Jeannie Kaplan served two terms as an elected member of the Denver school board. Denver is a reform hotspot. It has been under the firm control of reformers for the past decade. Kaplan says it has been a disastrous decade that has brought union-free charters, constant testing, but no improvement for the children.since the reformers regularly flood Denver school board elections with cash for their candidates, they will be in control for an even longer time. How many years must reformers be in total control until they can declare that every child has an excellent school without regard to zip code? Mayor Bloomberg had 12 years of unfettered power in NYC (Joel Klein was there for 9 of those years) and the happy day has still not arrived.
In this post, Kaplan describes what happened to District 4 in Denver, the epicenter of reform. She sums it up in three words: Disruption, disenfranchisement, and drama.
It begins like this:
“This is a saga about Disruption (school closings and openings, extraordinarily high teacher and principal turnover, destruction of neighborhood schools), Disenfranchisement (two board resignations in four years, two representatives chosen by the Board of Education, not the voters), and Drama (the most recent Board vacancy replacement appears to never have undergone the most basic background check which is mandatory for all Denver Public Schools – DPS – employees and volunteers. The seat became vacant in February 2016 and remains vacant as of May 2.)”
Read on: You will encounter your old friend Stand on Children (know to its critics as Stand ON Children).
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“The Revolver”
Reform’s revolving door
Has put us on the floor
We’re in and out
And round about
Reformed forever more
“Revolver” (2)
Reform is a revolver
And not a problem solver
A Russian game
With Franco name
And public school dissolver
this is a more global topic , but related… Jan Resseger had a good summary yesterday May 5 about things in Illinois… even if tangential I thought those of you who missed it might want to know (what we experience in MI, Illinois, OK, etc varies but it is of the same theme)… here are her specifics https://janresseger.wordpress.com/2016/05/05/ideological-battle-threatens-the-common-good/comment-page-1/#comment-4986
Thanks for the link, Jean. Jan seems to have a good handle on the shenanigans going on in Illinois.
comment from Jan Resseger’s article: “The same thing is happening so many places. I suppose Michigan right now is the most deplorable. Then there is Illinois and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and Kansas and… and…
a Utah parent/psychologist wrote on the CA Opt Out page he sure would not want to be living in FL.
How do you get appointed to the Denver School Board when you have a conviction for Çhild Abuse?
Earlier on, how do you get appointed the Chair of the Colorado branch of corporate reform-backed Stand for Children when you have a conviction for Child Abuse?
This news story delves into this:
http://kdvr.com/2016/04/13/new-board-member-for-denver-public-schools-is-a-convicted-child-abuser/
Doesn’t Stand for Children do any kind of vetting for its leaders, and later School Board Members? Doesn’t the Denver school board?
When asked on a form, “Have you ever been convicted of a felony?”, she lied and checked, “No.”
She also put on her resume that she had a Bachelor’s Degree from the University of Denver, when in fact, she quit after just two semesters.
Ms. Kaplan echoes this in her article. “Stand for Children” anointed this woman as the one to pick, and the DPS School Board simply followed Stand for Children’s orders and appointed her.
“Mystery #1: With 22 original candidates applying for the opening, many of them falling into the ”reformer” camp, why was it so necessary for this board to listen to Stand? What is the real tie that binds DPS to SFC? Why did this Board overlook other highly qualified candidates and take Stand for Children’s word that this young woman was the best choice, ignoring the most perfunctory background check? Why DID this choice have to be her?
“Mystery #2: Did the Board of Education actually ever know about the young lady’s encounters with the law regarding child abuse before KDVR’s report, and if so when did they know?
“I do hope the Board did not actually know about Ms. Holmes record, for if they did and still voted for her, what does that say about their decision making? This whole situation isn’t really about one ill-chosen director’s seat. This is in part about the politics in play in DPS and the relationship between DPS and the various reform groups and what all the players are willing to do to keep up the pretense of success.
“But most of all this sordid saga is about denying the voters of District 4 a real choice as to who should be representing them.”
Actually both Stand for Children and Denver Public Schools DID know about the child abuse conviction. However, since she “proactively engaged with” them about the matter, both groups hired her anyway:
http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/co/2016/04/13/denver-school-board-knew-of-child-abuse-conviction-before-appointing-new-board-member/#.Vyyh9dczH-U
————
The Denver school board knew about parent activist MiDian Holmes’ decade-old misdemeanor child abuse conviction before appointing her to fill a vacant seat representing northeast Denver, district officials confirmed Wednesday.
District officials unearthed Holmes’ record in a standard criminal background check and shared it with board members, Denver Public Schools spokeswoman Nancy Mitchell said.
Holmes, 35, a longtime activist and parent of three DPS children, told Chalkbeat she intends to join the board as planned. She is set to be sworn in Monday.
“I do recognize that things are a bit tarnished, and I have a lot of work to do to be a part of that trust I truly believe in,” Holmes said, adding that she is committed to transparency. “It’s going to be a difficult road. It’s going to be tough. But every tough situation, every tough day that comes, is 100 percent worth it. The kids in Denver and the kids in District 4 are worth it.”
cross posted at
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Jeannie-Kaplan-How-Refor-in-Life_Arts-Children_Diane-Ravitch_Disenfranchisement_Disruption-160506-310.html#comment595693
with this comment (which has embedded links to this site)
“Look at how fast the public schools are going down despite the total absence of evidence that charters work, and the proof that privatizing is a travesty.Take California, says Diane Ravitch: “District officials in California have confided in me that it is virtually impossible to stop a charter proposal, no matter how bad it is or how little it is needed. If the district turns down the proposal, the charter advocates appeal to the Los Angeles County School Board, where they are often approved. In the off-chance that both the district and the county turn down their proposal, the advocates appeal to the state, where they are almost certain to win approval.”
And look at this: John Thompson, historian and teacher, thought that corporate reform was happening elsewhere, but not in Oklahoma City. But now they have arrived in full force, with all their failed and demoralizing strategies. It is such a good post that I am quoting a lot of it, but not all of it. I urge you to read the whole thing.
The Washington State Education Association and other groups are suing to block the funding of charter schools in Washington State.
” Watch Out for ALEC Legislation in Your State! ”
https://dianeravitch.net/2016/03/13/watch-out-for-alec-legislation-in-your-state/
“Cashing in On Kids”
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35144-cashing-in-on-kids-172-alec-education-bills-push-privatization-in-2015
reports that ALEC education legislation is quietly spreading across the nation. ALEC is the American Legislative Exchange Council, a secretive far-right organization that is funded by major corporations and whose members are state legislators. Its goal is privatization and deregulation. It writes model laws, then its members introduce them into their state legislature as their own.
To learn all about ALEC, go to Alec Exposed.
http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed
Bloomberg and Klein would be the first to admit that they didn’t crack the code and provide every child with a great school option. However, more and more evidence is emerging that real progress was initiated and sustained on their watch. Adjusted for student characteristics and comparing like to like, students in the city’s traditional public and charter schools now outperform those in the rest of the state, be it big cities, rural areas, or the leafy suburbs, both on NYSED’s exams as well as the low-stakes, can’t-be-prepped-for-or-gamed NAEP:
http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/new-york-state-student-achievemnet-test-resutls-new-york-city-schools-no-longer-lag-rest-of-the-state-2016.html
Yet again I’m left to wonder: if you are opposed to reformers gaining total control of school districts, then where is your voice in the current debate over mayoral control in New York City? Why aren’t you asking for a speedy transition to an elected school board with appointment powers, such as the one in place in Los Angeles? Why do you advocate for Detroit and Newark and Chicago and Philadelphia to have openly elected boards of education, but not New York City?
You wrote: “Bloomberg and Klein would be the first to admit that they didn’t crack the code and provide every child with a great school option. ”
You are entitled to an opinion TIM, but not to the facts. These two did not privatize the working public schools to provide an option. Over a decade (as I watched and worked in nYC) they silenced the voices of the real educators who made it clear that all NYC needed was funding to support classroom practice, and bring smaller classes, materials and services.
Instead, they threw the most experienced educators OUT and as the schools filled (as a hospital or law precut would when the real practitioners were GONE) they handed the public money over to their pals in the EDUCATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
Click to access eic-oct_11.pdf
The result: is here: GRASSROOTS: AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH WAITING FOR SUPERMAN
Tim,
Please send a link to show where and when Bloomberg and Klein admitted they did not crack the code of school success. Bloomberg had total control of the schools for 11 years. How long does it take? Would he have cracked the code if he had a fourth term? Should he have appointed Eva as chAncellor?
For the record, I oppose mayoral control without meaningful checks and balances. I have said it and written it about 100 times.
There is a meaningful (to borrow a favorite term of yours) difference between saying you think you’ve done a better job on a big thorny problem than the people who preceded you and claiming that you’ve solved that problem entirely. You don’t need to look to me to sing the praises of the Bloomberg-Klein era; just listen to Bill de Blasio’s testimony before the Senate education committee’s hearing on mayoral control.
The checks and balances you’ve proposed here — https://dianeravitch.net/2015/03/27/new-york-city-should-mayoral-control-continue/ — don’t go far enough. What is the advantage to having “experts” from civic and educational organizations (not all of whom will even live in New York City, and probably none of whom would send their own children to NYC DOE public schools) vet board appointees rather than having a vote of citizens, stakeholders, and public school parents? What is the advantage of having PTA officers select local board members rather than citizens, stakeholders, and public school parents?
If your proposed structure is superior to the arrangement that’s in place in 99.9% of American school districts that have a publicly elected school board, then why aren’t you advocating for mayoral control + “meaningful” checks and balances for Scarsdale’s schools, or Greenport/Southold’s, or Los Angeles’s? Why this system only for New York City and nowhere else?
dianeravitch: amazing how Non Sequitur not only reflexively avoided answering your questions—shame on you! the darn things were short, in plain English and relevant—but after all the time he spends on this blog he still doesn’t grasp your positions on mayoral control and elected school boards and such.
Some would call that a straw man argument meant to deflect, avoid and create artificial controversy.
Posh and nonsense! This is something rather more wonderful than even Bloomberg and Klein admitting [?] they didn’t crack the great schools code.
It’s called Rheeporm Alchemy. But unlike that passé centuries-old variety where you turn base metals into precious ones, this cage busting achievement gap crushing 21st century version turns discussions of interesting topics based on facts, logic and decency—
Into their opposite. On their heads. Inside out.
That’s right: a precious metals into base metals approach. Rheeally! That’s it’s peculiarly Johnsonally twist!
And the best part? When defending corporate education reform and its selfless exemplars like Saint Eva this translates into $tudent $ucce$$.
Really!
😎
P.S. I humbly thank Non Sequitur for reminding me of Dorothy Parker’s observation:
“This wasn’t just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it.”
I especially liked the raisins…
Tim has a lot of ‘WHY,” questions.
I am a big fan of ‘essential’ questions’ . I called them th EQs, in my classroom.
An EQ is the kind of question that when answered well, offer s a clue to the SOLUTION
I prefer questions that begin with — “HOW’ .. because HOW = “in what ways”. A process offers details for solving a dilemma.
Your comment shows that you are deaf to what Dr Ravich has already made clear; you DEMAND that she explain her ‘reasons’/motives (TO YOU… , because, you see, WE ALL already KNOW WHY) !
“why aren’t YOU advocating for mayoral control + “meaningful” checks and balances for Scarsdale’s schools, or Greenport/Southold’s, or Los Angeles’s?”
What a silly question, meant to provoke rather than elucidate , and does nothing to address the issue of the fraud and chaos that IS IN CLEAR EVIDENCE as this ‘reform’ has deformed educational practices that al teachers know must be in place if kids are to learn.
Tim and others , who seem impervious to evidence, work so hard to obfuscate the real narrative about what went wrong with LEARNING. They want to make it about ‘teaching.’
The discussion by real teachers is ALL ABOUT LEARNING and what works.
The real narrative in this nation has been controlled and directed by people like Tim,
I got a question for TIM:
“How did the GENUINE processes that must be in place for kids’ brains to “get it’ , disappear with the ‘reform’ movement.”
Answer… The media sold THE BIG CON
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Learning-not-Teacher-evalu-by-Susan-Lee-Schwartz-111001-956.html
SO THAT non-teachers COULD WRITE AND MANDATE the curricula ,and THEY told the practitioner what to do. Businessmen, corporations and top-down management changed the conversation in THE MEDIA, WHICH THE YOWNED TOTALLY, IN ORDER TO divert the public from the truth– as the EIC robbed the 15,880 school systems blind!
Click to access eic-oct_11.pdf
Here is another great question:
“In what ways did the removal of the voice of the classroom practitioner (i.e. the grunt on the line) allow charlatans and snake-oil salesmen (like Duncan, Rhee, Klein, Pearson, Broad, Walton, and so many more) to convince the public that ‘they had the ‘magic elixir?”
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Magic-Elixir-No-Evidence-by-Susan-Lee-Schwartz-130312-433.html
Susan Lee Schwartz. I love ” impervious to evidence .” I may steal that phrase going forward because it succinctly describes “reformers.” As for the media and the selling of the BIG CON, I think they did it to us again in the selling and underestimating of Donald Trump.
LOL, Jeannie…I stole it from Paul Krugman, who (ironically these days) is ignoring some big proof about what is wrong with our economy.
“How is NAEP used in setting proficiency scores in other states?
Hanover Research found ……. Massachusetts, which utilized NAEP-based standards and benchmarks for approximately ten years before adopting standards based on the Common Core State Standards.”
This entered into “folk wisdom”/gossip I guess that under the Commissioner at that time there was deemed to be validity in the NAEP “standards” and “benchmarks”… … (this was prior to the “Common-ness of core”… but my recollection does not place a specific year on that timeline…. nor do I recollect who was the commissioner at that time; but I do know the last Commissioner in MA for whom I had any respect was Greg Anrig (both before and after he went to ETS)… Of course, today’s ETS is not the ETS that worked with us out of the Wellesley MA office in defining standards using various methods (Angoff, Nedelsky etc) and a lot of politics has been added to the intrigue.