head coach remains under fire. A lawsuit brought by seven athletes is pending.
It seems like college coaches have gotten away with more abusive behavior and for longer than coaches at the professional level. Many NBA players come from poor neighborhoods where respect is an important currency. Nowadays NBA oaches who show respect for their players and offer a positive role model–people like Greg Popovich, Phil Jackson, Doc Rivers, et al–tend to have more success. The ones who scream at and demean their players, generally disrespect them, and even question their manhood will either have to change their ways or expect to be fired often, or go back to the college ranks, because the players will eventually top listening.
Abusive practices (in the name of intensity and motivation) are still common in college sports (especially in football and basketball), and because of the way things are, this will often result in a white coach mistreating a black athlete, who will more than likely tolerate the mistreatment. Even Mike Rice of Rutgers apparently got few complaints from his players. You can watch the video on YouTube in which he assaults and batters white and black players alike.
You can look at the Sean Combs-Sal Alosi altercation as a father standing up to an abusive coach who bullied his son for years and finally went too far. You can also take a historical perspective–here was a white authoritarian in a position of power demeaning a young black man and so denying him his manhood. His father, a self-empowered black man, objected. Somehow that’s not acceptable. In this case the abused athlete was a child of privilege. In reality, many athletes don’t even have a father to back them up, let alone a rich one. This isn’t to excuse any misbehavior on the elder Combs’s part. It’s just to put it into a larger context.
History shows that black men under Jim Crow (and of course during slavery) felt that their manhood had been denied them. As a privileged white person, even after reading all the landmark works of African American literature, I didn’t fully understand the enormity of this fact. Not until I read a book called Freedom Struggles: African Americans in World War I, by Adriane Lentz-Smith. Blacks went to war believing they could earn their manhood by fighting for the US. Read the book to find out how that went.
The way I see it, the continued exploitation and abuse of black athletes by college coaches, white or black, represents the same impulse that drove Jim Crow. It’s even worse when you consider that elite black athletes earn millions for the colleges they attend but are offered little (in many cases, not even an education) in return.
That’s the social justice lesson that I think could come from this incident. If the new charter school were to help children explore social and economic problems of this sort, then it might provide a decent education for a small number of students. I’m not betting on it, though.
Here’s a good article about abusive college coaches: http://www.salon.com/2013/04/05/why_do_athletes_tolerate_abusive_coaches/
And another one:
http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/09/29/end-abusive-coaches-college-football-basketball
@Threatened Out West: there are so many athletes putting money into charter schools (clearly this is something financial advisors are advocating. Whether the motivation for the advisors is altruism seems doubtful; whether the clients are putting their money into such projects for gain, for doing something good for kids in needs, or other reasons is beyond my meager powers of mind-reading), that it’s impossible to keep up. Didn’t know Neon Deion got involved, let alone disastrously so.
But let’s face it: having loads o’ dough and having the vaguest knowledge of the particular arena into which one chooses to invest or to charitably contribute may be completely unconnected. Further, there’s nothing we can do to change that as far as I know.
I’m all for closely scrutinizing charter schools, particularly the chain variety. And I firmly believe that there should be oversight thereof. . But I also believe that if some people had their way, I’d never be allowed to set foot inside a mathematics or other type of classroom in any capacity (other than perhaps as a student). I wouldn’t be shocked if that went for a few folks who regularly read and/or contribute to this blog. And I wonder if anyone has been following the latest scandal to break in Detroit Public Schools: As Warren Zevon wrote, “It ain’t that pretty at all.” I know one of those charged. Was shocked when I read the name in last week’s papers. I’m not going to go into the full range of my thoughts about that particular situation and how it reflects a nationwide systemic disease that goes well beyond public education and education in general. No need. But there’s no guarantee that anyone is immune from evil-doing, folks. The whole nation is quite sick and few are able to stay unscathed.
Most states have an Educator Code of Ethics which is part of the certification process, and teachers must follow them. School systems refer teachers in violation of such codes to their specific state agency for review. Licenses are at stake.
Serious business when we have children in our care.
However, this type of accountability and regulation are probably ONLY for public school teachers, or those charters who specifically addressed state certification in their charter application.
It’s the Wild West for our here-today-gone tomorrow, or until the $M run out….charters.
Examples on the news every day about the stiff regulations public schools are under, and the lack of accountabilities for most charters.
Yes, no matter the state regs, I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT CHARACTER, CRIMINAL HISTORY, SMUT LYRICS, LIFE LIVED, etc….MATTERS!
We are teaching other people’s children.
Just remember, COSMOTOLOGISTS, and other professions,have stricter and longer certification processes than charter employees and TFA.
Hair is more important than children!?
@H.A. Hurley: Do you think Bill Gates goes through a vetting process when he wants to contribute $$ to public schools?
You mentioned codes for teachers. There are likely codes for principals as well, though I have no direct knowledge of that, never having been one.
But it seems to me that there is no such code for people who fund public education. Without getting into the (non-)debate about the public or private status of charter schools, I can’t see how the non-code applies to Sean Combs but not Bill Gates or, say, the anonymous donor who has been funding the college educations of any graduate of the Kalamazoo public schools.
I understand that some folks don’t care for Mr. Combs. There’s no question that charter schools are anathema to many here, regardless of who manages them or how they are run (I personally have a more measured view, as I’ve worked for both the worst sort of charter chain and one that was and still is run completely on the up-and-up). But if Mr. Combs sets up a school with a true focus on social justice, I’m willing to see what that entails and how it gets done before calling for the hangman.
Michael Paul G., I apply the same standard to Bill Gates, Eli Broad, and Puff Daddy. Support public schools, don’t subvert them with privatized alternatives.
Amen, Hurley. Thanks for clarity, rationality and plain ole’ common sense.
If he was just one more investor not interested in having his name in lights just there to make some money and maybe do some good in the process, I would have no quarrel with it. When his name and celebrity status are used to sell a product, reputation matters.
@2old2teach wrote in part, “When his name and celebrity status are used to sell a product, reputation matters.”
Perhaps so, but to whom, exactly? Are you saying that it matters to parents who are considering sending their child(ren) to this school? And if so, how do you imagine his name and celebrity status will factor into their decisions?
I hate to point this out, but isn’t that their call? And frankly, my concern, as always, will be with the actual quality and nature of the school, not whose name is attached. If Andre Agassi’s school sucks, it matters not in the least (to me, if no one else) that he’s a terrific guy (which he very well may be). Ditto Jalen Rose’s academy in Detroit. And I am a fan of both of them, as athletes and in some of their other endeavors. But what concerns me about their schools has little, if anything, to do with my personal views of them as people or athletes or announcers, etc.
My sense here remains: a school that truly makes social justice issues central is potentially very worthwhile. Of course, the proof will be in the execution of that agenda. The rest of this is pretty much just noise, in my opinion, and that includes my opinion.
Diane, I think it’s sensible to hold everyone to high standards, within reason, but my question is whether anyone within public education is biting the Gates hand when it extends financial support. And more to the point, is anyone vetting his character before accepting that support? Some question the particular programs he wishes to impose on schools (and with good reason). But if he or his foundation gives grants to support the purchase of materials, equipment, staff, or what-have-you that teachers, administrators, etc., have themselves sought, I’m not sure that anyone is going to complain or question whether to take it because they don’t care for some aspect of his character. Perhaps I’m wrong on that, of course, but off-hand, I suspect it would take some doing to find anyone putting him or members of his foundation through the sort of scrutiny we’re applying to Sean Combs here. Is it because Gates made his fortune in a less “dirty” business?
Wait a minute. It’s good to hold everyone to high standards, but since we don’t the hell with it? How do we decide who gets a pass on the high standards and who doesn’t?
As an aside, what about Steve Perry says to you that he can run a school centered around social justice? What about the two of these men together says to you this is going to be a quality institution? Just why is it that they get a pass on the high standards?
Finding out that someone you trusted and admired has betrayed that trust is incredibly hard to stomach. I don’t quite understand how that leads to the position of ignoring anything but results no matter how offensive someone’s behavior might be.
@2old2teach: “Wait a minute. It’s good to hold everyone to high standards, but since we don’t the hell with it?” I’m pretty certain that’s not what I stated or implied.
“How do we decide who gets a pass on the high standards and who doesn’t?”
I don’t know. Why are there codes and standards for teachers (and maybe for principals) but not for who can be on a school board or run for political office? I don’t make those rules and they’re more than a bit suspect, don’t you think?
But that said, I keep raising the examples of Gates and the anonymous philanthropist in Kalamazoo. Who vets them? No one. Nor would many care to do so. The lines get fuzzier when the person is sufficiently rich? Gates gets his name on all sorts of things and the recipients of his generosity don’t seem too put out by it. The Kalamazoo benefactor (whom I believe is actually more than one person) is, well, anonymous, and hence above suspicion.
All I’m saying is that the outrage seems just a bit selective, as well as a bit biased because Combs has a chequered past. We’ve already had someone comment about the person with whom he became enraged; from what I know about that coach, he’s not exactly a prince. Maybe Combs had a very good reason to blow his stack at him. Owners in various professional sports have been known to lose their tempers quite publicly. At worst, they generally pay a fine for having done so.
I don’t know Steve Perry, don’t know who he is. Sorry, but I’m not on top of every player in the education game. Unless we’re talking about the singer from Journey.
“Finding out that someone you trusted and admired has betrayed that trust is incredibly hard to stomach. I don’t quite understand how that leads to the position of ignoring anything but results no matter how offensive someone’s behavior might be.”
First sentence is true. No clue how you go from that to the second one, particularly to suggest that nothing but results matter. However, in judging a school, I think that what actually goes on in it matters most. “Results” sounds like high-stakes testing rhetoric to me, though I doubt that’s what you intended.
Facts matter. Reality matters. Saying that you’re promoting social justice is meaningless without evidence that that is indeed what’s going on. I find it hard to imagine that you disagree. So perhaps instead of trying so hard to put words in my mouth (such a popular practice on the Internet), let me know when you want to discuss how one weighs and judges whether a project is worthwhile in principle and whether it’s working out in fact. Getting hot under the collar over Sean Combs and Steve Perry is your prerogative, and you hardly need my permission, approval, or agreement to do that to your heart’s content. But until I see a lot of schools – private, charter, local public neighborhood, etc. – working to promote a social justice curriculum, I’m going to be interested in anyone that does.
Dr. Steve Perry is the “educator” with whom P. Diddy wants to start this school although Perry didn’t sound all that excited about the collaboration. Read up on him and you might doubt their ability to run a school with a social justice theme.
It seems to me that your argument repeatedly comes back to the fact that Gates or someone of his ilk gets away with it, so why shouldn’t P. Diddy? That strikes me as the adult version of, “Everyone else is doing it.” Just like your mentor(?) did not live up to your expectations, so why should you expect [insert name] to? Neither one of them should, and my not liking it is not going to change anything. Lots of people not “liking it” may eventually have some effect. Otherwise, why bother with fighting the reformsters at all? Neither one of them should be fronting the effort to start a social justice themed school. Neither one of them appears to have demonstrated much understanding of what that means. If either one wants to anonymously give no string attached, front money to someone with the credentials/experience to open such a school, great.
I’m sorry that you have taken offense at my words. I am not trying to be offensive.
I think you’re misreading me. As for Dr.(?) Perry, I suppose I’ll have to check him out. But a quick peek at his web-site smelled like televangelism, so it might take time to work up sufficient motivation.
As for, “I’m sorry that you have taken offense at my words. I am not trying to be offensive,” again, I’m not offended, just not in agreement. No apologies needed. Differences of opinion are what makes horse races, elections, and mob wars. 🙂
“I think you’re misreading me.”
I suspect I am. This is probably one of those conversations that requires face time.
This is what scares me about charter schools, literally anyone can open one. I don’t think that this is the kind of person we want running our schools. It is really frightening to think that someone can escape felony charges but can open up a school, what is this teaching students? This is super upsetting to me. I don’t think that this is right at all and its telling children that its okay to break the law, which it definitely isn’t.
Sydney, you are right. Literally anyone can open a charter school, for fun, for profit, as a pastime.
This is the “role model” idea once again. And to my mind, that’s connected to notions that violent video games, tv shows, movies, etc., CAUSE kids who watch them to be more violent. If person A has (allegedly) done bad thing B and is the titular head of school C, then kid(s) D (E, F, . . . ) will do bad things X (Y, Z, . . ., and on beyond Zebra).
Maybe. Maybe not. How influenced were you in school by your principals? In my individual experience, not much at all. Classroom teachers were where the rubber met MY personal road, not administrators. But even there, the influence was primarily on my academics or lack thereof, not on how I interacted with kids, or with adults outside of school for that matter.
If Meyer Lansky had been laundering money through my elementary school, . . .
I really think it’s stretching things to believe that Combs would be MORE of a “role model” via this proposed school than he has been via the rap music industry. Should we have some rules or laws to prevent people from becoming pop culture icons who behave badly?
What is particularly intriguing for me is the reaction to a vapor school: it doesn’t yet exist. And the willingness to take this particular guy and place a lot more upon him than we do against, say, Evil Moskowitz, who is a demonstrably wicked person in the context of schools. But prior to her compiling a track record as a charter chain villain, would we really have been gnashing our teeth about her entering into an executive position in education? Maybe so, but I don’t recall hearing about it, and she was a public figure at the time.
So what’s the issue with Combs? Racism? Sexism? Rap-ism? Are there any rappers whose entry into education we wouldn’t decry? Do we have categories of rappers such that those in SOME category might be acceptable?
I’ll address elsewhere the general antipathy towards the very idea of charter schools, reminding my antagonists that I have zero use for any charter chain I’ve learned about thus far.
Michael Paul,
Do you agree that educators should be required to pass criminal background checks?
@Diane – I think that question is more problematic than many might realize. Thus, I can’t offer a simple yes/no response.
Let me offer a hypothetical: a teacher applies for a position at X High School, a public neighborhood school in District Y of State Z. The candidate submits fingerprints which are sent to the FBI for a background check. The report comes back stating that at some point in the past, the applicant was charged with a felony. For argument’s sake, let’s say that this was not a sex-crime or in any way involving children or education. You’re the principal or the head of human resources. What is your reaction? What do you do? (Of course, anyone is free to weigh in).
Michael Paul,
I believe that no public school would hire anyone who had been convicted of a felony, regardless of the nature of the crime. That’s the case in NYC. I don’t know about other districts. However in North Carolina, teachers in voucher schools need not be certified nor pass a criminal background check.
Diane, please reread my hypothetical.
That is also the case in California. Back in 1976 when I earned my teaching credential and started to substitute teach, I had to go through a criminal background check just to be a sub. Any felony conviction and I would have been through as a teacher.
You go read the relevant policy guidelines, regulations, and/or statute and find out whether you have the discretion to hire the person. If you don’t, then the analysis is over. If you do, then you go read the relevant policy guidelines, regulations, and/or statute and find out what factors you should consider in the exercise of your discretion. In either event, you probably shouldn’t make the decision based on how the felony charge causes you to react.